what is acceptable from a political candidate in one of america's two political parties when it comes to inciting threats of violence. an urgent plea today from manhattan district attorney alvin bragg to keep in place the gag order against trump. prosecutors asking judge juan merchan to extend much of the gag order imposed on the ex-president in that hush money election interference case. bragg's team argues that merchan no longer needs to enforce the ban on statements about trial witnesses, but they do ask that the gag order remain in place when it comes to jurors, prosecutors, court staff, and their families. they note that trump's request to lift the gag order is filled with what we on this program might describe as nonsense. quote, the people note that defendant's motion once again includes a number of categorically false accusations. for example, the defendant claims that the d.a. is acting in concert with the defendant's electoral opponent and unspecified cast of associates in an effort to restrict the defendant's speech at an upcoming presidential debate. the defendant offers no factual basis for this assertion, and there is none. the claim is a lie. the reason for why the gag order should stay in place to protect the jurors will sound familiar to anyone who has followed this case or any of trump's cases or really any story that involves donald trump over the last nine years. prosecutors say that although the, quote, defendant asserts through his counsel that he has no intention of making extra judicial comments regarding the service of individual jurors, that promise does not amount to anything given that the criminal defendant in question is donald trump. quote, the defendant's singular history of inflammatory and threatening public statements includes attacks on jurors and other proceedings. since the verdict in this case, the defendant has not exempted the jurors from his alarming rhetoric, that he would have, quote, every right to seek retribution as president against the participants in this trial as a consequence of his conviction because, quote, sometimes revenge can be justified, he said. prosecutors also asked that the gag order remain in place for court staff and prosecutors citing an avalanche of dangerous, violent, often racist threats against the court and members of d.a. alvin bragg's team. 61 actionable threats in april, may, and june of this year alone, not to mention nearly 500 threatening e-mails and phone calls since april. an affidavit from an nypd officer reveals this. quote, threat cases were also logged for a post showing sniper sites on people involved in this case or family member of such a person. and a post disclosing the home address of a d.a. address employee. another of the threats logged on april 15, 2024, was a bomb threat to the residences of two people involved in this case. april 15th was the first day of the trial in people v. trump. the ongoing battle to curb the ex-president's rhetoric as he tries desperately to discredit his conviction in new york is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin is here. she was at the courthouse for the hush money trial. she's covering the story for us today. also joining us former top official at the department of justice, msnbc legal analyst andrew weissmann is back and host of politics nation, the host of the president action network al sharpton is here. lisa rubin, i'll start with you. your reporting is harrowing. i'll read some of it. msnbc has obtained photos of the recent and denigrating mailing sent to alvin bragg's campaign address. photos show a hand addressed envelope postmarked april 24th from portland, oregon. they feature three crude enclosures. first features a cut of bragg's face with the word moron sprawled across his forehead as pasted next to a noose and a hand drawn smily face directly underneath. this is what alvin bragg wakes up to, goes to the office and is greeted by, goes to sleep to. and we searched high and low, we didn't find any reaction at all from anyone in the republican party, and that was sort of the point about how -- how numb a lot of people have become to this very real threat of violence. >> that's upsetting, nicolle, that you didn't find any reaction like that and at the same time unsurprising. i also want to note that the communications that you just were quoting my description of were not among those that are addressed in today's filing from the d.a.'s office. the ones that were discussed in the d.a.'s filing were ones that made their way to the nypd because they came directly into the district attorney's office. the photos i obtained for msnbc were as sent to his campaign address. and so the universe of threats to alvin bragg and the people around him, working with him are far larger in all likelihood than that which we can know. and of course as bad as the images are that i saw today and had to describe for you and our colleagues, i want us all to pause and think about if those are the ones that they chose to share with us, imagine what else is out there that we haven't seen. i did make a request to my source. are there any e-mails, for example, that you can share with me that were sent to the campaign that might help give some more color and life to the threat environment in which the d.a. has been living? and the answer was, "not that i can share with you. these are just so upsetting to everyone who has received them and everyone who has lived with them." and so as difficult and painful as it was to commit that description to writing for you and our colleagues, i am left thinking about what else has been sent to the d.a. both through the campaign, through his official office in the form of things like those bomb threats. what did they sound like? what did people say? or the sniper images that are referred to in the filing. the amount of violence that has been targeted at the manhattan district attorney and his career staff as a result of their vowing to follow the facts and the law woud fear or favor is just staggering. >> i mean, andrew weissmann, i wonder where they would get the idea to attack alvin bragg. oh, wait, watch here's jesse waters, greg gutfield, tucker carlson. look what they had to say about him. >> bragg is a felon, and he's trying to make a career for himself over this. and bragg has interfered in this election more than russia has or china has combined. >> basically it's one party hunting another. >> alvin bragg should be indicted. >> i mean that's just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. there is no limit to the things that trump's allies will say, so the gag order is an important legal process. but the denigration and the targeting of bragg is being done on trump's behalf around the clock. >> yes. but i think there's a couple things to think about here. one is that the bomb threats and the other threats that the d.a. and lisa are describing, those are crimes, and it's incumbent on the nypd and the fbi as they have done to be very aggressive in prosecuting thethose. those are criminal acts, and they're criminal acts against public servants. you cannot call in a bomb threat, you cannot threaten to kill somebody. it is so reminiscent of what we saw the sniper sites, it's exactly what roger stone did with a federal judge that was overseeing his case. and then if you want to know how this relates to donald trump and why this is going to be, i think, so relevant to his sentencing is for anybody who -- just to analogize what happened on january 6th, if you want to know donald trump's the intent and whether he wants to see this happen, look at what he is not doing. you do not see him like any current or former official in a normal world, in earth one would be saying absolutely do not engage in violence, that is not the way that you protest. that is what you would expect to have heard on january 6th. that is why you have the d.c. federal case that is currently being held up by the supreme court is you have donald trump doing the exact same thing, which is if you want to know whether this is carrying out what he wants and his intentions, look at the fact that he is not lifting one finger or saying one word to say that this is wrong. obviously your point that all of his enablers are doing the same thing and creating this environment, but it's really important, i think, in the first instance to be thinking about donald trump because he is going to be sentenced imminently by the judge who is -- who oversaw the trial and who is being given all of this evidence of ongoing continuing threats. and one of the statistics that's laid out factually is that 90% of the threats that the nypd has received are since the trial began. and so this is all before judge merchan, and he is going to be able to consider what the defendant has done to foment this environment and what he has done to do anything to diminish the risk of harm to people who are public servants. >> the protection of everyone involved in the trial is a massive sprawling effort. rev, i want to show you some people in their own words who have sort of walked in their shoes talking about what it's like to be targeted and threatened by trump. >> even reward it. i said in some interview i believe they're more like suicide bombers this time around where they truly believe they are being patriotic and i am like the devil. >> i'm very much concerned individuals, lone wolfs will obviously resort to violence. here in the city of new york and in the state of new york we're taking precautions. i have more law enforcement around me these days. individuals have threatened my life, but i will not be paralyzed by fear. >> as much as michael is feeling relieved that the trial is over and gratified by the jury's verdict, he also is feeling fearful and properly so given the continued attacks even under the gag order. >> from the time i took office i began to get threats. those threats come in the way of e-mails. those threats come in the way of phone calls, text messages, any which way you can imagine. at some point the threats became where i had to leave my home. >> rev, we could have made a compilation of everyone who's been threatened from the media to republicans who refused to go along the coup to republicans who testified the january 6th congressional hearings, to former colleagues and cabinet. i mean the threats are so routine that they don't lead a ton of newscasts anymore, but they are so not normal, and i worry in a time where we're post-political violence, right? we're post-paul pelosi, post-january 6th, post trump supporters taking flagpoles and naming cops from january 6th. i worry there's somewhat numb to it. i worry its part of the politics of the trump republican party. >> that is very concerning whether we're normalizing this and acting like this is just part of some theatrical play rather than real life dealing with real human beings. one only has to look at january 6th to understand what trump can incite and what some people will do in broad daylight in front of the u.s. capitol and then in the capitol building, and we're very concerned as a nation we should be about the judge and his family and his staff and the d.a. in fact, we had at national action network a prayer for alvin bragg's family. this is family man who's a sunday schoolteacher just blocks away from our headquarters. and people are not looking at the fact that donald trump has an opportunity every day -- every day at rallies to say i don't want to see any harm done to the prosecutors, let me fight this out with an appeal. he has an opportunity thursday night to say that at the debate. and i really shudder to think if the judge gives him an opportunity on sentencing july 11th and gives him an opportunity to address the court before he's sentenced, which some judges do, what is he going to say? is he going to play to his crowd and say this was a rigged case and attack the courts to exacerbate the threats, or would he try to take a role one would expect from a president? i think people need to watch what he does in the debate, and we all need to brace ourselves if the judge allows him to address the court on july 11th. >> lisa, how closely is the judge watching trump's public comments? and what is he likely to do with this filing today from d.a. alvin bragg's team? >> nicolle, i don't know how closely judge march merchan is watching trump's public comments because if he were, for example, during the trial trump made the comments about one of the lawyers on d.a. bragg's staff that never were raised either by the d.a. office during the trial itself but also weren't raised by judge merchan. so i don't know what his media consumption is like. i will say, though, that to rev's point, one of the points that trump keeps trying to make and i think will come up at the sentencing is a fiction that shows his lack of remorse and is not covered by the gag order at all. it's the fiction that the charges against him were engineered by the biden administration in collusion with alvin bragg and some unspecified cast of associates. in fact, the d.a. office uses that in their filing today. he did it earlier this week on the trail, too, in racine, wisconsin, saying it was because of crooked joe biden and his group. as long as he keeps saying that that's definitely going to be a part of the political debate showing where we're at the point now where the campaign and legal has collapsed into one. it's not an accident our colleague vaughn hilliard and i continue to show up in the same places together, because those two things that used to be separate are in the feedback loop together. it's not even in a feedback loop anymore. it's one and the same. >> yeah, i mean that's the way to understand this and process this. and, andrew, it's why i'm constantly trying to pull you into our political conversations. i have to sneak in a break, but i do want to put you on the spot, andrew weissmann, and ask you to answer for me if here in year nine of covering trump, if the legal system is able to sit through that and understand that he is using and exploiting his -- his rights as a defendant, now as a convicted felon to advance his campaign. sneak in a quick break for us. we'll have that conversation on the other side. also ahead for us, a big ruling from the united states supreme court today. the justices have decided 8-1 to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers, and that's a good thing. bad news, all the justices except one agree that's a good idea. and i don't know how many of you will be surprised to learn the one was clarence thomas. plus, a hearing in the mar-a-lago documents case that only really raises more questions about judge aileen cannon. why she's holding a three-day hearing on issues that have already been heard and that ultimately have nothing to do with the criminal case against ex-president donald trump. we'll look at the criminal slow walking of the criminal documents case. and one week to go before former president trump and president biden face-off in their debate. we'll talk about strategy for the debate, how to cover it, the expectation game and much, much more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. (man) switching all the time...it wasn't easy. (lady) 35! (store customer) you're gonna be here forever. (man) i know. (employee) here is your wireless contract. (man) do i need a lawyer for this? those were hard days. representative. switch! now that i got a huge storage and battery upgrade... i'm officially done switching. (vo) new and existing customers get iphone 15 on us when they trade in any iphone, any condition. guaranteed. (man) i really wished you told me sooner. (roommate) i did. hi. i use febreze fade defy plug. and i use this. febreze has a microchip to control scent release so it smells first-day fresh for 50 days. 50 days!? and its refill reminder light means i'll never miss a day of freshness. ♪ with so many choices on booking.com there are so many tina feys i could be. so i hired body doubles. mountain climbing tina at a cabin. or tree climbing tina at a beach resort. nice! booking.com booking.yeah. if you spit blood when you brush, it could be the start of a domino effect. new parodontax active gum repair breath freshener. clinically proven to help reverse the four signs of early gum disease. a new toothpaste from parodontax, the gum experts. we're back with lisa, andrew, and rev. andrew, it's a remarkable journey that we even get to talk to you and have you in these conversations where politics comes up. right, we covered you on the mueller team. i mean, before that you were covered -- your lawyering was covered in a case and other legal situations. but now you cannot be part of these conversations of our live coverage of the trial without covering trump as a candidate because trump as a candidate understands the conviction is lethal with independent voters. it's even coming up for him, it's surfacing in fox news polls, it's got him raging against fox news, who he's angry at i guess for not cooking down their polls. but that's too far down the earth two pipeline for me to really untangle. what is your sense, i mean the legal system doesn't exist to be part of our political system, but trump's constant efforting to sort of shove it through his campaign efforts seems to strain it. what are your thoughts about this? >> so, i don't mean to sound terribly highfalutin, but i'm going to tell you a story when i was just starting out as a lawyer. roger baldwin one of the leaders of the aclu union says it doesn't matter what's in the constitution if it's not in the hearts of the u.s. citizens. i remember not understanding and if it's the constitution and we have a statute, that's bedrock. and i think what he said resonated so much with me these days because, you know, our legal system has not fared all that well in terms of holding for the first time a president or former president to account. you know, we've seen successes with judge merchan, failures with judge cannon and the supreme court of the united states. it's really a mixed bag. and also speed is not what the judicial system is known for. as reverend al sharpton knows very, very well. and so i think the real take home is is that you learn that looking to the legal system, it's important, it should be better, it should be fought for, but the real issue is making sure that the roots of the constitution and statutes and what it means to be american and live in a democracy, those are -- we don't internalize those and vote based on those and live those. it doesn't really matter that you have a judge merchan and that you have a trial if it's not going to be something that's meaningful to the electorate. and so we sort of -- yes, we should still look to legal system, but it's not ultimately where we need to look in terms of the future of our country. it's the -- what trump has revealed is that the roots that sort of we thought or at least i had thought were so deep in this country, constitutional rights and norms are quite shallow. >> yeah, i mean, rev, this is the thing with trump, right? i mean he's such a four alarm fire, five alarm fire that you look to the person who was handed the hose, right? so for two years it was mueller, and you're waiting for mueller to get him. you know, indictment after indictment, and i think that is a lazy approach, right? because the real scandal is that one of the country's two political parties said nothing today about the nature of the threats facing d.a. alvin bragg, nothing. nothing. they're heinous. i didn't even read all of them that lisa reported. they're heinous. one of the two parties in the country doesn't care about the rule of law in america that threatens donald trump. >> no, i think that that is the existential threat to the country, that we're normalizing this kind of behavior. i mean, this is not some politician saying that he's gotten threats and we wonder how serious it is. you have the new york city police department saying these are credible threats. you have jurors and the judge the family. we're at a time we are normalizing a man convicted on 54 -- 34 felonies is still within striking distance, you have the supreme court that has broken ethical rules, and we are debating whether or not there should be an ethics standard. i mean, we have never been where we are now as a country, and i really think we need to bear down because people need to really actively bring back the boundaries of behavior in this country. it's beyond politics now. >> yeah, but, rev, what does that look like? i think the most sort of when i try to explain it to people who are just starting to pay attention, right, we're heading into a general election, they say, listen, there is a two-tiered system of justice but it's the other direction. a federal judge in california said trump more likely than not committed felonies three years ago. there's nobody else who would have more likely than not committed felonies and still be walking around without facing any legal consequences for those crimes. he was talking about the january 6th insurrection. >> not only not facing any consequences, getting public support. look at where he is in the polls, and he's able to get every republican in the house of representatives and the senate to stand with him. this is absolutely unthinkable, unimaginable, but it's real, and we need to talk to people like it's real, and we need to behave like it's real. i don't think people understand the gravity of how far this has gone. >> andrew weissmann, where ask every day where are the generals, you can't say the same thing about people of law folks, they're out there, they're warning people. former attorney general eric holder said on the show on wednesday, people should focus on the fear, the fear that we should all feel if trump does what he put on a website and promised he would do in project 2025, which is to turn doj into a weapon to use against his perceived political enemies. he got pretty far in his first term without really understanding how to pull the levers. i mean he had everybody under the sun that trump raged tweeted about for scrutiny and questions for different reasons comey faced scrutiny, mccabe faced. you know, trump made some progress without really understanding how it works. what is the conversation we should be having about what he would do with a second term? >> well, you know, i think there's a lot to talk about in terms of what would happen in the second term, but the one thing i would caution is that i don't think one needs to even engage in speculation about what he would do and allow trump to say, oh, those are flights of fancy. you can look at what he is saying and doing now, and you can look at what he said and did when he was president. in other words, you don't have to project very far. yes, it's clear it's going to be worse because he's now going to be ready and prepared whereas last time he wasn't. and you can be sure that people who were somewhat of a guardrail and cautioned and did things including the attorney general sessions will never be -- nobody like that will be appointed again because he was fired because he understood the independence of the department of justice. even if you disagreed with him politically, he was gotten rid of because he was a form of a check on the president of the united states. but you can really look at what is going on right now, which is justpura thoritarianism. and so you don't have to speculate and go further. but just on the good news part because i know the legal system has not done all that well, but let's just remember that on july 11th that this is the rule of law in action. we had a, i think, a very fulsome trial with eminent defense counsel. we had a wonderful judge overseeing the case, and a jury found -- citizens found beyond a reasonable doubt that crimes were committed, 34 of them. and donald trump regardless of his position in office was found guilty, and he will be sentenced. and that to me is a positive sign for this country as much as it will be divisive and it'll be used as a springboard in the campaign, it is -- you know, i think it is something that brings us a step closer to sort of what we are founded on and to holding everyone to account if they commit a crime. and so it is useful while we're talking about sort of this -- the sort of the ying and think about the yang where we are. it's so important to remember this other aspect is what we stand for. >> and just to tie it all together, andrew, to think and to learn from lisa's reporting of what the people went through to show that a former president is treated like anybody else would be. because you're right, now the process is in motion, so the next part of the process is sentencing. but to look at it in the context of the threats these folks live under is truly remarkable. lisa rubin, thank you for your reporting. andrew weissmann, and rev, thank you for your insights. thank you all for starting us off today. after the break i'll tell you who clarence thomas thinks should be able to own a gun. to. ♪ i'll be there... ♪ ♪ you don't... ♪ ♪ you don't have to worry... ♪ (vo) in two seconds, eric will realize ♪ you don't... ♪ they're gonna need more space... (man) gotta sell the house. (vo) oh...open houses. or, skip the hassles and sell directly to opendoor. (man) wow. (vo) when life's doors open, we'll handle the house. see? homequote explorer lets you easily compare home insurance options so you can get what you need without overpaying. yeah, we've spent a lot on this kitchen. oh, yeah, really high-end stuff. -sorry, that's our ghost. -yeah, okay. he's more annoying than anything. too bad there's mold behind the backsplash. [ sniffs ] yep, that's mold. well, then, let's see if we can save you some money with progressive. guess how much i originally paid for this fireplace? 23 bucks. materials and labor. just ignore him. you got bamboozled! i want to read a statement to you to see if it seems remotely possible that it could be controversial to anyone. quote, an individual found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another person may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the second amendment, end quote. that was from the majority opinion in united states vs. rahimi. it was a case about whether someone subject to a domestic violence restraining order may have their guns temporarily taken away from them, and it was a statement that every single supreme court justice agreed with except justice clarence thomas, the only justice on the supreme court to dissent in this case. thomas writing that laws protecting women from being shot by their abusers are, quote, inconsistent with the second amendment, end quote. thomas' dissent is even more shocking when you read the many, many reasons why the state sought to remove zacky rahimi's guns. quote, rahimi beat his girlfriend then fired shots at either her or her witness as she fled his abuse. they subsequently got a restraining order from the state court. rahimi, however, continued harassing her, threatening a different woman with a firearm and was identified as the suspect in at least five additional shootings. when the police searched his apartment they found a pistol, a rifle, ammunition, and a copy of the restraining order. in a statement reacting to today's decision, a senior biden campaign advisor tells nbc news this, quote, no american should overlook the starting reality behind today's decision, protecting domestic abuse survivors from gun violence should never be a question, but the fact it even had to be considered shows just how extreme donald trump and the gun lobby are. let's bring in former u.s. attorney, form deputy assistant attorney general harry litman, and the founder of moms demand action, shannon watts. huge victory. i think unless you've stuck your nose in this part of gun violence, i think most people don't always appreciate most women who are murdered with guns are murdered by people they know. it is very, very difficult for our system to protect women from domestic abusers. a lot of the measures are temporary. this is a huge, huge, huge step forward in this majority opinion today. >> it is a step forward, and i'm very glad about the outcome. it will protect countless women and children from domestic violence. as you said about two-thirds of domestic homicides in the united states are committed with guns. about 70 women are shot and killed by a former intimate partner or current intimate partner every month. about 20% of all violent deaths are by intimate partners. they also involve children and family members, and here's a statistic really astounding. homicide is the leading cause of maternal death in the united states, most of it with guns. so the idea that we're going to remove guns from someone who is subject to a restraining order is common sense, and it's been a long-standing federal law in this country for a long time. and, in fact, moms demand actions volunteers have gone state by state, and now 30 states have now broadened the definition of domestic abuse, or they've made sure police can confiscate those abusers guns, but because donald trump was able to appoint right-wing aextremists to the fifth court of appeals, to the supreme court with a case that is, as you said, never should have been heard, when we talk about zacky rahimi who this man is, not only did he threaten a man with a gun who shot his girlfriend, he then threatened his girlfriend with a gun, fired twice due to road rage and opened fire in the parking lot of a whataburger. this is a man who shouldn't have a gun whether he's an abuser or not. and yet the supreme court in particular clarence thomas this originalism would argue he and felons and domestic abusers and all kinds of people should have access to guns. it's incredibly dangerous regardless of today's outcome. >> harry litman, with that in mind, what do we learn about clarence thomas today? >> well, he had a certain consistency. look, this opinion was cleaning up a self-inflicted error by the court two years ago in the bruin case. and that's where thomas said unless you have something directly on point from the original list period or the regulation of guns in the country, you can't regulate. and here there wasn't any history for understandable and irrelevant reasons, sad reasons really of regulating domestic offenders at the time. it was a case that had to go the way that it went, and thomas' adherence to what they said in bruin really just shows the rigidity of the way he approaches the constitution. they said something else, but they said different things among them, six different things among them. and this is going to play out not just in guns but in all their cases involving originalism for, i think, years to come. but chief justice roberts and the majority said it has to be relevantly similar the regulation, and you can come up with relevantly similar regulations that we used to do and he's saying society would do. but now take that question and think about, for example, gay marriage. is that relevantly similar as to marriage as it used to be or abortion? that test and the different variance of it, the different justices expressed is really going to play out over the next several years. >> harry, i want to press you on that and ask you what else we learned today. i have to sneak in a quick break first. we'll all be right back. first. we'll all be right back. i used to leak urine when i coughed, laughed or exercised. i couldn't even enjoy playing with my kids. i leaked too. i just assumed it was normal. then we learned about bulkamid. an fda approved non-drug solution for our condition. it really works, and it lasts for years. it's been the best thing we've done for our families. call 800-983-0000 to arrange an appointment with an expert physician to determine if bulkamid is right for you. results and experiences may vary. slowing my cancer from growing and living longer are two things i want from my metastatic breast cancer treatment. and with kisqali, i can have both. kisqali is a pill that when taken with an aromatase inhibitor helps delay cancer from growing and has been proven to help people live significantly longer across three separate clinical trials. so, i have the confidence to live my life. kisqali can cause lung problems or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious skin reactions, liver problems, and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections. avoid grapefruit during treatment. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain, a change in your heartbeat, dizziness, yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills, or other symptoms of an infection, a severe or worsening rash, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding. long live life and long live you. ask your doctor about kisqali today. my mental health was better. but uncontrollable movements called td, tardive dyskinesia, started disrupting my day. td felt embarrassing. i felt like disconnecting. i asked my doctor about treating my td, and learned about ingrezza. ♪ ingrezza ♪ ingrezza is clinically proven for reducing td. most people saw results in just two weeks. people taking ingrezza can stay on most mental health meds. only number-one prescribed ingrezza has simple dosing for td: always one pill, once daily. ingrezza can cause depression, suicidal thoughts, or actions in patients with huntington's disease. pay close attention to and call your doctor if you become depressed, have sudden changes in mood, behaviors, feelings, or have thoughts of suicide. don't take ingrezza if you're allergic to its ingredients. ingrezza may cause serious side effects, including angioedema, potential heart rhythm problems, and abnormal movements. report fevers, stiff muscles, or problems thinking as these may be life threatening. sleepiness is the most common side effect. take control by asking your doctor about ingrezza. ♪ ingrezza ♪ the all new godaddy airo helps you get your business online in minutes with the power of ai... ...with a perfect name, a great logo, and a beautiful website. just start with a domain, a few clicks, and you're in business. make now the future at godaddy.com/airo we're back with harry and shannon. shannon, i want to come back to something you said. i mean, i think the country is focused on the supreme court as a political liability to living safely in this country if you're pregnant, safely in this country if you're worried to drop your kids off at school and worry they'll have to run from a shooter. say more about the fact that this case was even considered. >> well, you know, it should never have been appealed. this is a long-standing law, a federal law. the supreme court didn't have to take it. they didn't have to hear it. they could have gotten a briefing. but, again, we have right-wing extremists on the fifth circuit court of appeals. we also have them on the supreme court, and particularly clarence thomas, right? these are gun extremists who are making laws based in originalism. and these laws based in originalism are killing women and children. and i think today is a very good sign that even the most right-wing courts in our nation's history could not deny that keeping guns away from domestic abusers is constitutional. however, we were talking about before the break about bruin, another decision based on originalism. so we're going to keep seeing these kinds of challenges. i mean last week the supreme court overturned the bumpstock ban passed after the las vegas mass shooting. this isn't the end, but just because we can't appoint or vote for supreme court justices doesn't mean we don't have power. we can decide who we vote for in november, and we can vote for lawmakers who will make policies that save lives, that are based in gun safety. joe biden and kamala harris are the most -- the strongest gun safety administration we've had in our nation's history. they've done everything they can whether it's passing the first bipartisan law, the bipartisan safer communities act in 2022, which had the support of 15 republican senators, and everything they can do by executive action. and they have vowed to do more when they're re-elected. so if you're feeling dismayed by the cases the courts are taking or by the decisions they're making, know that you have power in november to help change it. >> well, i mean, harry, there is a danger for republicans. i mean, if they really want to defend this court, they're going have to explain -- and this is from nbc news, msnbc's website where in an op-ed we write this. if you're looking for a narrow historic analog for laws preventing those subject to domestic violence restraining orders for earning guns, you won't find one. it wasn't until 1978 any state punished husbands who beat their wives. it took until 1920 for every state to criminalize wife beating. women were and it should not come as news to any of us, not full people under the rule of law. so if we have a window into a world view that's looking back to those moments in history for his legal opinions, those were not great moments for women. >> yeah. and the screaming question is why should they be the ones that control our conduct and action today? it would have been lunacy to do any other possible view here, but the court was in a corner of its own making because of what it had said in the bruin case. and this comes up in many different areas, so they give some ground here. they sort of had to. but i think the point is well-taken that doesn't mean they will do it the next time. and right now we're left in a certain flux. moreover, they signal in some of their conduct they kind of enable other courts like the fifth circuit but even state legislatures i think what we saw in louisiana just two days ago will do something against the constitution because we like our odds with the supreme court. it's also another kind of illustration of what happens when you have an unpredictably extreme court at the ultimate spot that you think should be, you know, drawing the line, and it may not be drawing those lines anymore. >> harry, what do you make of when the supreme court will be done? there's a lot of big stuff left to do. >> yeah, there are at least a half a dozen cases and 15 big ones. they're going to announce more decisions wednesday. that's consistent with thursday and friday. people have said will it extend? they have in the past in early july. i think wednesday, july 3rd is the outside date here. i don't see it happening after that, but i think it could go into that week.real, you know, blockbusters to come and i think people are still polishing final opinions but by my prediction would be no later than wednesday, july 3rd will be the last day of the term. >> and is it, do you predict that immunity is something we get on that last day, harry? >> not necessarily. soon. very soon. and i don't think they'll be so foolish as to do it next thursday. when we have the debate. but right now, i do think all the points about favoring trump are well taken but in this very last few days, i think it has to do with all the opinions in there and they're being wherein. so it could be the second to last day. still the end of the term. i think we've had a few clues though which way we were going of late. it's not good. >> what are the clues? >> i think justice kagan has twice in the last two days made a point of saying we shouldn't be deciding this so we are not going to and her two majority opinions. if i had to guess, she's sharpening her pencil and making the same point. what they're going to do in this case is so unnecessary and as andrew was just detailing, so undermining of this need of having a trial which i think is maybe by the boards. so they're taking on a much bigger set of questions than they need to. i think is going to be one of the themes of a dissent coming up. >> yeah. former attorney general eric holder made a similar point. he said kavanaugh said they're writing for the ages. he said no you're not. you're deciding a case. harry, shannon, thank you both so much for being here today on this story with us. steve bannon is making one last attempt to stay out of prison. speaking of the supreme court. it's ten days away. we'll tell you about that next. y we'll tell you about that next ♪ ♪ i got the power of 3. i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. i'm under 7. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. i'm lowering my risk. adults lost up to 14 pounds. i lost some weight. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. living with type 2 diabetes? ask about the power of 3 with ozempic®. higher shipping rates may be “the cost of doing business...” but at what cost? turn shipping to your advantage. with low cost ground shipping from the united states postal service. ♪♪ shop etsy for thoughtful pieces made by real people from the united states postal service. to bring a little something extra to the ordinary. find items that add wow to walls and make you fall in love with your family room again. when you want one-of-a-kind pieces to refresh your home... etsy has it. (man) every time i needed a new phone, i had to switch carriers... (roommate) i told him...at verizon, everyone can get that iphone 15 on them. (man) now that i got a huge storage and battery upgrade... i'm officially done switching. (vo) new and existing customers get iphone 15 on us when they trade in any iphone. verizon ♪♪ rising costs. selective coverage. for countless americans, the complex specialty care they need has always felt... just out of reach. ♪♪ at evernorth, we give members unrivaled access to the most complex therapies at the best prices. while providing enhanced support like in—home nursing at no additional cost. that's wonder made possible. evernorth health services. leaving no stone unturned. former trump white house adviser and pardon recipient steve bannon today asked the united states supreme court his very last option, to keep him out of prison. steve bannon filed an emergency application for continued release pending the appeal of his contempt of congress conviction for defying a january 6th committee subpoena. the strategy was already tested by peter navarro earlier this year fighting the exact same conviction, but he was rejected by chief justice roberts before being renewed then again rejected by the full court. the supreme court has asked the justice department to submit a response to bannon's application by june 26th. as it stands, bannon must report to prison on july 1st. up next, judge cannon kicking off a three-day hearing in the classified documents case. why the case feels like it's moving backward. the next hour starts after a quick break. don't go anywhere. after a quick break. don't go anywhere. (♪♪) (♪♪) try dietary supplements from voltaren, for healthy joints. so, i didn't think i needed swiffer. until... i saw how easily it picked up my hair every time i dried it. it only takes a minute. look at that! the heavy duty cloths are extra thick for amazing trap and lock. even for his hair. wow! and for dust i love my heavy duty duster. the fluffy fibers trap dust on contact up high and all around without having to lift a thing. i'm so hooked! you'll love swiffer or your money back! documents and or he's allowed to have these by the pra. why would you need to ask questions about video footage? why would you possibly move the documents when they are coming to retrieve them? to me, it just doesn't make any sense. on top of that, why would you put two lower level employees in the position they're in if you did nothing wrong and these are your personal documents? >> very, very, very astute questions there. hi, again, everyone. it's now 5:00 in the east. the man asking those questions speaking with ari is not your standard trump critic. not a never trump republican. not a democratic lawmaker. not a pundit on this network. he's ryan butler. a former 20-year employee of donald trump's at mar-a-lago. one of the key witnesses now against him in the disgraced ex-president's classified documents case. the case that presents the biggest legal threat to donald trump out of the many, many indictments he currently faces. an assessment we heard that not from trump's detractors, but again, those in his closest inner circle. here's trump's former attorney, bill barr, and ty cobb. >> i've said all along that if the case is out there right now, the one i'd be most concerned about if i were the former president is the mar-a-lago document case. >> and why so? >> well, because it's, it doesn't go on intent or anything like that. it's very clear that he had no business having those documents. >> well, i think this original indictment was engineered to last 1,000 years and now it will last the superseding indictment will last. this is such a tight case. the evidence is overwhelming. >> and yet, and yet, despite all that, despite how overwhelming the evidence is, a trial date is nowhere in sight because of the judge. trump appointee, judge aileen cannon, slow walking this tight, overwhelming case to last the ages every step of the way. today, a prime example, she held a hearing that just wrapped up for the day entertaining a farfetched motion filed by the defense. motion questioned whether special counsel jack smith's appointment in and of it is constitutional. that hearing continues monday. it's not over yet and will be followed with the cannon hearing two more challenges brought by the defense. nbc news reports at today's hearing, quote, cannon appeared skeptical at some of the team's arguments, however the fact she took the time to hear these arguments only adds to the now widespread perception that she's simply doing whatever she can do to delay the case for trump, which is his legal strategy. he wins re-election. he could then have this case thrown out. according to former trump white house lawyer, ty cobb, cannon's decision on smith's appointment could backfire on her. >> the worse thing that could happen to her is that she does reel for trump on this because that would go to the 11th circuit then i think this petty partisan premadonna would be put in her place and they would remove her. >> it's where we start the hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends. politico correspondent, betsy woodrow, tim haake, and charlie sykes is here. betsy, just remind everyone who ty cobb is in the trump story. he's not a democrat. he's not a liberal. he was trump's lawyer and his characterization of judge cannon is among the harshest, i've heard. >> that's right. cobb was the lawyer representing the white house during robert mueller's probe. he worked in the white house. he worked closely with trump. one of the key strategies that he supported, which ended up working out okay for trump in part because of bill barr's role, was pushing as much material as possible to the special counsel as quickly as possible. the argument that cobb was making internality during the mueller probe was that with the justice would be best served by moving quick. by not throwing up tons of roadblocks. cobb had enough sway in the president's inner circle that that was the argument that in many cases won the day. the way he handled the mueller probe is the opposite to the way trump's current team is handling jack smith's investigation. of course, there's all sorts of differences between these two scenarios but i think yearsdown the road when people look back and ask tactically which lawyer did the best job for trump at that moment in time, ty cobb is going to look pretty good from a strategic standpoint. the fact of course now that he's coming out so vociferously, so adamantly against trump's behavior and cannon's management of this case really speaks volumes. >> tim, we shouldn't have to reach for trump allies to verify what we can see with our own eyes, but i do. so i'll cop to that and own that. but what's instructed is that trump is a master at disorienting us with things we can see with our own eyes. facts that aren't in dispute. so bill barr is instructive in saying yeah, i read that indictment and what he took is not in dispute. that he took it is not in dispute and that he obstructed in a very sort of bad cop movie kind of way. the government's effort to get back into its position, state secrets, national defense information, that was all caught on tape, too. talk to me about what a judge, any judge, trump appointed or otherwise, could see so differently. >> yeah. i think what we're seeing is a judge who is inexperienced, insecure, and therefore, does not have the ability to sift valid arguments from completely ridiculous arguments. i won't go as far as to say this is an intentional effort by the judge to help the man who appointed her, but it is at the side of a judge who does not have the kind of experience, the kind of instinct to sift what is meritorious from what is not. judges are besieged in cases actively litigated cases like this, with all manner of motions of pleadings. some of which really matter and some of which don't. and 99% of the judges around the country have the ability to say this one, i can get rid of quickly on the papers. i don't need a two-day argument to evaluate whether or not it is constitutional for the special counsel to be appointed when judge after judge after judge who has litigated that issue has found consistently that it is permissible for the department to use special counsel. what we're seeing here is a judge who had four i think criminal trials since she was appointed. she did not have a long track record as a litigator even before she was appointed. and her instincts are poor and they're forcing her to entertain these ridiculous arguments that really don't merit the time and that result is delay. and justice deferred, delay, really prejudicial for the special counsel and also for the people of the united states who have a big decision to make. >> i want to associate myself with your refusing to go that final step. but i struggle because in competence should be blind. right? should harm all sides equally. the truth is judge cannon's conduct has only harmed jack smith. >> absolutely right. no question. that's why so many people said well, there must be some sort of nefarious motive here because her incompetence is favoring one side. there are a lot of cases that are, the stakes are so high. you see this a lot in capital cases. the judges bend over backwards to provide procedural due process and a thorough opportunity for the defendant when the stakes are so high to raise every possible argument to err on the side of being completely fair. again, i'm giving her the benefit of the doubt here on intention, but the net result is the same. the net result is as you've said. very, very beneficial to the former president. when he is staring at allegations, i agree with ty cobb, with bill barr. there is a very, very strong evidence that we have seen already on the face of the indictment and in pleadings set forth by the special counsel. this case seems extremely strong. it does not rely like the federal case in washington on any indication of the president's intent, but simply his possession of these documents and allegations of obstruction after repeated requests. it seems really, really strong. so delaying that, the adjudication of that strong case, really prejudicial to the united states. >> charlie, let's go back to the strength of the evidence. here's, you know, what basically amounts to the crime being carried out on tape. >> these are the papers. this was done by the military and given to me. i think we can probably, right? >> i don't know. we'll have to see. you know, we'll have to try to -- >> declassify. see, as president, i could have it declassified. now, i can't. isn't that interesting? so cool. and you probably almost didn't believe me, but now you believe me. >> no, i believed you. >> incredible. >> so there he is, holding the gun. i know it's a gun. i know i can't shoot the gun, but hey, staffer, can i shoot it? basically on tape carrying out all the elements of the crime. >> and you have the audio tape, also the videotape. this is why it's so important to do what you did earlier, to say this is not a partisan democratic hit job. when you have bill barr, ty cobb talking about how solid the evidence in this case is. this is a very, very straightforward case. and you know, aileen cannon has turned out to be who we thought she is. i agree with tim, but it is interesting that the nicest thing you can say about her, the strongest defense you can make is that she's incompetent. the strongest defense is that she's an inexperienced judge in over her head and cannot make a decision because the alternative to that is a judge who is so in the tank for donald trump that she's willing to in many ways embarrass the court. you know, i know you talked about this "new york times" report earlier this week. which is extraordinary on so many levels. the report that the senior judges basically took her aside and said judge cannon probably you should not sit on this case. this is not a good idea. it is not, the optics are bad. there are alternatives. the fact that they thought that it was, you know, appropriate for them to urge her not to take the case is one thing. the fact that this story is actually out there, that it was reported, that there are judges who apparently have told this story is also extraordinary and an indication of how embarrassing her performance has been in this case. because you will very rarely read stories about what federal judges said to other federal judges. that is also not normal at all. and the other thing about cannon that i think is striking and worth noting is what an outlier she has been in the federal judiciary, including among trump appointed judges. including among judges supported by the federalist society who have been going by the book. who have been standing by the rule of law. who have not been accepting these arguments. who have not dragged their feet and have been very, very outspoken about what donald trump and his supporters have done. so, you know, aileen cannon really is out there on an island. either because she is so inexperienced and incompetent or because she is willing to trash her reputation to delay this case for donald trump. either way, it's not a pretty picture. >> yeah. i mean, betsy, if she's on an island, she's on it with roger stone. here's what he believes she knows she's going to do. >> the president's trial in georgia, i think the judge is on the verge of dismissing the charges against him in florida. they're delayed in new york city and they're now delayed in washington. so it's not clear that they can have a trial before the election, which is the absolute key to be able to convince people that the reason we lost was cause of the trial. right now if they steal it, people will say, it's not possible. trump was leading in all the polls. they want to try him, suck up his money, suck up his time, and create a reason why their theft is plausible, believable. you see? >> so betsy, we don't know why roger stone, let me carefully quote him. quote, thinks the judge in florida is on the verge of dismissing the charges against him in florida, but it's what he believes and as with what the proud boys heard when trump told them to stand by and stand back. it's, you know, what they heard is him telling them to stand by. there's certainly enough in the system, right, where credible people reading the story in "the new york times" about two judges and by the way, one of them was a george w. bush appointee. they were not appointed by democratic presidents either. i mean, just speak to what the trump side is hoping for and expecting at this point from cannon. >> there's no doubt that cannon is by far their favorite judge they're dealing with in the plethora of criminal cases trump faces and that they're delighted with the decisions she's made thus far in this case. one thing to flag when it comes to questions about her inexperience and the way she's handling these issues, she's not the only comparatively inexperienced judge handling special counsel proceedings and this specific issue of the constitutionality of the appointment of special counsels. a judge in los angeles and in wilmington, delaware have dealt with almost this exact same legal argument because they're overseeing hunter biden's criminal cases. they're both trump appointees. between the two of them, i think they've handled fewer than ten criminal trials. similar suggest matter. similarly high profile cases. both of those judges when they were presented with arguments that the special counsel's appointment was unconstitutional, they took some briefs, read over them and threw out the arguments really quick. you didn't see any coming in to argue. didn't see any three-day hearings. and the hunter biden proceedings aren't low profile. but both those judges handled it totally differently. there's no question that cannon is not a seasoned member of the bench. but the fact that she's only handled a few criminal trials by itself doesn't explain the whole picture here. >> it's such an important point. right. because we have inexperienced judges who make their way all day every day and they don't make any headlines. no one's going anywhere. when we come back, as judge cannon slow walks this case, the risk to the country's national security become all the more dire and obvious. we'll have that part of the conversation next. later in the hour, we're less than a week away from the first presidential debate. president biden sharing the stage with the twice impeached, four times indicted president. what kamala harris is saying today about the stark contrast the biden campaign hopes to make to everyone watching. and an update on that breaking story out of arkansas where law enforcement officials held a press conference moments ago confirming that a shooting at a grocery store has left three people dead and eight people wounded. among the wounded are two law enforcement officials who are not believed at this point to have life threatening injuries. police say the shooter was shot by officers and is in custody. we'll stay on that story as well. we'll be right back. as well we'll be right back. are now being analyzed and restored using the power of dell ai. ♪ so this is pickleball? it's basically tennis for babies, but for adults. it should be called wiffle tennis. pickle! yeah, aw! whoo! ♪♪ these guys are intense. we got nothing to worry about. with e*trade from morgan stanley, we're ready for whatever gets served up. dude, you gotta work on your trash talk. i'd rather work on saving for retirement. or college, since you like to get schooled. that's a pretty good burn, right? got him. good game. thanks for coming to our clinic, first one's free. ( ♪ ♪ ) start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. -remember when i said we need to screen for colon cancer? -was that after i texted the age to screen was now 45? [both] because i said cologuard®! -hey there! -where did he come from? -yup, with me you can screen at home. just talk to your provider. [both] we'll screen with cologuard and do it my way. cologuard is a one-of-a-kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45+ at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for me, cologuard. (dad) we never thought that with verizon, false positive and negative results may occur. saving on the the best in entertainment was gonna be so easy before... we had to pretend we had seen all these shows... now that we have verizon, we can stop pretending. (vo) disney+, hulu, espn+, netflix and max. all for just $20/mo. only on verizon. (mom) my turn. norman, bad news... i never graduated from med school. what? -but the good news is... xfinity mobile just got even better! now, you can automatically connect to wifi speeds up to a gig on the go. plus, buy one unlimited line and get one free for a year. i gotta get this deal... i know... faster wifi and savings? ...i don't want to miss that. that's amazing doc. mobile savings are calling. visit xfinitymobile.com to learn more. doc? - [narrator] life with ear ringing sounded like a constant train whistle i couldn't escape. then i started taking lipo flavonoid. with 60 years of clinical experience, it's the number one doctor recommended brand for ear ringing. and now i'm finally free. take back control with lipo flavonoid. how is the system going to work if intelligence officers are going to try and decide whether this president is going to be trustworthy? like, how does this work if those people who are honor bound to give to the president now say you know, but i don't know whether this guy can be trusted. he might take it. do they start making choices about what they share and don't? so the whole system breaks down. >> that was the former principal director of national intelligence sue garden on this program warning about the practical and real dangers to our national security that someone like donald trump, well, donald trump specifically, poses. if he were to return to the white house. he's of course a man who puts himself before the safety and security of our nation's secrets and we all know that, but now that he's the nominee, charlie sykes, it feels like we should be having this very specific conversation. that conversation with sue was i think before the republican primaries, you know, vomited up trump as the nominee again. now that we are faced with him as one of the two choices in november, the facts of this case are, i don't know that there's anything other than the facts of the january 6th case. more central to the determination or deliberation over who people should pick. how do we make sure these facts are in front of voters ahead of november? >> this is the problem with donald trump because the zone is so completely flooded with horrible possibilities. the election of donald trump creates an immediate constitutional crisis but also it creates an immediate foreign policy and intelligence crisis, doesn't it? because donald trump's allegiances are certainly not clear. so these doubts are going to be real. whose side is he really on? what is his relationship with kim? what is his relationship with putin? and other people who wish us ill. also, what is his reliability in protects those secrets? as president of the united states, he has sweeping power to do whatever he wants with this information and he's also made it clear that anyone in the intelligence community that does not bend the knee is going to face the chopping block. he has said openly that he intends to gut the nation's intelligence community. intends to fire generals that he does not think are loyal enough to him. so the big question will be if he is elected, get to your question in a second, will these generals, the people in the intelligence agency, preemptively decide, okay, we have to go along with all this or we're going to have to quit preemptively. this is something we've talked about and you've talked about so extensively. the people know what the stakes are. the people in the intelligence community. the retired generals need to speak out. they need to speak out now. they need to speak out this fall. they need to sound the alarm. it's one thing for you and i to have this conversation, but we need people like general mattis and general kelly. people who have served in donald trump's cabinet. people who have been you know, high level officials in the intelligence community saying this is not normal. this is extremely dangerous. let me explain to you what donald trump has done in the past. what he is saying right now that he's going to do and use your imagine about what this could mean for the future of america's role in the world and in our national security. this needs to come from them and it needs to come from them before the election. >> you know, betsy, sue gordon speaks carefully, but clearly. have we heard from gina haskell, who would have as much visibility as sue and to the threat trump poses? >> not that i'm aware of. she is pretty studiously kept her head down since the end of the trump administration. one thing about sue that's so important and that makes her comments on your show about the rank and file in the intelligence community so weighty is that there aren't many former senior intelligence officials who are as deeply connected to who you might call the foot soldiers of the u.s. intelligence community the way sue gordon is. she wasn't somebody who just was very senior within the department of national intelligence, but she also had just generated a lot of deep affection and reverence from the people who were very much the rank and file. when she says it's possible that intelligence officers could have concerns about sharing information with trump, she's speaking of course in a hypothetical. it's a forward looking statement. but if she's saying that it's based on lots and lots of conversations that i am confident she's had with people working right now who are grappling with real moral issues related to how they would handle their relationships with sources, how they would handle the work they do if the president is someone who they feel could make decisions that would put those sources in danger or that would put those secrets in danger. >> you know, tim, you came probably, you know, the closest to having this kind of testimony that would disqualify trump from serving as commander in chief come out of the mouth of the kind of person we're talking about. that's former chairman of the joint chief, general mark milley. i read his transcript of his interview with you. it was central to being able to assert on the part of the committee something that a writer this week was able to assert, that trump knew he lost. that he was treating his supporters like dupes, like human shields, to be sent to the capitol. one died there tragically. it was an important piece of testimony. what is your sense of the impact of what he testified to to you and more over, what he saw during his service in the trump administration to the public's understanding of the specific national security threat of a second trump presidency. >> they're so instructive. i'm glad you highlighted general milley because he was one of those voices that gave us a glimpse. not just of the facts of his understanding of january 6th. but of style. right? it was substance and style. and his impressions of the commander and chief up close were indicative well beyond january 6th. he told us so much about not only the fact that the president said after a meeting, we'll leave this for the next guy, right, an acknowledgment that he lost, but he also told us this really powerful story about how the president questioned him when he, general milley, wrote this letter to the joint force. to every soldier apologizing for being present at that st. john's church event where the president held up that bible. milley felt like the uniform was misused in a political way and apologized. he said that the president looked at him after he next saw the president and said why did you send that letter. it's a sign of weakness. and milley said, sir, with all due respect, it's actually a sign of strength when you acknowledge a mistake. he said the president looked at him like he had two heads. he didn't understand that. so general milley is sort of a bell ringer or harbinger or someone who saw up close how the former president thinks, how he processes information. and that's more telling to me than the individual story about acknowledging he lost. the milley transcript and so many of our other work are available and i hope people pay close attention to both the style and the substance when they make this important decision. >> yeah. it's another, we have all the information we need, right? but it is important to charlie's point. there's so much of it. it's helpful to have these folks out there. betsy, tim, thank you so much for having this conversation. charlie sticks around a little bit longer. when we come back, how president biden is planning to use next thursday's debate to draw a sharp contrast with the disgraced, convicted ex-president. our political panel joins us after a very short break. don't go anywhere. l joins us after a very short break don't go anywhere. iasis held me. now with skyrizi, i'm all in with clearer skin. ♪ things are getting clearer ♪ (♪♪) ♪ i feel free ♪ (♪♪) ♪ to bare my skin, yeah that's all me. ♪ ♪ nothing is everything ♪ (♪♪) with skyrizi, 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. and most people were clearer even at 5 years. skyrizi is just 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. (♪♪) ♪ nothing and me go hand-in-hand, ♪ ♪ nothing on my skin, that's my new plan ♪ ♪ nothing is everything ♪ now's the time, ask your doctor about skyrizi, the number one dermatologist- prescribed biologic in psoriasis. learn how abbvie could help you save. (bell ringing) someone needs to customize and save hundreds with liberty mutual! (inaudible sounds) (elevator doors opening) wait, there's an elevator? only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, ♪ ♪ liberty. ♪ why would i use kayak to compare hundreds of travel sites at once? i like to do things myself. i can't trust anything else to do the job right. kayak... aaaaaaaahhhh kayak. search one and done. the cockroach. resilient creatures. where there is one, others aren't far behind. well that's horrifying. always scavenging... ortho home defense max indoor insect barrier. one application kills and prevents bugs for 365 days. nature is wild. your home doesn't have to be. hi, i'm greg. i live in bloomington, illinois. i'm not an actor. i'm just a regular person. some people say, "why should i take prevagen? i don't have a problem with my memory." memory loss is, is not something that occurs overnight. i started noticing subtle lapses in memory. i want people to know that prevagen has worked for me. it's helped my memory. it's helped my cognitive qualities. give it a try. i want it to help you just like it has helped me. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. republicans are glitching out. they can't seem to make up their minds on how to attack president biden ahead of the debate. who is president biden to him, really? evil genius, master mind who managed to steal a presidential election without leaving behind a shred of evidence? a puppet master secretly pulling the strings of political prosecution in new york and georgia and every else? or the other they think they attack him for. sleepy joe biden. bumbling elder statesman. not all there. somehow incapable of the most basic human interactions. on earth one, we understand he can't be both and of course in reality, he's neither. for the republican party, the problem with trying to have it both ways is that occasionally, those two contradictory images of president biden run up against each other. the first presidential debate is one week from tonight after weeks of sharing deceptively manipulated or edited videos in a concerted effort to make sure that as many people as possible think president biden is bumbling, people in donald trump's corner are now playing with "the new york times" calls the expectations game. they're now raising the bar so voters aren't as impressed when president biden gets the chance to speak to them directly. meanwhile, the biden campaign is working to communicate with its supporters with its coalition. vice president kamala harris spoke to our colleague, mika brzezinski about what to expect in the debate next week. >> joe biden and this debate will make clear the contrast. you know, of the many issues in our country, in our world that are complex and nuanced, november of 2024 is binary. and when you look at the difference, i would ask people to really imagine what the world will be like on january 20th, 2025. on the one hand, you have joe biden who has spent his life and career fighting for the well-being of other people including healthcare. on the other hand, you have the former president who spent full-time when he was president trying to get rid of the affordable care act, which if he is successful as president again would mean over 100 million people would be stripped of healthcare coverage. you have on the one hand, joe biden who under his leadership bipartisan support for the first meaningful gun safety legislation in 30 years and on the other hand, the former president who when speaking of survivors of horrendous gun violence says get over it and will proudly talk about how to the nra about how he did nothing on the issue. and i could go on and on. i think the debate is going to make clear the contrast between the current president who works on behalf of the american people and the former president who pretty much spends full-time fighting for himself. >> joining our coverage, chief political columnist and host of the podcast impolic, john heilemann is here with a great interview of your own. founder of iraq and iran veterans of america. let me play some of your conversation with jen o'malley dylan. >> joe biden's going to stand on that stage and he is going to show what he showed in 2020. that he is in this for all the right reasons. he's focused on delivering for the american people and him standing next to donald trump is the best way to show that. do i think rules are going to protect the american people from whatever donald trump might say? of course not. but i do think you know, having this really be serious is what the american people want and i think that you know, joe biden every day is doing the job of being president. this is a great opportunity earlier in the cycle than ever before for the two of them to stand together and for him to talk about what he's done and what he's fighting for. and you know, not having an audience, distractions, not having to worry about covid. i think all of those things are better for the american people and joe biden's going to have a great debate. >> john heilemann. your thoughts. >> well, i guess my thoughts, mika, gees, the kamala thing, i'm about to call you mika. not mika. >> deeply flattered. >> two great friends. look, i would say that they, the biden campaign, jen o'malley dylan, hasn't done an on the record interview since she became chairman, stepped back into the job she had last time, which was being joe biden's campaign manager. over the course of an hour, we talked about a lot of stuff. i confronted her with a lot of concerns and fears and worry that is a lot of democrats have right now because of the stakes of the election. because some of the things they see, she was confident. she had really good answers to lot of the questions. i think on this debate question, the thing i asked her that you and i discussed, is it your expectation that the moderators are going the fact check joe biden in realtime or is it joe biden's job and if it is, how do you avoid this debate just being joe biden fact checking because we know donald trump is doing to spew lies. she conceded that was a problem. the lies coming out of donald trump's mouth was obviously a problem for the country and a candidate, but also dealing with it is a challenge. i think one of the things they're going to be grappling with over the course of these days at camp david really deeply in debate camp is going to be this issue. how much fact checking does joe biden try to do. how much does he leave to the moderators in realtime or the media afterwards because he obviously has a positive message he wants to get out and even a lot of the contrast messaging could be hindered significantly if he spends too much time following i'm sure his instimt, which is to call out every lie donald trump utters. that could be 94% of the things that come out of donald trump's mouth. >> paul, your thoughts. >> you know, i think the democrats always make it too complicated and i think what joe biden has to do is stand up and say you might not like me, but this guy is a lot worse. he needs to have plain speak. he needs to be uncle joe. he needs to do story telling. also just to remind people there's a deep ethical character integrity contest here. i don't think it's his job to try to fact check donald trump. i think it's his job to remain cool and to show leadership and to show stature and show reasonableness. he's talking to two groups. to democrats. needs to say hey, stick with me. come out in big number. and he's talking to independents. he has to be honest with them and say hey, i may not be your cup of tea. you may not love me, democrats, but i'm better than this guy who's a disaster, a threat to our national security, who's an indicted felon. he has to stay above this and not try to sell every policy point. we're also talking to a lot of low information voters. he's got to go to their gut and he can do that by showing he's a good man and that donald trump is a piece of garbage. >> charlie sykes. >> this is going to be an immensely influential debate but i think it's going to be a shit show. if anybody thinks there's going to be an intelligent discussion of policy, that is somewhat naive. donald trump is going to be a fire hose of insults, interruptions and bs and even though his microphone will be muted, i think he's going to try to throw joe biden off. paul is right. people are going to be looking at this in terms of okay, can we trust joe biden. so you know, this is, unfortunately, this is not, i don't feel i'm going out on a limb when i say this is going to be the worst and dumbest presidential debate in american history. it will be neither enlightening or immobiling because donald trump is not going to be up there discussing student loan debt. he's not going to be talking about healthcare policy. he doesn't know anything about these policies. he doesn't care. he will just simply be flinging things. i understand the political necessity of for joe biden to exceed expectations and i understand why he is doing it, but part of me thinks that you know, standing up there with donald trump as a convicted felon and treating him as if he is a legitimate, normal presidential contender does normalize this prospect, but it is what it is. and so you know, and unfortunately, we're all goeng going to be analyzing it. nobody's going to confuse this with lincoln douglas debate. not even the kennedy nixon debate. we're all going to be evaluating the show. who turned in the best performance in the show. we need to keep focus on the stakes. the issues here and how much, how important this election is. and yet, we are now being sucked into a reality show and donald trump knows how to behave during a reality show. or how to misbehave. and only hope there will be a moment in which donald trump's behavior is so erratic in which he loses his cool and that joe biden can turn to him and say hey, whatever you think of me, do you really want to give this guy control of the nuclear button again? i may be old, but he's old, too, and he's crazy and you can see it with your own eyes. >> yeah. i'm bursting. i have to sneak in a quick break. >> oh, my god. oh, my god. so many things to say. , my god so many things to say. this week on chewy, shop all your pet's favorites and get a $30 egift card. enjoy more savings on more food, and more treats. more of everything they love, delivered right to your door. only with chewy. we are back with john, paul, and charlie. heilemann, i know you've got an issue. charlie, go ahead. >> i'm still stunned on a panel that includes me and you, two of the most profane people i know. and nice charlie sykes from wisconsin that it was charlie sykes who would say, use that, brought that profanity on the air. i'm stunned by that, number one. number two, charlie, you know, the prediction of this being the dumbest, idiotic, i think you forgot the debate in 2016 with donald trump and marco rubio talking about the size of their genitalia. what charlie said on the sub -- fine. maybe. the third thing, i have a lot of respect and a lot of time for the argument that by doing this debate at all, that joe biden is normalizing donald trump and there was a case for them to say we will not stand on stage with donald trump. i think the case morally, the case ethically you could make that argument. i do think politically if joe biden had decided not to debate donald trump and given the frame of the election trump has, which is me, strong, you, weak, and the fact that you know, at least in some of the, we have a very tight race here. i'll say it over and over again. i don't think anybody's ahead. but trump's not losing right now and the biden campaign, giving them that stick to beat them with, that joe biden was too afraid of donald trump to debate, i think that would have been a political mistake. >> i don't disagree with that. here we're at this moment where we're watching donald trump being on the stage tossing peanuts at joe biden and unfortunately, this is the state of our democracy. this is not going to be a great moment for our democracy, but i agree. there was really no choice. the, and i think you're framing is right. this i am strong, you are weak, if joe biden dodged this debate, you'd hear no end of it throughout the campaign. so they have to do it. but it's part of just kind of the tragedy of 2024 and where we're at and what we have to go through to get point. >> you know, paul, wring you in on this. you said something i agree with. i mean, i -- i prepared a lot of folks who weren't great at debating. what you need is to own, a self-own. i think in this moment joe biden what do go out with a self-own on the age thing. i mean, i'm so old i may not make it through the next 90 minutes without needing to sit down and taking a sip of water but never hand state secrets over to the enemy, never call vladimir putin a nice guy and receive a love letter from kim jong-un. kim jong-un hates my guts, why? because i call him an evil deck tater. he has to punch him in the face. with his own boasts. he boasts about things that are disgutting, grabbing win tweep the legs and if biden doesn't punch him in the face with his own things he's proud of the thing is lost before it starts. >> yes. i mean, if this was a debate you just destroyed the other two guys. right? you brought it, the moderator. exactly what's needs to happen. profanity or not. my mother watches this show and try to keep it in check. bottom line, it's an strength. people are nervous, have anxiety. some people are scared. you have to project strength and confidence. some of this is very physical. they want to see these two guys onstage opposite each other and see how they look. can they stand up there 90 minutes? nicolle you know, standing up under lights 90 minutes is extremely physically demanding. do they have endurance, discipline and the command to be our commander-in-chief. that's something you caulked about in the past and always important to remind people. biden emphasizing you are selecting a commander in chief. decides whether or not we go to war, finger on the button, someone the boss of your children if they serve in uniform. i think those are the things to continue to emphasize for really biden to be disciplined show he's more disciplined than trump maybe the least disciplined president and candidate we've seen in history. that distinction needs to be clear. get in sleep, come ready, eat his wheaties and long strong and project confidence. >> thank you all for joining us. to be continued. i feel we could have this conversation every day until the debate and beyond. thank you so much for it. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. (man) now that i got a huge storage and battery upgrade... i'm officially done switching. (vo) new and existing customers get iphone 15 on us when they trade in any iphone. verizon the promise of this nation should extend to all from new york to new mexico, from alaska to alabama. but right now, people like you are losing their freedoms. some in power are suppressing voting rights. banning our kids books from libraries and attacking our right to make private health care decisions. we must act now to defend these freedoms and protect our democracy. and we can't do it without you. we are the american civil liberties union, and we're asking you to join us in protecting our democracy at the national level and in communities like yours. call or go online to myaclu.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 the freedoms of all americans, no matter your zip code. if you also believe in the right to vote, the right to free speech, the right to learn, the right to bodily autonomy. please join us now. these are your fundamental rights that people are playing with. and so you need to get involved, because if you don't, then someone else is going to decide whether or not you get to choose what happens to your own body. so please call or go to myaclu.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 and more to show you're part of a movement to protect the rights of all people. we can't make systemic change in the way that we want to doing it by ourselves. we have to work together because we the people, means all of us. from sea to shining sea. so please call or go online to myaclu.org to become a guardian of liberty today. ♪♪ jardiance! -it's a little pill with a ♪♪ ♪♪ big story to tell. ♪♪ ♪♪ i take once-daily jardiance ♪♪ ♪♪ at each day's staaart. ♪♪ ♪♪ as time went on it was easy to seeee, ♪♪ ♪♪ i'm lowering my a1c! ♪♪ jardiance works twenty-four seven in your body to flush out some sugar. and for adults with type 2 diabetes and known heart disease, jardiance can lower the risk of cardiovascular death, too. serious side effects may include ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration that can lead to sudden worsening of kidney function, and genital yeast or urinary tract infections. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. you may have an increased risk for lower limb loss. call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of infection in your legs or feet. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. ♪♪ jardiance is really swell ♪♪ ♪♪ the little pill with a big story to tell! ♪♪ last night major league baseball paid tribute to the late, great willie mays and the negro league by holding a game in birmingham, alabama. willie mays played his first professional home games at that field in 1948 as a member of the birmingham barons. here's a stunny response. >> walked into restaurants and they would point at me and say, you can't eat here. i would go to a hotel and they'd say you can't stay here. we went to charlie findlay's country club for a welcome-home dinner and they pointed me out with the "n" word. he can't come in here. findlay marched the twoel team out. finally they let me in there. >> you haven't seen the whole thing it's worth finding it and watching all of it. our friend eddie gilad wrote jackson reminds us that jim crow isn't a moment in the distant past. people are walking around lived through it and still carry the scars. another break for us. we'll be right back. be right b. okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. yay - woo hoo! ensure, with 27 vitamins and minerals, nutrients for immune health. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. (♪♪) these days everyone is staring at screens, and watching their spending. good vision is more important than ever, but so is saving. that's why america's best includes a free eye exam when you buy two pairs of glasses for just $79.95. book an exam online today. -dad, what's with your toenail? -oh, that...? i'm not sure... -it's a nail fungus infection. -...that's gross! -it's nothing, really... -it's contagious. you can even spread it to other people. -mom, come here! -don't worry about it. it'll go away on its own! -no, it won't go away on its own. it's an infection. you need a prescription. nail fungus is a contagious infection. at the first signs, show it to your doctor... ... and ask if jublia is right for you. jublia is a prescription medicine used to treat toenail fungus. its most common side effects include ingrown toenail, application site redness... ... itching, swelling, burning or stinging, blisters and pain. jublia is recognized by the apma. most commercially insured patients may pay as little as $0 copay. go to jubliarx.com now to get started. ♪ you need t-mobile... ♪ ♪ home internet with 5g. ♪ wait! t-mobile has home internet? ♪ what a feeling! ♪ ♪ to have t-mobile now! ♪