tv Deadline White House MSNBC July 8, 2021 1:00pm-3:00pm PDT
hold on. get a powerful and secure connection you can count on. only with xfinity xfi. and see f9 only in theaters. ♪ ♪ hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in the east. it's all happening today. president and vice president using their respective bully pulpits to push back against the wildly successful national gop campaign to roll back access to the polls in reaction to doubts thrown about the integrity of our elections by the disgraced, twice impeached ex-president. never before has a lie about election results been used so quickly and enacted so many laws in so many state houses. according to the brennan center for justice since january lawmakers in 48 states have
introduced at least 389 bills that would restrict voting access. 22 of those bills have already been signed into law in 14 states. and at least 61 others are quickly moving through republican dominated legislatures in 18 states including one in texas likely on its way to becoming enacted. vice president harris made remarks today about protecting voting rights at howard university a few hours ago where she announced she and the president have directed the dnc to expand its i will vote initiative with an investment of $25 million. >> yes, it is early and we have never really started this early before, but, folks, it is never too early to defend your rights. so with these new laws that have been passed or they're trying to pass we have to start now to finish strong.
the people must be able without hinderance, without obstacle, certainly without insurmountable obstacle, to decide our country's future. with this $25 million, the democrats are investing in the tools and technology to register voters, to educate voters, to protect voters. >> the vice president's speech today a table setter for a meeting between herself and the president with civil rights leaders in the roosevelt room. that meeting just getting under way. the public engagement comes as the gop push to call into further doubt the results of the 2020 election gathers even more steam. in pennsylvania republican state senator and trump ally requesting an arizona-style review of ballots there. nbc news has this new report. he and his capacity as chair of the state senate's
intergovernmental operations committee is requesting a long list of items including software, copies of hard drives and phone sim cards, wireless router logs and more. according to a copy of the letter he sent to york county. he asked for a copy of the paper. and in georgia fresh evidence the legal path to rolling back and fighting the voting restriction laws will take years. eight lawsuits are pending against georgia's new election law in federal court. they have been assigned to u.s. district judge j.p. boulee who ruled against intervening in one of the lawsuits. it could take years for the cases to work their way through the federal court system. in texas today republican governor greg abbott convened a special session there to pass
his state's voting restrictions. advocacy groups gathered in the battle there to preserve the right to vote. the president and vice president stepping into the fight to protect voting rights in america, where we start with some of our favorite reporters and friends. the moderator of washington week and an msnbc contributor, also joining us "new york times" domestic correspondent who has been all over this story since the beginning and charlie sykes is here, msnbc contributor. yamiche, i start with you. a very scripted day from this white house to speak to the mounting angst and heat from activists and leaders in the state. talk about this sort of one-two punch, if you will, the vice president's speech in this meeting with civil rights
leaders. >> the president and vice president are juggling a lot. they want to remind americans their priority remains on voting rights and access to democracy. it is based on a lie there was voter fraud when we know that there wasn't. republicans are really also making the political calculus if they talk about voting, transgender rights, that will animate their voters and they can even try to change some of the voting laws if they pass these laws. democrats are facing a conundrum here which is that the supreme court has signaled they're not going to be stopping these voting rights laws, the congress is not signaling they're going to be able to pass voting rights laws. you have to have the vice president out saying we're going to spend money on educating
people, on trying to invest in the voting systems we have and there's this two pronged effort to get something legislatively done and the courts and the doj going after these laws. they are trying to remind americans and progressive democrats they are not forgetting about voting rights on a day like today. >> charlie, the irony is without action on voting rights, democrats won't be in charge of these other issues for a generation but the republicans are pushing laws about critical race theory, they want to talk about transgender sports, but if they succeed in changing and rigging access to the polls, it won't matter what democrats have to say. it won't matter how effective the massive vaccination campaign
was between january and june. it won't matter if they can't win elections in states like georgia and arizona and texas. >> i'm really strike by the symmetry. the republicans have a game plan and they're willing to embrace these tinfoil hat conspiracy theories, the crazy spread like a weird pandemic. places like pennsylvania is the litmus test now that you have to have an audit. you see it in wisconsin, you see the arizona fraud being used as a model. but i have to say and i understand -- i take yamiche's point all the things the white house has to juggle today but a lack of real focus and urgency on the part of the democrats to deal with this including the failure to focus on the other aspect of this not just the access to the ballot box but
nullifications of elections. the power of state legislatures to overturn the election. the electoral vote counting act that might allow a republican congress to set aside the winner of an actual election. they seem to go through the motions and wave their hands at it. but it does feel like, again, going through the motions as opposed to a real sense of urgency, a full-court press would involve compromised legislation, more aggressive action by the department of justice, and a much more aggressive approach by the white house including the president and the vice president and, quite frankly, i know we're supposed to think they're addressing it today, but i actually think what you just played highlighted the contrast between the republicans at ramming speed and the democrats not quite figuring out what they want to do here. >> i co-sign everything you've
just said and had to move in an extinguisher for my hair being on fire. nick has been writing about this for six months. because it is malevolent it's hard to ascribe to the gop national campaign but it is extraordinary, it is efficient, it is effective and they are barreling through norms that even they didn't think they could get through. you're talking about the voter nullification stuff. that was a pipe dream in november. they have added more audacious measures to the stay laws as they have steamrolled them through without any serious conversation in washington about doing anything. the reason they announced $25 million for the dnc is to help democrats navigate the new laws as though they are a foregone conclusion that they'll all pass. nick, i want to read to you something on this nullification point because i think this is something that the reporting such as yours first brought to
focus in a national level that in georgia it's about disempowering people, most of them republicans, who walk the line regarding the november election results. let me read this to you, nick. it may well be time for congress to act to make voting rules more consistent nationwide. the biggest threat now is less voting laws are too restrictive but are counted and the results accepted by losers as well as winners. the strength of democracy and laws under consideration that would throw election results into question and allow state legislatures to reject them are a serious problem. it seems that if democrats can't get angry enough to protect their core to vote, they should protect the will of all voters and the capacity as a country to have any sort of transfer of power. >> when you look at a lot of the
bills put through that are bringing restrictions on voting it's hand-in-hand with a restructuring of power within state houses, within counties about who is going to be administering these elections. in georgia the secretary of state has been stripped of some power. the same with arizona. in georgia some election boards have been restructured. you see women of color, democrats, removed from county boards. and these are the places the actual election decisions are made where hours are set, where decisions on where precinct locations will go. and this fear that everything that held the line after president trump tried to overturn the results whether it was in michigan standing up against trying to block the certification, whether it was in detroit where they stopped poll watchers from gaining access, tried to stop counting or
overturn results there were these checks that made sure our election held and the big fear right now is when you look at a lot of these bills and what's been passed and what has become a new law in these different states that may look like a dress rehearsal and some of the checks have been removed. a big fear is if those checks are removed what's to say they could be stopped again? >> yeah, yamiche, that's the thing. if democratic leaders are not angry enough that they are being systematically and openly disenfranchised, they don't even lie about removing drop boxes in harris county. republicans are not hiding the ki couple ber here. they are doing what they are saying. but if republicans doesn't have as much outrage that charlie and nick are talking about, where is their focus other than helping
navigate and accepting the fate of these new voter restrictions? >> there are two things democrats say. when you talk to people on the record and in front of cameras they say, of course the white house is fighting tooth and nail to roll back the when you ask people to dig deeper and what exactly are you going to do when you have republicans being as charlie and you have pointed out so efficiency in their ability to pass these voter nullification laws and laws restricting voting, they really say we have to navigate this new world because democrats look and see the supreme court is not where this is going to be stopped. look at the doj and the courts, maybe we can stop some of that through some judges but with the filibuster continuing to stand, what president biden and former president obama called a relic of jim crow, with that still standing there doesn't seem to
be any still standing. democrats are scrambling to deal with the system in 2022 and possibly 2024. this is a crisis for the democratic party with people of color having literally died for the access to the ballot that they're now facing being blocked from, you have this question of how can the democratic party continue to exist if at some point republicans can say we don't like the way your voters voted so we're just going to stop that and say a million votes in philly, we don't want them because they didn't go to us. you do get the sense democrats are scrambling to understand how to really do something with teeth when they don't have the courts -- the supreme court, that is, and they don't have congress to back them up. >> have they given up? >> you hear people saying the
for the people act was begrudgingly a lot of democrats tell me was a messaging bill, not a big effort to make it bipartisan. there are other voting rights bills in congress that are floating around and people trying to figure out whether or not that could get done. you have senator manchin working on his voting rights bill. democrats haven't given up but they're facing this deep polarization. a couple senators better at not having their names called out on tv because they're more quiet, if those lawmakers don't get it together and say we have to do something for the survival of our country and party, democrats still want to get something done but the part is so, so hard. i can't see where this actually ends up. >> buckle up, buttercup. here is where we're heading.
charlie sykes, in pennsylvania donald trump's ally there, mr. mastriano has requested two post election audits to confirm the accuracy of the count there. pennsylvania's attorney general has been on this air affirming the counsel has been confirmed and every lawsuit against it was tossed out of court. they're seeking sanctions against rudy giuliani and others. all those facts notwithstanding, here is what he says. the goals are to restore faith in the integrity of our system, confirm existing legislation on the governance and identify areas for legislative reform. the only reason they have to restore faith and the integrity of our system is because they've destroyed it. there is no voter fraud, no voting irregularities in pennsylvania. there was a guy who had his dead
wife vote for donald trump. >> you have to wonder whether or not he actually believes these things need to be looked at or just the way you bow to donald trump. the new litmus test. it was interesting he wants to look at the paper the ballots were printed on because, what, he thinks it was such a brilliant idea for arizona to look for bamboo in the ballots because the ballots might have been flown in by the chinese or something like that? >> the bamboo hunt. >> yeah, instead of thinking that's crazy, he said, hey, let's do that here. that's really the state of play here. but, again, to nick's point, all of those guardrails that held after the 2020 election feel like they're under siege and you sort of go through everything that could have happened, that could have gone wrong.
what if you had somebody else in georgia as the secretary of state? what if the governor and the secretary of state in arizona had taken a different position? what if the elections board in michigan had been more trumpian? what if the pennsylvania delegation got its way and they reversed the results of that election? this seemed crazy at the time, and we can kind of pat ourselves on the back that we survived that. but what if that was just a dry run, a rehearehearsal? what does it do to american politics and american democracy if we have a constitutional crisis two presidential psych unless a row? i mean, you can come up with scenarios that will set your hair really on fire, nicolle, if, in fact, they are serious about this and they are normalizing this kind of approach. maybe they weren't ready. maybe they hadn't been softened
up enough in 2020. by 2024 people will go, of course we can overturn an election because, who knows, maybe the chinese did plant fake ballots and if you think that's nuts, i don't think you've been paying attention. >> it's harrowing. nick, i want to put some numbers before you and then you tell me what leaps out at you. 880 bills introduced in 49 states. there are no more hot spots, no more fires to put out, no more funds for the dnc to rush to. one precinct or another this is a national crisis now. and here is what the public opinion is, what boggles my mind the most. 56% of all americans think making sure everyone who wants to vote can do so is a good idea. only 41% think that making sure no one not eligible to vote is
the higher priority. to that 41% there are laws, it's a crime to commit voter fraud. most of the people who committed that crime were people who voted for donald trump. so where do you see, when you look at the data and you look at the pace with which these have been enacted, what do you think this picture looks like in a few weeks or months from now? >> i think in a few weeks or months you'll see more states that have passed more laws that had more restrictions to voting. texas today launched their special session. governor abbott made it clear that voting would be the top priority. and then both bills that came out one last night and one this morning failed in late may in texas. it banned drive-through voting and 24-hour voting. added new i.d. restrictions to vote by mail. it greatly empowered partisan
poll watchers in texas to have more authority and make it harder for election officials to remove them for bad behavior. and sending out applications for absentee ballots. and that's just the beginning of it. taken together that bill with the state texas already is would cement texas as the most restrictive state and the most difficult state to pass a ballot. new hampshire will take on new voting bills. michigan might still. there's going to be a march that's just going to continue. we certainly haven't seen the end of it of states with legislature still in session and voting is clearly a top priority of the republican party and of the republican state legislatures to keep pushing forward and i would point out that the texas democrats when they saw the bill coming forward in late may and their plan to count ter sought to launch a massive registration drive and
signaled about 2 million voters they thought were likely democratic voters that were eligible but unregistered. and the cost that they estimated for that was between $14 million and $15 million and that's just for texas. when you look at that and what is coming down the road in terms of their bill that will likely move quickly through the special session and compare that to the $25 million the democrats just announced today i think you see where the priorities are in terms of the parties and how much stronger it's being pushed on the republican side given their governorships and the courts. >> it is the most effective gop legislating effort that i have ever witnessed in my career, and i don't know, charlie, if you have seen anything more effective, chime in now. i've never seen anything like it. >> no. and it is concerted and, look,
they think this is going to work. bottom line, this may turn off some swing voters. this may turn off some of voters but they feel they're going to pick up or at least suppress far more voters. and, also, this is the motivating issue. what people need to understand is that right now the issues that are really jazzing the republican base are, i think, probably in order. these voter laws, critical race theory. attacking the women's soccer team or something like that. it does feel like they are talking past one another in a fundamental way and i hope that the democrats are not putting too much confidence in thinking that the biden economy, some of the infrastructure bills will overcome these social issues as well as the attack on the elections because this is something that the republican
party is completely behind and the base is very motivated, very fired up to do this which, again, i can't remember anything quite like this in the past. >> we'll stay on it. thank you so much for your coverage and for starting us off. charlie is sticking around. why tucker carlson was caught communicating with russians and he now appears to be willing to wage war against the nsa. donald trump's latest conspiracy theory on the january 6th insurrection may be more incriminating than he realizes. and president biden with strong words defending his decision to withdraw all troops from afghanistan. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues. ite house" continues. front desk. yes, hello... i'm so... please hold. ♪♪ i got you. ♪ all by yourself. ♪ go with us and get millions of flexible booking options. expedia. it matters who you travel with. verizon launched the first 5g network,
and now we want to be the first to give everyone the joy of 5g. with a new 5g phone on us. old customers. new customers. just trade in your old one. cracked, busted, sticky buttons. we're calling it the biggest upgrade ever. because it is. flowers are fighters. that's why the alzheimer's association walk to end alzheimer's is full of them. because flowers find a way to break through. just like we will. join the fight at alz.org/walk so then i said to him, you oughta customize your car insurance with liberty mutual, so you only pay for what you need. hot dog or... chicken? only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ paul loves food. but his diabetes made food a mystery. everything felt like a “no.” but then paul went from no to know. with freestyle libre 14 day, now he knows how food affects his glucose. and he knows when to make different choices.
last week tucker carlson of fox news told his audience that he heard from a whistle-blower at the nsa they were monitoring his communications in an attempt to take his show off the air. it's a claim that resulted in a rare and forceful public denial from the nsa stating this, quote, tucker carlson has never been an intelligence target of the agency and the nsa has never had any plans to try to take his program off the air. but thanks to stunning new reporting from axios overnight we're learning more about the situation. jonathan swann is reporting carlson was reaching out to u.s.-based kremlin intermediaries in an attempt to set up an interview with russian president vladimir putin. shortly before carlson announced his accusation on the air. sources told axios government officials learned of carlson's efforts to secure the interview
and carlson became aware of the government's knowledge of his outreach. carlson responded to axios in a statement, quote, as i've said repeatedly, because it's true, the nsa read my emails and then leaked their contents. that's an outrage as well as illegal. to be clear axios has not confirmed whether any communications intercepted and unclear why carlson believes his outreach to russian intermediaries could be under surveillance. carlson's dangerous accusations have added to a growing chorus of distrust in our country's intelligence agencies all started during the presidential transition by the disgraced ex-president. joining our conversation, the former assistant director for counterintelligence at the fbi and host of the bureau podcast and an msnbc national security analyst. andrew weisman, form earp fbi general counsel, now an nyu law
professor and lucky for us msnbc legal analyst. talk about who the nsa listens to and say if i wanted to interview, i don't know, ahmadinejad or vladimir putin myself, what would that expose me to in terms of anyone potentially hearing those efforts? >> the nsa is perhaps the most secretive agency in our government. they have a mission that is squarely targeted against foreign threats, and their job is to capture communication from individuals designated as of interest in terms of national security. it's in the nation's security to collect those communications against those foreign targeted individuals, their phone numbers and emails. it cluster ris organizations and known emails and phone numbers and addresses for those targets.
obviously if someone trips into that electronic coverage because they're communicating with a foreign target, they will trip into that intercept. here is how it works if it's believed, even believed, that person is a u.s. person, a u.s. individual, and their information would be masked. it might say suspected u.s. person or suspected phone number, suspected american i am not convinced at all this whistle-blower actually exists. what better way for tucker carlson to cover his rear end, because he's called a russian intelligence officer or intermediary for the kremlin. he gets worried about it. he decides to go on the offensive and announce that the nsa is listening to me and have them try and deny it. i think it's good cover. there's something much larger going on here. another page in the playbook of folks like tucker carlson and
the gop who want to continue to erode the public's trust in their institutions. if you keep doing that enough the objective is you can't trust your institutions and the career professionals and then the only people you can trust are us. and you get to reshape the truth into your own version of reality. that's what's going on here. >> and henry weisman, it feels like we're already there. vladimir putin says something. tucker carlson says he has a point. the current american president is overseas getting ready to meet with him. and then within a few news cycles, it's collusion in plain sight. >> absolutely. >> it's disturbing -- >> i'm sorry, frank. let me bring andrew in and i'll come back to you. >> sorry, i was going to agree with frank, my colleague from my
fbi days, that if you think about what tucker carlson could have done here, he could have followed the same route that "the new york times" and other respected journalists did when they were incidentally overheard and may have, in fact, not been incidentally had their call records obtained by the department of justice. they could have gone to the attorney general and tucker carlson could have joined them to say what i'm concerned about here is not that there was incidental collection when i am calling a foreigner, including if you try to reach out to vladimir putin you can pretty much be sure you're going to be high risk of being intercepted. he could have said, look, there's a first amendment issue and i want to be sure there are safeguards, but he didn't take that route. he did, as you said and as frank
pointed out he wanted to use this for his own purposes and to sow distrust which is so anti-american. instead of raising a legitimate issue about safeguards in the system when you're dealing with journalists to make sure that this is not something that senior officials in the department are making sure this was done responsibly. >> i wan to press on who he might have been talking to here, frank. in terms of getting a putin interview i'm not sure why putin would need to appear on that show. he does a lot of putin's messaging all by himself. putin did do an interview with my colleague, keir simmons. let me read a little bit of the reporting about tucker carlson's communications from axios. two sources said his two kremlin intermediaries live in the u.s., but the sources could not confirm whether they were both
american citizens or on u.s. soil at the time they communicated with carlson this is relevant because if one of them was a foreign national and on foreign soil during the communications the u.s. government wouldn't necessarily have had to seek approval to monitor their communications. it all has an echo to mike flynn and his conversations he lied about, was prosecuted for, pled guilty to, and pardoned by the ex-president. he, too, was picked up communicating with the russian ambassador and with his experience had to have known there was a chance the united states government listened to him. what is the missing piece here for you, frank? what questions do you have? >> because of the source of this, which is tucker carlson, i have to tell you, i have great -- to even buy into this. i don't know what the truth is when it comes to tucker carlson's assertions. but, yes, look, if he's talking
to people who have a governmental function or act on behalf of foreign adversary government officials like vladimir putin, it is possible -- i don't want to get into the highly classified details, but it's possible he was talking with targets in some way, shape or form. whether they were here on u.s. soil or whether it was something that had to be approved by a fisa court or even perhaps u.s. persons who are representing vladimir putin or the russian government is really not relevant to me as long as the rules were followed. the missing part here is this. was there really a whistle-blower? were there violations -- and, again, even as i say this i'm giving credence to someone who deserves no credence at all. were the rules followed in terms of mask being and unmasking? in my 25 years running counterintelligence for the fbi it is a major deal to get a u.s.
person's name unmasked. very few people have access to that inside the nsa. the idea somebody saw tucker's name being passed around or they had access to it and they leaked it to him, let me say this, if that person even exists, they're going to be arrested for passing top-secret information. but i'm not sure that person exists. >> put me in a color me skeptical column along with frank, but let me just ask you, again, about where this leaves us as a country. tucker has a massive audience and former republican joe walsh tweeted this. tucker carlson said the men and women of our fbi nsa and cia are our enemy, the men and women in our intelligence community on the front lines trying to keep us safe are our enemy. and the millions who are watching him tonight nod in agreement. seems to further erode the fabric of all those things that were once on the other side of the red line. what does this do inside the
intelligence agencies, andrew? >> well, look, i have a lot of faith for people who are in the intelligence community and that they keep their head down. of course it is demoralizing to have people say this kind of disinformation. and just to give a classic example of why this is a classic nothing burger, just imagine a search warrant where police go in and do a search of a home. they could get all sorts of information about people unrelated to the people who live there. in notes and bank reports and credit card records. the same thing for telephone calls. so there's just nothing unusual about having a third party overheard, particularly if you're speaking to vladimir putin.
>> there's that. thank you so much for spending some time with us today. frank is sticking around. a radical distortion of the facts and a worrying sign of further incitement. donald trump naming a martyr in the january 6 riot next. t. ♪ ♪ when technology is easier to use... ♪ barriers don't stand a chance. ♪ that's why we'll stop at nothing to deliver our technology as-a-service. ♪ to deliver our technology as-a-service. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
and dangerous conspiracy theory about what happened on that day, that dark day in our nation's history. for almost a week donald trump capitol rioter ashli babbitt as amartyr. she was fatally shot by police after storming the capitol alongside the mob and trying to squeeze through a broken window of a barricaded door. investigators recommended the police officer behind her death not be charged. while trump is known for his bluster about law and order, he's painting babbitt as a loyal soldier in his war on democracy. quote, who shot ashli babbitt? if that were on the other side the person who did the shooting would be strung up and hung, donald trump claimed. we're back with charlie sykes. not for nothing ashli babbitt was part of a group whose mission statement was to hang mike pence. donald trump is sort of like your set weight on a scale.
you can diet and diet but your body returns to a weight. donald trump returns to a belief these were good people and he articulated to kevin mccarthy people just care more about the election than he did. >> yeah, it's gone full circle, right? and this is a very significant move that by embracing this whole insurrectionist as martyrs, donald trump is reframing the entire issue and saying that, okay, this may have been violent but it was a noble effort. these people were actually heroes and they were fighting to defend democracy. in following the story so far it went from antifa, it wasn't so bad. they were peaceful tourists. maybe it was the fbi that incited it. this, i think, is one of the more significant twists in the trump saga, in this trump -- january 6, which is to cast this as somehow noble. and he's willing to completely
change his position about police killings in this particular case because every revolution needs a martyr. so watch how this now becomes the litmus test. how this spreads throughout the right wing media that, in fact, if this election was stolen and these terrible things happened maybe it was completely justifiable for these patriots to storm the capitol and we should celebrate them and defend them rather than condemn them. if you haven't been watching donald trump his ability to spread these messages is extraordinary. this is a dramatic reversal. it does take him back to what he was saying about kevin mccarthy on january 6, these people cared more. these are his people and he's going to stand by them. >> frank, it puts him right in line with his closest ally on the world stage, vladimir putin. watch.
>> did you order the assassination of the woman who walked into the congress and who was shot and killed by a policeman? do you know that 450 individuals were arrested after entering the congress and they didn't go there to steal a laptop. they came with political demands. 450 people. >> so there's that. i just add one more thing for you to react to, frank. donald trump was reported by "the atlantic" to have called those who died in service of the country's military suckers and losers. ashli babbitt an insurrectionist is a hero. >> yeah, so look, with regard to vladimir putin. rest assured if the same thing happened at the kremlin, there would be mass slaughter by the russian military of those individuals. you're talking about a man who poisons his opponents. with regard to trump we're talking about the same guy who tweeted when the looting starts, the shooting starts.
in a recent book by michael bender he tells repeated accounts of trump in the white house telling general milley and others, bill barr, we need to shoot the protesters, just shoot them. so that's the guy who now is claiming it's somehow wrong for law enforcement to do their job. three things happen when you turn ashli babbitt into a martyr. first, you are legitimizing, as charlie said, the insurrection. you're making it not so bad. they were in the wrong place at the wrong time doing the right thing. ashli happened to be in the wrong place. secondly, you minimize the violence and the gravity of the threat that that day posed to our absolute democracy. thirdly, you're putting a target -- here is what's also really disturbing and law enforcement needs to pay attention to this. anybody who thinks that trump or the gop backs the blue, check this out. we have the president basically demanding the identity of the law enforcement officer or agent
who did his job, who was investigated and found to have done a righteous shooting in terms of defending himself and others from an eminent threat, demanding the name. why is that? because it would be okay to identify this agent and expose that officer and his family to danger, risk, safety and threats. that's what this president wants to do to someone who tried to protect democracy. >> charlie, i'm with you. it's sort of a known and brazen sadist but it is, again, a new twist in ken mccarthy and mitch mcconnell's political depravity. why are they going along with something that endangers the men and women who protect their lives every day at the u.s. capitol? >> well, when you've gone as far as they have, it's hard to step back at this particular point. if i can make one more point,
it's not a revision of history, think of the signal, people who still pose a real danger, a real clear and present danger to national security. think about what he's saying to the oath keepers and other groups saying you're the good people. what you're doing is legitimate, is justifiable. and so in the last segment we were talking about whether or not what happened after the 2020 election was a dry run or a rehearsal. think about what donald trump is doing to encourage and to back up these right-wing groups that now are being cast in the mode that they see themselves as patriots and freedom fighters and he's feeding into all of that. and of course kevin mccarthy and mcconnell will say nothing. >> let me say something to them. i think you're right.
the insurrection had happened when donald trump still had the most extraordinary power of the presidency, the power to pardon. ashli babbitt had been killed. could have pardoned her. he could have pardoned all the insurrectionists and he pardoned none of them when he could have. so anyone who thinks they're going to commitname, good luck with that. charlie sykes, frank figliuzzi, thank you for spending time with us. next, a covid outbreak so dire a hospital this week, july 2021, ran out of ventilators. 2021, ran out of ventilators
♪ welcome to allstate, ♪ ♪are you down, d-d-down, d-d-down, d-d-down♪ where we're driving down the cost of insurance. ♪ ♪ are you down, down♪ ♪d-down, down? are you♪ drivers who switched saved over $700. ♪ allstate. here, better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands. click or call for a lower rate today.
you're in good hands. at verizon, we want to give everyone a 5g phone, on us. with all the entertainment you love. like disney+, hulu, espn+, and now google play pass so you can game in glorious 5g. we're calling it the biggest upgrade ever. because it is. flowers are fighters. that's why the alzheimer's association walk to end alzheimer's is full of them. because flowers find a way to break through. just like we will. join the fight at alz.org/walk you need an ecolab scientific clean here. and you need it here. and here.
the state of missouri is really struggling as a delta variant takes a serious toll on unvaccinated citizens of that state. solution, the situation is so dire that one springfield area hospital had to borrow ventilators over the 4th of july weekend. with just 45% of all missouri residents having received at least one dose of the covid vaccine compared to more than 55% of all americans, the state now leads the country in new covid cases relative to its population, averaging 1,000 new cases every single day. let's bring into our conversation nbc news correspondent chuck brewster live in springfield, missouri. what is the latest? >> reporter: nikole, a doctor at the hospital you referenced that needed to bring in ventilators over the 4th of july weekend told me it is the worse it has
been in terms of dealing with the coronavirus pandemic. a reminder, we are 16 months into this pandemic. there's some frustration there that they are reaching their peak this late into the situation, especially when you hear doctors talking about how preventable this is. the latest numbers that we heard from that mercy medical center is that 125 people are in the hospital battling the coronavirus, more than 90% of the people in n. so really dire conditions. and about 95% of those patients are unvaccinated. that's why you hear this frustration coming from officials, from local officials, from medical officials. i spoke to the fire chief here and we are in front of this firehouse because this is where they're having a vaccination clinic, telling people to come here with trusted sources to get that vaccine. the fire chief here calling this a mass casualty event, happening in slow motion. again, their frustration of over how preventable this is. listen to what one doctor, a critical care physician at mercy medical center told me just
yesterday. >> you know, it is sad to see people dying in the hospital for something that could have been prevented. step one, get your vaccination. but if you don't believe the vaccine works, take some measurements, you know, protect yourself and others. i hope that message gets out there and our community takes action on it. >> reporter: now, the federal government is also getting involved. last night the first member of a federal covid response team arrived right here in springfield, missouri, to help of help stop this trend. again, the big push you are hearing from officials on the ground, whether you are talking to, again, the fire chief, whether you are talking to the governor or hearing from doctors themselves, they're saying you can stop this, you can stop this surge that's being led by the delta variant. you can stop it by just going out and getting that vaccine shot, nikole. >> here is hoping that they listen. nbc's shaq brewster live for us in springfield, missouri. thank you so much, my friend.
after the break, aggressive new steps by texas republicans in their latest assault on voting rights there. the next hour of "deadline: white house" starts after a quick break. don't go anywhere. we are just getting started. ted. ♪ when technology is easier to use... ♪ barriers don't stand a chance. ♪ that's why we'll stop at nothing to deliver our technology as-a-service. ♪ we made usaa insurance for members like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started.
>> hi again, everyone. it is 5:00 in the east. five weeks after shutting down the legislative session in texas, democrats ready to battle again against efforts by republicans there to enact voting restrictions in their state. at the time of their heroic walkout, texas democrats pleaded with the white house and democrats in congress for help. federal voting rights legislation was dead on arrival due to the gop's obstruction of it and some democratic senators' loyalty to the filibuster. there are signs the white house is taking the surge of voting restriction laws seriously now. right now in the west wing of the white house, the president and vice president are meeting with civil rights leaders to help formulate a plan to fight measures like the one likely to pass within a few days in texas. because for texas's governor greg abbott, this time it is personal after the devastating blow delivered to him by democrats, abbott called a special legislative session, one that began today. for texas republicans who are
now putting forward new bills that look very, very similar to their original voting restriction laws. hb-3, filed by the texas house last night, and sb-1, filed today in the senate, include banning many of the measures texas put in place during the last election, measures that contributed to the state's record turnout in 2020. things like drive-through voting and overnight voting. the bills all add criminal penalties for voting law violations. they would add new id requirements to vote by mail and empower partisan poll watchers. the efforts by state democrats did have a positive impact as ari berman writes in "mother joans." after public outrye republicans have backed away from a few of the most controversial provisions including ones that make it easier to overturn elections and cut sunday voting. as noted in "the times", it is happening in a brand-new world. quote, republicans' new election overhaul bill in texas, a state
which already has some of the nation's strictest voting rules, will be the first to come before a state legislature since the supreme court's ruling last week to uphold two voting restrictions in arizona. that decision significantly elevated the threshold for whether a voting measure constitutes a violation of section two of the voting rights act which prohibits discriminatory voting practices. whether texas democrats are successful yet again in blocking the restrictive voting measures put forward in their state remains to be seen,utdy voting rights attorney mark elias is signaling the fight is just beginning in response to both hb-3 and sb-1 he tweeted this. quote, if texas enacts this bill, it will be sued. the continuing battle to protect voting rights in the state that is already the hardest to cast a ballot this is where we start with some of our favorite reporters and friends. joining us, ari berman, "mother jones'" reporter and author of "give us the ballot." joining us, matthew dowd, and
author of the upcoming book "revelations on the river." and kim atkins is here, an msnbc contributor. matthew dowd, it is your state. texas governor abbott is trying -- i think saving face here and going back at these voter restrictions with the wind of the conservative majority of the supreme court at his back. talk about today in texas. >> well, great to be on. i mean i think you have to couple what he is trying to do on voter restrictions with what other things he has done in the last legislative session, the governor and the republicans, and he wants to do in this because i think they're fundamentally connected. what they're doing is trying to restrict votes so people can't hold them accountable in the process of voting next year in 2022 when he is up for election. because they have passed policies that are highly unpopular with the texas
electorate, but whether it is permitless carry on guns, abortion restrictions, restrictions on women's choice, and then in this legislative session along with the voting restrictions, i don't know if you are aware, he wants to aim discriminatory practices at transgender people. he wants to go after critical race theory. he wants to do more choice restrictions for women in the state. so they're coupled together and, as you mention, we are a very low turnout state. we had the highest turnout we have ever had in 2000. we were ranked ninth in the country in turnout even though we had a record turnout. to me it is totally aligned with the idea, they're passing on popular policies, the state is fundamentally changing its diversity. therefore, they don't want to be held accountable by the voters and that's really -- it is crass political politics in order for them not to be held accountable by the voters. >> ari, this is the national republican strategy, to -- you know, if your policies don't
appeal to broad swaths of the electorate, change the electorate, not the policies. you tweeted, you put an even finer point on some of matthew's analysis. let me read what you tweeted today. greg abbott didn't call a special session after 23 people were murdered by white supremacist in el paso or after 700 people died when a power grid failed, but the gop is holding a special session to make it harder to vote after finding only 16 false addresses on registration forms out of 11 million votes in 2020. this is, you know, maybe part of these pushes by republicans that don't get enough attention. republicans at the national and state level spent a lot of time and a lot of money in texas looking for voter fraud, and what they found were in most cases less than -- in the case of texas, 16 cases and most of them voted for trump. >> exactly, nicole. they're going after these imaginary problems, whether it is voter fraud or critical race
theory or banning transgender kids from participating in sports, but they're not dealing with gun violence. they're not dealing with the failure of the state's power grid. they're not dealing with hurricanes and all of the other natural disasters they have there, and they say everything is bigger in texas. that's true when it comes to voter suppression as well. this is the toughest state in the country to vote in. this is a state where you can vote with a gun permit but not a student id, where they closed over 750 polling places since the supreme court gutted the voting rights act, where there's no online voter registration, where you actually have to be deputized in every single county to be able to register voters, where voters under the age of 65 couldn't even vote by mail even during a pandemic. and what is their response? to make voting even tougher, to ban mail ballot drop boxes, to get rid of things like 24-hour voting and drive-through voting that helped increase voter turnout, to dramatically increase access for partisan poll watchers to lead to more
intimidation, to prevent election officials from even sending out absentee ballot request forms, where election officials could be thrown in jail simply for trying to make it easy to vote. i mean the fact that texas already makes it so hard to vote and now is going to make it even tougher is really shocking, and i think what distinguishes texas from a place like georgia or florida or iowa where they've made it harder to vote but it is still relative easier to vote relative to a place like texas is now. >> kim, the national picture of what republicans started doing in the days after the election when kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell refused to knock down the defeated ex-president's lies about voter fraud, even when bill barr said, "i looked and i can't find any to the associated press," something we know thanks to great new reporting landed like a bomb in the west wing, the fact that from that inaction, from that complicit aid, you know have 389 laws making their way through 48 states, and the democrats are --
or the white house today is listening. the vice president announced $25 million to help democratic voters navigate around these new restrictions. are they waving the white flag? have democrats given up? >> i don't know that democrats have given up. i mean they still have, if they want to take it, the opportunity to pass legislation that will bolster and restore the voting rights act on a federal level and help bolster the ability to push back against these laws and give both the doj and others better standing in order to challenge them. but what has also happened in the meantime, as you mentioned, is the supreme court last week made it much, much easier for these laws to not only go into effect but stay in effect. essentially, now officials in texas and elsewhere know that all they need to do is claim that there is a strong state interest in preventing voter fraud. they can do that without a scintilla of evidence of actual
fraud. that was in the decision by justice alito as he laid it out. so knowing that in moving forward, it is going to be difficult to take these -- to mount a challenge to these laws once they're in place, despite i'm sure mark elias will do his best but i think it is a lot tougher now than it was last week. right now when it comes to these efforts, the wind is at the back of republicans, and it really -- the only substantial hope of pushing back is on a federal level, but that is only if democrats act and that is only if they choose to do so without the filibuster. >> matt dowd, we have known each other a long time, the better part of two decades. let's be really blunt here. there is no legal path. the lawsuit garland filed in georgia we learned overnight will make its way through the courts. democrats don't have years. the supreme court will uphold, as kim is saying, a lot of these laws. the only card they have to play
is federal voting rights legislation that will nullify all of these statewide laws. that is it. that's ball game, and there are no meetings that i am aware of today on reaching any sort of compromise even amongst themselves. i have not heard anything about joe manchin's proposal being met with a counterproposal by any democrats or republicans. do you think they've just given up? i mean what do you think happens next? >> well, maybe there's a secret plan that we're all unaware of that's going on, and you know from the beginning, nikole, i said from the beginning i thought the president and the administration needed to make this priority issue number one, two and three, and everything after this, including the pandemic, which he has done a great job, including -- because -- the pandemic and have a booming economy and we can lose our democracy. i think that's fundamentally what this is. i don't think enough democrats and enough people in the
country -- but let's take democratic leaders -- understand the perilous point we are at in this country for our democracy. basically we have a -- of the minority in washington and around the country. texas is a perfect example. all of these policies we talked about are opposed by the vast majority of texans but they're happening anyway. in the end i think they have to make it a priority. i have doubts about it. i mean the hypocrisy to be honest of somebody like senator sinema or somebody like senator manchin who talk about voting rights and how important it is in civil rights and let's celebrate somebody on this day and all of that but, oh, by the way, i'm going to keep the filibuster which keeps all of those things from being preserved and reassured in this country. i think my view on this all is in the end it will be about who comes out and votes in 2022. with all of the impediments that will be put into place, and i don't expect much success in the courts in this with the supreme court that we have, the only way it is going to change and it is fundamentally the only way it is
going to change, is if droves and droves and millions and millions of people overcome any impediment and vote wholesale every single republican out of office. that to me is the only path out of this. >> ari berman, not to ruin even the sort of moon shot that matt dowd is articulating, but a lot of these laws include voter nullification measures. in georgia fred raffensperger will no longer be the arbiter of a disputed result. arizona's secretary of estate, office currently held by katie hobbs, has been stripped of her power to defend the state in lawsuits. there are efforts in all of these states to disempower the democratic and republican election officials who, whatever you think of them -- and a lot voted for donald trump -- walked the line in november and felt strong enough to defend the will of the voters in their state, that we had albeit not a peaceful transfer of power but we still had a transfer of power. even if matt dowd's electoral
moon shot comes to pass, it is not all together clear to me the voter nullification laws wouldn't reverse it anyway. >> well, and that's the ultimate undemocratic two-step that they're doing right now, nikole. they're doing everything they can to try to make it harder to vote. if somehow that doesn't succeed, if somehow voters do end up going to the polls and voting republicans out, then they are going to try to overturn the will of the voters. that was the trump playbook in 2020 and they've done everything they can to try to institutionalize that going forward in 2022 and 2024. they had that language in texas, it was taken out of the bill to overturn elections because it was so controversial, but it is still in place in other places like georgia. when i talk to democrats in texas, they feel the urgency of this issue and they say "we were in the minority in the texas house and we walked out and blocked this bill, you guys in washington are in the majority, you should be able to do
something, if we can block the bill in the minority you should be able to use your power in the majority to protect voting rights." and when texas republicans wanted to make it harder to vote in 2011 and pass a new id law, what did they do? they got rid of the two-thirds requirement to pass bills. now democrats are unwilling to get rid of the 60-vote requirement to pass legislation. so in state after state after state republicans are using their majorities to make it harder to vote. democrats have to use their majorities to make it easier to vote. that is a message coming out of texas and other states right now. >> ari, you know this issue better than just about anyone covering it. do you think they will? >> i think the presser is just going to be ratcheted up on them, between the filibuster of the for the people act, between the supreme court's further gutting of the voting rights act last week, from the new voter suppression efforts in texas. how much more evidence do you knee that republicans are going to do whatever they can to make it harder to vote?
and we can build roads and bridges in the infrastructure plan, but if our infrastructure, our democracy, is falling apart, it is not going to mean much going forward. so this is an existential fight for democracy. i totally agree with matt. it needs to be prioritized overall other issues, because when i talked to bet owe o'rourke recently he said if we don't have voting rights there's no other tradition in the senate that's going to matter. so this issue really trumps everything else. >> kim, hillary clinton has weighed in, writing this on "democracy docket." the fight for voting rights is the fight for our democracy. quote, when the people make their voices heard in an election, we should respect the results. these aren't partisan statements. they're attributes of a functioning democracy. now is the time for anyone who cares about ours to stand up and fight for it, using absolutely every tool in our tool box, legislation, marching and protesting, speaking up, supporting people and groups advocating for a democracy that reflects the diversity of this
country and, yes, showing up to the polls at every election, not just the presidential ones. democracies the world over have faced this challenge. how we respond will have a ripple effect around the globe. i think about her words here. i think about liz cheney, who sort of stepped into the breach around the big lie as it pertained to the insurrection but has not entered into the fray around what are arguably the most devastating impacts in 48 states of voter suppression laws. i wonder if you think there's a chance for a democracy movement in this country, a bipartisan one? >> there should be one. i agree that there should be one. i don't know if that's going to evolve in time to stop what is happening right now, which is clearly focused on 2022 and all of the elections beyond, but i think that it is true. i think that the only thing -- i'm frequently asked, what can i do if i am concerned about what
is happening with voter suppression happening across the country? and don't just say vote, baugh because that's what we were told to do last time and it didn't work. this is the only thing i can think of, is increasing that pressure on lawmakers to say, hey, this matters to us more than anything. it certainly matters to us more than a senate rule that some lawmakers think is so important, and perhaps that will be enough. i personally in answer to the question you asked already, do you think it will be enough, i think no. i think that senators manchin and sinema and potentially others are really determined to not be the one to make that change that is necessary for this to happen for whatever reason, whether it is the reason that they state or something else. but i think that the only way would be a sustained pressure from the electorate itself, letting them know that that is what the people want. >> i'll make this prediction. if you are right, the moderates,
i guess as they view themselves, the red state senators and the democratic party who refuse to prioritize democracy and voting rights over the filibuster, a rule that you can't find anywhere in the constitution, they will be the first to go and it will be really hard for democrats to ever be elected in states like that ever again, and there will be no satisfaction in anyone saying they told them so, but here we are. ari berman, matthew dowd, kimberly atkins stohr, thank you for starting us out. when we return, president biden defending the withdrawal of all u.s. troops from afghanistan and pledging to stand by the interpreters who helped the united states and whose lives are in danger as the taliban makes gains on the ground. plus, brand-new reporting from "the washington post" about the trump grift and how the disgraced ex-president continues to profit by charging rent to the united states secret service for protecting his life every day. ahead of the tokyo olympics,
tennis star naomi osaka with strong words about the issue that divide us and the toll it is taking on our mental health. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. k break. don't go anywhere. cynthia suarez needed to buy new laptops for her growing team. so she used her american express business card, which lets her earn extra membership rewards points on purchases for her business. now she's the office mvp. get the card built for business. by american express. omega-3 from fish oil is an important nutrient for heart health. qunol's ultra purified omega-3, is sourced only from
wild caught ocean fish, not farm raised and comes in an easy to swallow mini pill. the brand i trust is qunol. flowers are fighters. that's why the alzheimer's association walk to end alzheimer's is full of them. because flowers find a way to break through. just like we will. join the fight at alz.org/walk this isn't just a walk up the stairs. when you have an irregular heartbeat, it's more. it's dignity. the freedom to go where you want, knowing your doctor can watch over your heart. ♪♪ i became a sofi member because i needed to consolidate my credit card debt. i needed just one simple way to pay it all off. it was an easy decision to apply with sofi loans, just based on the interest rate and how much i would be saving. there was only one that stood out and one that actually made sense and that was sofi personal loans. it felt so freeing. i felt like i was finally out of this neverending trap of
we did not go to afghanistan to nation build, and it is the right and the responsibility of the afghan people alone to decide their future and how they want to run their country. so let me ask those who want us to stay, how many more, how many thousands more americans' daughters and sons are you willing to risk?
already we have members of our military whose parents fought in afghanistan 20 years ago. would you send their children and their grandchildren as well? would you send your own son or daughter? >> powerful words from president biden who, today, finds himself on the defensive from all sides of the political divide, defending his decision to withdraw all u.s. forces from afghanistan amid warning from his own generals what a boon this will be from the taliban and among criticism from fellow democrats he is not moving quickly enough to protect afghan interpreters who risked their lives for many years now to protect and aid the u.s. efforts there. president biden seemed to declare in the clearest terms to date that the 20-year u.s. effort in afghanistan was a failure. >> i argued from the beginning, as you may recall, it came to light after the administration was over, the last of our
administration, no nation has ever unified afghanistan. no nation. empires have gone there and not done it. >> of those comments specifically, "the new york times" adds this contest, that it was a reference to the british occupation of that country in the 19th century and the soviet effort to gain control there three decades ago. "the times" adding this, quote, both efforts failed and mr. biden was in essence adding the united states to the list. joining our coverage, paul rieckhoff, founder of iraq and afghanistan veterans of america. president of righteous media and host of the independent americans podcast. jeremy bash is here, former chief of staff for the cia and department of defense and msnbc national security analyst. paul rieckhoff, i start with you. you reaction? >> i think it was a mixed bag. this is a very difficult speech to give. it is a very somber time for our military, for the people of afghanistan, for our allies. i think overall the message was
good. it is time to get out, and the way biden framed it was important, saying that we had an objective to keep america safe from attack and we had an objective to kill bin laden, but at the same time the way we're getting out feels wrong. it feels like we are washing our hands of this problem, we are getting out as fast as we can, and there's a real concern about his message being too optimistic and too hopeful. the reality is the taliban is moving through that country fast. it looks bad. a lot of people are going to get slaughtered. we might have a humanitarian disaster on our hands, and our afghan interpreters are being left to die. biden clearly did not have a plan to get them out. they should be somewhere safe already and only now is he introducing a plan to get them somewhere else without a real plan. like he didn't stand up and say, hey, if you are in afghanistan here is the website you go to so you don't get murdered. so there's a real concern, i think especially in the veterans' community, that we are leaving this the wrong way and that the worst may be yet to come. >> jeremy, i think the president very aware of this criticism
that paul is articulating, it is coming from some members of his own party. let me show you some of what he said about our efforts now. >> we're also going to continue to make sure that we take on the afghan nationals who worked side by side with u.s. forces, including interpreters and translators, since we're no longer going to have military there after this. our message to those women and men is clear. there is a home for you in the united states if you so choose, and we will stand with you just as you stood with us. >> so, jeremy, i guess my question is, if the president made clear that this was his vision and his plan for afghanistan at the end of the last administration in which he served, why wasn't there a plan to get our interpreters and our friends and the people who worked alongside us for those 20 years of war out? >> well, first, nikole, i think the cole that biden delivered
today is he's leveling with the american people and he is saying our strategy for 20 years now needs to change. it hasn't been a failure because the mission has been to prevent homeland attacks emanating from afghanistan like a 9/11 attack, and we have done that successfully. we have done that across republican and democratic administrations. so to that extent the mission has been achieved and now if we want to retain a robust military presence in the region, in the middle east, to find, fix and finish any resurgent al qaeda or other terrorist attack threatening our homeland we will have the capability to do so, but having 2,500 troops on the ground is not going to be the thing that defines whether or not we can protect our homeland, especially given the fact that we have other terrorist threats across the globe in syria, in yemen, in africa, and we have to reposition our forces to deal with that. now, with respect with the
interpreters, i fully agree that the united states needs to have an aggressive plan to get them out as fast as possible. i'm told from people inside the administration that more than 1,000 are coming out every month. that's not fast enough. that we are actively providing resources to them so that they can get to third countries and military bases, but at the end of the day there are numerous congressional statutes and laws that require intelligence assessments before people can be repatriated here, and the administration is working with congress to streamline those so that those people can be safely brought to the united states if they want to be here. but i think, again, the broader point here is that 2,500 troops in afghanistan is not going to be the thing that protects our homeland. we have to have an aggressive, over-the-horizon military force to do that. >> paul rieckhoff, you mentioned a lot of emotions. can you just take us through what those are?
>> yeah, i think it is important to understand that most of the american public hasn't been tracking on afghanistan for the last 20 years. we've used the #forgotistan because the folks that served in uniform and in the foreign policy community feel like we've been at war for two decades and the rest of the country has been focused on other things. there's a real sense of this quickly going in the rearview mirror and a sense of loss, a sense of reckoning, a sense of questioning our own service and our country's commitment, but also questioning if the country is going to commit to what happens next. the military operations might be over, but conflict is not, especially for the afghan people, for women on the ground, for interpreters. maybe this interpreter situation just kind of clarifies it, because failing to plan is planning to fail. we're talking to afghan friends on the ground right now who heard this speech and don't know where to go, and they're hearing from jen psaki and others maybe we're going to send them to kazakhstan or some other place that violates human rights. they should be in guam on
someplace like it where we can control. there's bipartisan support to help get them to guam and it will help us deal with the moral injury many of us are going to feel, but all of the other after effects that are going to affect the men and women who served over the last two decades. there's a concern we're forgetting what happened over there and it is starting with our friends and maybe those of us who served in uniform will be next. >> i agree with paul's points and he makes them strongly and i agree, except i don't see how 2,500 troops to ground resolves the moral issues, resolves protection of interpreters across the country. those are all things we have to deal with, but the question presented to the president of the united states, the commander in chief, is do we keep 2,500 troops in the country, which we have had troops there for 20 years, or do we change our strategy to protect our homeland. i think president biden made a gutsy call. he leveled with the american people and said, we can protect our homeland and we can attack
al qaeda with an over-the-horizon force. i think that's absolutely critical, because if you look at the recent intelligence assessments from our intelligence community, there was one sentence in the worldwide threat hearing devoted to al qaeda in afghanistan. there are other threats we have to deal with, and it would be a dereliction of duty, it would violate everything we stand for and care about if we weren't positioned and postured to deal with the other threats. i know paul and the entire community of people who served in the post 9/11 wars fundamentally agrees with that, we have to protect our homeland at the end of the day. >> well, if i can respond. go ahead. >> go ahead. no, go ahead, paul. >> no, what we know is this is not simple. it is not one question. it is not the only thing the commander in chief has to solve, is whether or not to put troops on the ground. this is a really complex, complicated, rapidly evolving situation, and the worst thing a president can do is say it is simple and it is going to be over and this is the chapter ending. there are so many pieces to this and it is up to him to frame
that strategically for the american people, it is up to him to ask the american people for help, and he may be leveling with us about the choices but i don't think he leveled with us about how bad it can be over there to come. it may not have been our objective to keep peace over there forever, but we also have to deal with the fact we could have a real humanitarian disaster on our hands we were a part of. we can't wash our hands and say, hey, it is the afghan army's problem now. we have a moral responsibility on that issue and to deal with issues like pakistan and plenty of other things that he didn't touch on in his speech. it is not simple, and the worst thing a president can do is make it sound simple. >> it is not simple at all. for our diplomats and our intelligence professionals who are going to be having to deal with the new relationship with afghanistan, they're going to have to grapple with all of those things. i couldn't agree more. they will have to deal with the regional issues, they will have to deal with running intelligence network, they're going to have to deal with the humanitarian issue, the refugee problem. there are a number of very complex issues that are coming
out of afghanistan over the coming months and years that are going to face this administration and the next administration and the next administration, no doubt about that. i think the question though again, back to the choice that biden was dealt with, which was do i keep troops in afghanistan or do i reposition those troops elsewhere, and i think the smart national security position was to reposition the troops elsewhere. >> paul, i want to give you the last word. i want to take my own history out of this, acknowledge that i worked for a president whose policies in the region were very polarizing and unpopular, but just ask this as plainly as i can. it is not necessarily troops in or troops out. i mean we have troops in all sorts of places. we still have troops in germany. we have troops in, you know, korea. we have troops all over the place. was taking all of the troops out and leaving women to fall again to violence, to the taliban, leaving our interpreters in the lurch, was that the right decision in your view? >> i don't think so, but, again,
it is not a bifurcated question. it is not either/or. the question was, okay, if you are going to pull troops out, then how are you going to keep women safe, how are you going to deal with our interpreters in if we're closing the door, how are you going to provide resources at the va? you have to look at it holistically and frame up with the american people that you are leveling about that decision, but also level with us about what is to come. level about the fact there will be veterans facing health impacts for a generation, and that might cost money, too. so let's start planting those seeds now and let's make a commitment to the entire country to understand that, yes, the military component of our commitment there has ended, but our moral commitment remains forever, and that's where the president's really got to be out in front and continue to keep it front and center so america doesn't forget. >> so important. i'm really grateful to both of you. i'll ask both of you to stay on this with us because i agree with you, paul, the military has born the brunt of something that
the vast portion of the american people have not been thinking of on a continuing basis. thank you for being here. when we return, there's new reporting about how the twice-impeached ex-president is grifting taxpayers for his own protection. it involves the secret and that story is next. e secret and that story is next. ready to seize th. make it look like, it's from another planet. make your new sink work a little harder. make your home everything you need it to be. and make it yours. oscar will love that. [ bark ] however you make it, make your home like no other. ♪ ♪ when technology is easier to use... ♪
barriers don't stand a chance. ♪ that's why we'll stop at nothing to deliver our technology as-a-service. ♪ ugh, there's that cute guy from 12c. -go talk to him. -yeah, no. plus it's not even like he'd be into me or whatever. ♪♪ ♪ this could be ♪ hi. you just moved in, right? i would love to tell you about all the great savings you can get for bundling your renter's and car insurance with progressive. -oh, i was just -- -oh, tammy. i found your retainer in the dryer. -oh, i was just -- -oh, tammy. at verizon, we want to give everyone a 5g phone, on us. with all the entertainment you love. like disney+, hulu, espn+, and now google play pass so you can game in glorious 5g. we're calling it the biggest upgrade ever.
because it is. - i'm norm. - i'm szasz. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly; it's important. we walk three to five times a week, a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. anything to drink? just water... hold on, we're coming! mio... water tastes like, well...water. so we fixed it. mio.
directed the trump-moscow negotiations about the campaign and lied about it. he lied about it because he never expected to win. he also lied about it because he stood to make hundreds of millions of dollars on the moscow real estate project. >> donald trump is no stranger to trying to use the trappings of the presidency to make money, lots and lots of money. the latest chapter in this long-running grift comes courtesy of brand-new reporting from "the washington post". trump's golf club in bedminster, new jersey, is charging the united states secret service more than $10,000 for guest rooms occupied purely and solely by people who are there to protect him from harm. during his first month at the club this summer, and that's just one month, "the washington post's" david fahrenthold reports this, quote, since trump left office in january, u.s. taxpayers have paid trump's businesses more than $50,000 for rooms used by secret service
agents, records show. while the totals range from the thousands to the tens of thousands, it is chump chain knowing how much was spent over the last four years. "the post" adds this. in all, trump's company charged the government more than $2.5 million during his presidency according to an analysis of the spending records. joining us, david fahrenthold, "washington post" reporter and msnbc political analyst. why doesn't he have a house? >> he has a house but it happens to be located on a property he also owns so he can rent the house next door. >> he lives at clubs and hotels where the rooms go for rates. i mean if you lived at -- i mean other presidents have protective services and the rates aren't like hotel rates where you can set and rig. that seems to be where the u.s. government and the taxpayers get screwed. >> yeah, this is a situation that there's no rules for because nobody ever contemplated this happening. it really hadn't happened before
from an ex-president. so the secret service can spend whatever they need to to get rooms near the person they're protecting, and in this case trump, because he spends all of his time at his own properties, he controls the rooms they need and can charge whatever they want. at mar-a-lago he is charging $400 a night and at bedminster it appears he is charging $554 a night for a cottage the agents use near him. >> and this goes on, david, indefinitely? >> it appears so. you know, i was interested to see when he -- obviously he did this the whole time he was president and i was interested to see would it change after he left office, and it does not appear to be. it appears to be following the same pattern. assuming he goes from mar-a-lago back to bedminster, doing the rough math it looks like $175,000 a year taxpayers will be paying trump basically for the privilege of protecting him. >> david, your body of reporting has always sort of been at the intersection of how his businesses profited from the presidency. what do ethics officials and
experts and lawyers say about this? >> well, where ethics is right here, because there's not a lou that says you can't do this, and the ethics experts i talked to said, look, ex-presidents typically see themselves as sort of still engaged in public service after they leave office. they're not working for the government anymore but they're there to serve the public good and give back to the country. this is kind of the opposite. trump is basically doing as much as he can to get money out of the government, basically for, you know, as a benefit to a benefit. he has the benefit of secret service protection. he arranged it in a way that provides another benefit, which is cash to house the agents that protect him. instead of sort of trying to give back, he is sort of trying to get more. >> yeah, i mean i think we are long way from giving back. he is defending an insurrectionist in today's news cycle. let me read more from the reporting. legal experts have said there are no laws to prohibit trump's company from charging the secret service rent at his properties, either during or after his
presidency. the rate is effectively up to him. by law, the secret service can pay whatever it must to rent rooms near its protecties for use as command posts and meeting rooms. the service is more focused on the protective necessity as opposed to how much it is going to cost after the fact. there's nothing they can do if rates are high, said jonathan wackrow, a long-time secret service agent who now works for a consulting firm teneo. it is not a question if they can do it or how much. is there anything to protect the secret service if it is a busy weekend at bedminster and rates go through the roof? is the rate levelled out or it goes through the roof? >> it seems it is constant. there's a rate they are charged for every single day, it was the case when he was president and seems to be the case now. it doesn't seem to go up or down depending on availability, but it means they are charged even when trump isn't there. trump now goes into trump tower
mondays and tuesdays of every week. when he is gone it appears the secret service is still getting charged for that cottage. >> that's amazing. david fahrenthold, thank you for staying on it and joining us today to talk about it. when we return tennis star naomi osaka speaking out about the mental health toll of the divisions in this country and how it infects virtually every aspect of life. that story is next. is next usaa is made for the safe pilots. for mac. who can come to a stop with barely a bobble.
lucia. who announces her intentions even if no one's there. and sgt moore. who leaves room for her room. with usaa safepilot, when you drive safe... ...you can save up to 30% on your auto insurance. get a quote and start saving. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. this may look like a regular movie night. but if you're a kid with diabetes, it's more. it's the simple act of enjoying time with friends,
knowing you understand your glucose levels. ♪♪ flowers are fighters. that's why the alzheimer's association walk to end alzheimer's is full of them. because flowers find a way to break through. just like we will. join the fight at alz.org/walk replace old pipes? i can do that. install energy-efficient windows? i can do that. build an electric car? i can do that. weld the tower of a wind turbine? modernize the grid? install 10,000 solar panels? do what i've been doing my whole life? rebuild the country and protect america against climate change? we can do that. hearing is important to living life to the fullest. that's why inside every miracle-ear store, you'll find better laughs at family barbecues.
you'll find a better life is in store at miracle-ear, when you experience the exclusive miracle-ear advantage. including innovative technology, like the new miracle-earmini. so powerful, yet it's nearly invisible. we're so confident we can improve your life, we're offering a 30-day risk-free trial. call 1-800-miracle today and experience the miracle-ear advantage. (upbeat pop music in background throughout) that meeting at the white
house between president biden, vice president harris and civil rights leaders has just wrapped up. some of the participants are speaking at the microphone. let's take a listen. >> -- vicious and sinister attack, beginning with the events of june -- january 6th at the capitol and cascading like a tsunami through state legislatures across the nation that have a singular intent, which is to suppress, deny and thwart the votes of black people, brown people, young people, people who are disabled and many other americans who live with great disadvantage in
this country. now, we witnessed an election last fall where 159 million americans voted, and let me correct the historical record. it was the highest voter turnout in american turn out in america history. you can't count the 1900 election because women did not vote. you can't count the 1900 election because black people were laboring under the burdens of a grandfather clause and a literacy test. we took time and the president shared our great concern about the emergency nature of the situation we are facing in this country. for everyone's benefit, as a group we work diligently over the last several months on
behalf of both the legislation known as the for the people act and the john lewis' voting rights advancement act. in furtherance of that, we have met numerous members with congress including senator manchin and a number of republican members of the united states senate, we have and we'll not leave any stone unturned to save american democracy. we'll speak with anyone, anywhere under any circumstances. we'll take any actions, non-violent peaceful or intelligence to protect american democracy. we are going to share with you,
not omnivore characterizations of our discussions with us, steps that several of us plan to take over the next several weeks in the next seven months to assure the american people are educating and understanding that this attack on democracy is not partisan. this is an attack on the very fundamental values. to protect and save american democracy. let me finally share this view. i will say this when we look at
is happening in this nation, we see an effort to impose a system, you suppress the vote and elevate the filibuster. we use the electoral college, we used the nullification of the supreme court. the power of this grand and glorious multi-cultural nation. we are here at a time of great, great seriousness. and we had add powerful discussion with the president. we want it to be clear coming out of this meeting and we'll share with you the steps we
intend to take. this is a serious moment, this is a moment of great gravity and great threat to the essence of american democracy and the right of people to vote. reverend al sharpton. >> thank you, marc. >> we had a very con did, no-holes meeting with president biden and vice president harris for about an hour and 40 minutes, scheduled for an hour. the supreme court's decision last week was a blow of indescrible impact, it was our task to tell the president and the vice president that not only do we need the white house to do
all it can that we are going to build a movement around this country to resist that. what is a clearly a move to try to disenfranchise people of color from voting. it was laid out in the state legislature and in the legislation is geared towards robbing us of our vote. the vice president and the president need to know, the movement from the ground up is starting to be the only way we can preserve our rights to vote. hr-1 or senate bill. we informed them and they listened patiently.
they asked questions but we informed them that this is going to come not from the white house down but from our houses up. this is our ability to preserve the rights to vote. we talked and mentioned about the lead for the george floyd justice and policing act. i told the president there is growing numbers of people in all communities, that are concerned about what's going on with policing. this past week, i did a urology for a young 17-year-old killed by law enforcement with only a can of antifreeze in his hand. his name was britain, 17-year-old, and he was a young white teenager.
i did a urology of 500 people there, 95% white that says yes, reverend al, ben crump was there, we do need this justice and policing act. we need at the same time in working with the white house and gun violence because in our communities, we are having to deal with the threat from the cops and the robbers. we are dealing with multiple instability but all of it can not happen without protecting the right to vote. none of this whether we are dealing with policing or whether we are dealing with how we regulate guns, all of it comes from our ability to protect the franchise of putting the right people in office and the right legislatures and the right
legislators. we want the president to understand that as andrew young and martin luther king left this very white house in '64 and began the movement that led the '65 voting act, we'll create movement on the ground to protect the right to vote just as dr. king and others left here in 1964. we have been watching our al sharpton and marc memorial with a meeting with the vice president and president. we are joined by carrie champion, you are here to talk about naomi osaka.
i wonder your reaction to this case having to be made once again by civil rights leaders to an american president. >> thank you for having me, i will talk sports or politics, whatever shall it be for you. let's tackle this issue of voting rights. just two weeks ago, i did a voting special with stacey abrams in regards to right now being our time. we know that she's a voting rights advocate and she made the case so clear before the supreme court, i unfortunately have to tell you that if we continue and i want to thank you for having many actual message on right now. if we continue to ignore it, i almost felt and tell me if you agree that when the supreme court handed down that decision, it was quiet. it was almost of damaging statue
did not really strike a blow to indiscrimination. yes, i appreciate your colleague standing before us saying we have to take action now. now we have to fight even harder. there is a reason why and i get so angry when i speak to people that i know friends and family members in so many cases say your vote does not matter. why did they fight it so hard to take it away? >> right, cari, i have to ask you to come back much earlier in the hour. i agree with you. the supreme court's decision because it puts the wings on the back of these republicans, you raised a great point. why are they trying so hard to take it away. i hope you can