get started wih fast spees and advanced security for $49.99a month for 12 monts plus ask how to get up to a $750 >> good evening. prepaid card with qualifying internet. and thank you for joining us this hour. i am -- anders thompson in for chris

hayes tonight on this special two hour edition of all in. it was an hour-long shouting match in the oval office which nearly ended in a fistfight. there was almost a physical brawl between a top white house aide and former trump national security adviser michael flynn. i am referring of course to that now infamous a white house meeting in december 2020. flynn, along with a crew of trump's lawyers like rudy giuliani presented an avalanche of baseless claims of election fraud while the white house lawyers debunked all of them. at that meeting, sydney powell presented trump with the draft executive order that would have directed the military to seize our nation's voting machines. part of that plan we have also been by sydney carroll herself, a special counsel and could have impose martial law and required everyone run of the election. obviously that didn't thankfully end up happening. they mutinous ideas pitched in the oval office meeting a date

not exist in -- they are part of a desperate effort to paint the results of the 2020 election, by trump's legal team. they would ultimately file and lose more than 50 lawsuits an instances of election fraud. so it makes sense that the wall street journal today is reporting special counsel jack smith is honing in on trump's lawyer. the team reportedly asked rudy giuliani specifically about that december 2020 meeting as part of his eight hour long interview with them last week. we are gonna get some expert legal help to unpack that reporting later this morning. it is worth noting just how expensive smith's investigation is become at this point. for months now we have had it dribs and drabs of information about the special counsel probe. each laying out a different area the jacks mitt is focused on. for example, this. >> reporter: america deserved an honest election. this is what they got. suitcases of ballots added in

secret in georgia and dead people voting in wisconsin. a money for voting scheme in nevada. watchers denying access in pennsylvania. faulty ballot drop boxes, and facing felony charges in michigan. new evidence is overwhelming. >> that wasn't and that trump and his campaign put it in december 2020. everything but the first line is false. we have known for wild it jackson has been interested in losing the 2020 election and trump raised $250 million using false claims of election fraud. like the kind reference in the a. last, week the washington post laid out just how interested smith is in that part of trump's scheme. the special counsel has our pointedly ben subpoenaing and questioning everyone from the traditional copywriters road to the eyes to the trump campaign officials who signed off on them. they've been creating a paper trail of emails showing that a lot of the people involved in these efforts in new trump's election fraud claims were

bogus. so let's just back up for a second. we know that the special counsel investigation is zeroed in on the fundraising and the efforts by trump's legal team. but in addition, we have also learned a great deal about's interest in the former presidents fake election scheme. that was the effort to groups of republicans affectedly cause play as alternate states of electors. they held a fake alternate electors signing ceremony and then try to have those fake elector certificates brought to vice president mike pence on january six, in order to stop the certification of the election. last, week cnn or courted the trump campaign official who physically tried to bring those fake elector certificates to pence on january six, he is now cooperating with the special counsel. that comes after reports that multiple fake electors themselves have been given immunity deals in exchange for their cooperation with smith's investigation. one thing is for certain. jack smith knows how to walk

and chew gum at the same time. what can we learn from just how encompassing this investigation is reported they become? and how close is it to unanimous? joining us now is former federal prosecutor paul, butler and msnbc legal analyst lisa reuben. lisa, paul, thank you both for being here with us tonight. lisa, does the breadth of jack smith's investigation indicate to you that we are likely to see a lot of different charges here or is this suggest that jack smith is dotting every i crossing all the t's? >> it is really hard to say, simon. certainly when it came to the records investigations nobody really knew that the and was coming until we knew that the end indictments coming down. in fact most of us don't even know there is a grand jury in florida let alone miami until a few days before. so i think it is really hard to read the tea leaves and know exactly what is coming on the pipe. now that having been said, the breath of the investigation

here is astonishing and i think that one of the things that jack smith and his team are trying to do is show that whatever trump was trying to do to overturn the election, whether it was raising money under fraudulent pretenses or going out and sending alternate states of electors to congress, under similarly false pretenses, that the entire time he was advised repeatedly by people in his campaign and people on the white house staff that the underlying facts of the alleged fraud weren't facts at all and they were dead wrong and if there was nothing wrong with the election results they were trying to overturn. and i think that's the importance of sauce in some respects of the meeting the talk about a moment ago. >> so paul, if jack smith can prove that donald trump's lawyers knew that they were pressuring both these claims, what kind of repercussions could they be up against? >> some lawyers have already face repercussions from the

tower jasmine sender by the federal judges, censored by people like sydney powell. we know that donald trump uses lawyers as henchmen to try to get them to do his dirty work while insulating himself from any criminal exposure. but, symone, now judges and prosecutors are on to that. so when these lawyers get interviewed by prosecutors, i think they're trying to do three things. and one is to see what they know about donald trump, and especially his motive and mind stage regarding the big lie. did he know that he actually lost him is just willing to do whatever it took to remain in the white house? the other thing as you noted is that these lawyers themselves might have criminal exposure. they've got what is called queen for a day immunity meaning that they cannot be prosecuted based on what they say in these interviews. but that does not mean that jack smith cannot charge them with a crime. you just have to prove that he did not use any of their statements on the interview, in the interview against. him in his prosecution. and the third reason is that he

wants to lock in their testimony. he wants to try to make sure that if trump is eventually prosecuted that these lawyers who don't show up and try to offer exculpatory information about donald trump. finding that he's not guilty. if their testimony is locked in with these witnesses then jacks mitt can rely on them. >> it has been reported that multiple individuals are very high up and donald trump's orbits including rudy giuliani have been offered proper deals by the special counsel. what is a proffer deal, first of all? >> when i was a prosecutor we called it queen for a day so when it means is that you go in and you spill it to the -- >> you just tell it? all >> because whatever you said cannot be used against you in a prosecution. if you are eventually charged with a crime, prosecutors will have to demonstrate that they could not use anything you said to charge you. but they can use that for leads

and if you lie and that is proven then you can be charged with perjury. the reason that smith is doing this is that if he did not make this deal, these lawyers would almost certainly take the fifth. so this is the only way that he can get their testimony. >> i don't think i ever want to be queen for a day. lisa, it seems as though rudy giuliani is having his -- to any reporter that will listen to the interview that he did with jack smith was voluntary. why would he even want that to be public knowledge? >> simone, i ask myself the same question last week. because rudy giuliani even re-tweeted a story from cnn, an issue the reporting that he had gone in and smoking with jack smith. i think what people to know that for two reasons. he wants fani willis's team to know that, because i deal with the special counsel's office only protects him against a federal prosecution.

it doesn't nothing for him with respect to the state of georgia. and as you know, while the president can pardon someone for a federal, crime the president does not have the power to pardon anyone for a state crime. if donald trump were to be reelected, he would have absolutely no power to do anything with any prosecution, much less a conviction of rudy giuliani in georgia. he wants those in georgia to know that he's willing to play ball. and he's eager to play. bob that is first and foremost reason for doing its. >> so, lisa, fani willis has signaled i would argue very strongly the charges of her investigation could come either late this month or some point in august. what about those tea leaves there? obviously rudy giuliani feel seems to feel something in there. can we glean anything from what has happened in the special counsel's investigations to these interviews that are happening to the statements that fani willis has been putting out about this timing

and should the special counsel's team be concerned? >> i don't think the special counsel's team has any reason to be concerned. certainly people can be prosecuted for different acts and different jurisdictions. i think the witnesses slash targets do have reason to be concerned, however. although paul can certainly tell you it is possible to deal after one is indicted, it is much easier to cut a deal before that ever happens. so if you are a person like rudy giuliani, or for example mike roman who was the director of elections operations, he is the guy who tried to deliver the state electors states to mike pence, and you really want to cut any deal that you are willing and able to cats, before either one of those indictments is coming down the pipe for you. >> well, paul, i guess we will end here. on the point about these three different investigations, jack smith with the federal track and fani willis. we have not even gotten into

new york this week. but is there any -- more concern that maybe overlap? does jackson look about fani willis is doing, just from what is available to the public, does that influence what he does and vice versa? or no? >> they're not talking to each. other they're certainly not talking to each other about -- so the answer is, no they investigation does not as a whole lot to do with each other. there was a thought that because it jacks mitt charge to the documents case in mar-a-lago, that was based. but this grand jury that is investigating january 6th is heating up. they are hauling people like john eastman and mike pence into the grand jury. you don't do that just to play around you are doing that if you want to bring charges. i think what jack smith is concerned about is that by the end of this year, 2000 people will have been charged with regard to january. six the little guys, the soldiers if you, will the people who are responsible for the violence, the real question from jack smith is the deal

you're only going to go after the little guys? or are they going to look at the people who finance and organize a fomented the insurrection which brings us to donald trump and these lawyers and the big lie. >> all. write formal for their prosecutor paul butler and msnbc legal analyst lisa reuben, thank you both very much for your time. coming up, when the supreme court dismantled race conscious decision-makers in college admissions, they left policies in place that benefit the predominantly white applicants, his parents and grandparents attended a leak colleges before them. today there is a new challenge to the so-called legacies. we'll have more on that, next. have more on that, next.

hi, my name's steve. i lost 138 pounds on golo and i kept it off. golo's changed my life in so many ways. before, i was over 300 pounds. now, i literally have the ability to take a shirt off and go out in the sun where i would have never done that before. try golo. it works.

i told myself i was ok with my moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis symptoms. with my psoriatic arthritis symptoms. but just ok isn't ok. and i was done settling. if you still have symptoms after a tnf blocker like humira or enbrel, rinvoq is different and may help.

rinvoq is a once-daily pill that can dramatically relieve ra and psa symptoms, including fatigue for some. it can stop joint damage. and in psa, can leave skin clear or almost clear. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. done settling? ask your rheumatologist for rinvoq. and take back what's yours. learn how abbvie could help you save. we moved out of the city so our little sophie could appreciate nature. but then he got us t-mobile home internet. i was just trying to improve our signal, so some of the trees had to go. i might've taken it a step too far. (chainsaw revs) (tree crashes) (chainsaw continues) (daughter screams) let's pretend for a second that you didn't let down your entire family. what would that reality look like?

well i guess i would've gotten us xfinity... and we'd have a better view. do you need mulch? >> new fallout today from the what, we have a ton of mulch.

supreme court's decision, striking down you the receiver we've actually programs. responses to surgery he was banned ecology admissions and in their vehicle the justices brought a different, form preferential treatment in elite american universities. from children of alumni and donors and circling a ca missions. in her decision justice -- noted legacy advocates are predominantly white because less than 5% of africans to harvard. they conceded 30 pediatric applicants admitted each. lawyer he called these legacies

part of a, quote emission pocket problem when most of the people under represent racial minorities. even conservative justice gorsuch who join the majority express discontent with the legacy system of ours preference for the children of alumni as he wrote, quote, while race neutral in their fates they will no dead benefit white applicants the most. it is not hard to see why legacy admissions will benefit white applicants the most. carter was founded in 16 36 bid not graduates first black students for over 230 years. and for a full century after, that harvard fewer than 12 black undergraduates a year. election was not until the 19 that progress began to be implemented and harvard's undergraduate population began to rise. black and retro population. they start show the racial makeup of applicants to harvard as a 2021. the blue slides represents white applicants. on the left are normal

applicants, and that poll is about 30% white. 40. percent the other applicants the children of alumni's. white applicants make up nearly 7% of that pool. and here is the. thinning the applicants and that heavily white legacy pool are now six times more likely to be admitted to harvard to the nose and the general pool. it was helpful pie charts come from a federal civil rights complaint filed today with the u.s. department of education. the complaint challenges harvard legacy admissions as a civil rights violation. and seeks to force harvard to stop considering applicants relationships to alumni in their admissions process. the groups who have filed the complaints argued that ending legacy and mission is more urgent than ever because race conscious admissions policies may have helped to offset those programs and have now been banned by the supreme court. joining us now is michael camping,'s litigation follow act -- for civil rights in --

filed today. mr. campaigns, thank you for coming with us here today. don't agree is this response to the -- uninformative action? >> first of all thanks for having me. i'm glad to be. here we have lawyers for civil rights have been concerned with the donor legacy preferences that you have reference for quite some time. but the light of the supreme court's decisions reference last week is all the more imperative to rooting out any types of policies in higher education that harm communities of color in predominantly benefit white applicants. on these donor and legacy preferences are examples of these types of policies. >> so, know it maybe -- break it down for. asked for folks at home are wondering, well how is this a civil rights violation, how exactly do legacy admissions at harvard violet civil rights law? >> sure. so we filed this complaint

under title six of the civil rights act of 1964. which forbids harvard and other types of schools that receive federal funding from having programs are process is that have a racial element. and that discriminate on the basis of race. in this particular instance, we have the donor legacy preferences which as you said can create up to 70% white folks to be in admitted into the school. and that could make up to 30% of -- just four legacies. so for each slide in admissions, that is taken by one of these applicants who has made it through the premises, it takes away another slot from another deserving candidates. and they do that we have analyzed in that has been analyzed in connection with the harvard affirmative action case shows that if you don't legacy preferences are to be eliminated, that there would be a rise in the number of

applicants of color admitted to harvard. >> so, we have been using the term complaints here and i think that is very important. because what you filed today was not a, lawsuit it was a complaint. so what are you seeking from the department of education? what exactly could today do in this case? >> because they of education provides federal funds to harvard, it has a unique position with respect to investigations. so, we are to the department of education through this complaint to the office of civil rights. we urge them to open an investigation into harvard. to declare that these practices are legal and to ensure that if harvard wants to continue receiving these federal funds, that it ceases having any connection with these admissions policies for donor legacy preferences. >> and if the department of education agrees with you, and they uphold your complaint, is

at the end of it or is there a court battle after that? >> well we had civil rights at this time have filed this particular federal civil rights complaint, but we are keeping all of our legal options open. this issue is a widespread issue, we have named harvard in this particular complaint but we are keeping our options open. >> mr. capping's, kippins, i am struck by this whole thing. because as i said at the opening, the 1970s specifically from the time, the black population at harvard, grows a direct result friendly in front of action programs. those alumni's children would in fact be considered legacy, should they apply to harvard. so you have any concern that getting rid of legacy admissions would eliminate a pipeline that some black families have actually had access to invade building? in other families of color in recent decades? >> my response to that would be that we at --

lawyers for civil rights are seeking a level playing, field a field in which a person's individual merits is what gets them admitted to the school. at this point, with this particular federal civil rights complaint, that is what we are seeking. that's what we are urging the department of education to enforce and with respect to the number of people who have attended harvard who may be nonwhite, and have been benefiting from this particular type of admissions policy, i would add that it pales in comparison to the number of white applicants and white families that have been benefiting from this and as i said before, up to 70% of those applicants who are admitted through these donor and legacy preferences are white. >> michael kept things, litigation fellow at lawyers for civil rights. thank you so much for your time tonight. seems like the people have the right lawyer on this one. we'll be watching. thank you. >> thank you so much. >> when we come, back folks, former vice president mike

pence on the notion of a color blind society. >> you do not believe that there is racial inequity in the educational system in america? >> i just really don't believe there is. >> i have thoughts. so many thoughts. and i will discuss them with the great doctor abram as candy. that is next. ndy. that is next

every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting the kibble. and kicking the cans. and feeding their dogs dog food that's actually well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. get 50% off your first box at thefarmersdog.com/realfood are you tired of clean clothes that just don't smell clean? get 50% off your first box downy unstopables in-wash scent boosters keep your laundry smelling fresh waaaay longer than detergent alone. if you want laundry to smell fresh for weeks, make sure you have downy unstopables in-wash scent boosters. my name is wendy, i'm 51 years old, and i'm a hospital administrator. when i talk to patients you can just see from here up when you're wearing a mask. and i have noticed those lines beginning to really become not so much moderate

but more severe. i'm still wendy and i got botox® cosmetic. and i'm really happy with the results because they're very subtle, and i feel like i look like myself, but just less lines. botox® cosmetic is fda approved, to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness maybe a sign of a life threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history. muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins. as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. see for yourself at botoxcosmetic.com income tax. sales tax. gas tax. californians pay some of the highest taxes in the nation. but now lawmakers are proposing a so-called “link tax” that would charge websites every time they link to a news article online.

experts warn it could undermine the open internet, punish local newspapers, while subsidizing hedge funds and big media corporations. >> -- so tell lawmakers: oppose ab886, because another new tax is the last thing we need. paid for by ccia. moving forward as a country. embracing the notion that we're

all to be judged out of the color risk but the cause of our character in this case allergy p.a.. >> my understanding is you saying there are not answer that you do not believe there is racial inequity in the education system in america? >> i just really don't believe there is. i believe that there was. there may have been a time when affirmative action was necessary. simply to open the doors of all of our schools and universities. but i think that i must. past will continue to move forward as a color blind society. >> a color blind society. that concert with the central struggle is the supreme court's decisions to strike down race conscious policies last week. you can pay elsewhere, the takeaway seems to be that we have achieved some kind of colour-blind nirvana. that has raised solutions to systematic inequity actually just preachers white people. so we should be race neutral, or color blind. like president in that mike pence suggests. the argument in the courts

majority opinion last week and chief justice john roberts said the jim crow era justice john marshall hart. a man often called the great dissenter. roberts pointed to a specific section of the dissent in policy before it saying in 1896 as a separate but equal case. he wrote, quote, the constitution is color blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. in part, for that reason, the court found that affirmative action was a violation of the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. but that roberts majority opinion happened to skip this part of harlan's 1896 dissent. right before the columbine constitution. harlan, writes quote, the white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. and so it is. in prestige and achievements and education and wealth and empower. so i doubt not that it will continue to be for all-time if it remains true to its great heritage and holds fast to the

principles of constitutional liberty. a color blind constitution on one hand, and a quote, dominant race on the. other two diametrically opposed concepts on the same page. so this contradiction was actually laid bare in a new piece, coauthored by ibram x. kendi, author of how to raise an anti-racist. and founder of boston university center for anti racist research. dr. ibram x. kendi writes quote, the color blind offense either color or superior, as harlan did. the peoples production costs in the constitution quebecers figured by legal fantasy yet again, to protect racial inequity. history repeats sometimes without rhyming. race neutral is the new separate but equal. then, the fantasy was that separate facilities for education appointed to the race this were equal and that actions to desegregates them were unnecessary if not harmful. today the fantasy is that regular college admission objects are race neutral in

that affirmative action is not necessary, in fact harmful. now racial neutrality is a doctrine of the land as separate but equal was a century ago. and we need a new legal movement to expose its fantastical nature. joining us now is doctor ibram x. kendi, professor and founding director of the central center for interest researcher boston university. doctor kendi, thank you so much for being here. i appreciate writing that piece because i've been trying to make this case to my team over the weekend and they were like i don't know. will somebody go right? and you definitely did. black and zelenskyy no students are still under represented in many of our countries most -- public universities. but the supreme court believes that we are ready for a race neutral or even a color blind approaches to emissions. which excludes affirmative action. you called this legal fantasy. in the atlantic. why is it a legal fantasy? >> i think it is best to contextualize it how it was a

century ago. in which you have made those litigants who were trying to desegregates schools, who were going up to the supreme court hearing that supreme court was telling them that the schools were separate but equal. even though study after study show that black schools were seeing for any way less resources from states like mississippi and georgia and south carolina. then segregated white schools. similarly today, you have supreme court justices claiming that the only race based admissions factor is affirmative action. but as you've already talked about, if you look at legacies that provides racial preferences for white students. the same thing with for instance children other employees. white people are overrepresented on the staff and faculty of colleges and universities. so there are preferences added

to their children. it also includes what people are more likely to donate to these institutions. and the relatives of donors also get a boost in admissions. even standardized tests, which primarily show the wealth or the income of the parents of the cast makers. we have a massive racial wealth gap so to me it is a fantasy that we have race neutrality, other than affirmative action. just like it was a fantasy a century ago that the schools were separate but equal. >> so you're right that we need a new legal movement to expose race neutrality as a fantasy. what is the new legal movement? >> well, i think it starts with your previous aghast, he was actually demonstrating that a legacy is actually not a quote, race neutral. that actually gives preferences to white students. we start to look at something at our missions factors that

are their which demonstrates they are leading to racial inequities. and disparities. and i think that's what we have to show. we have to demonstrate the outcome of these policies and be less focused on whether they have racial language or even the intent of the policy maker. >> you talk about the outcome. in california and in michigan, affirmative action was already outlawed for the public universities. in the 90s and in the early 2000s, actually. so black enrollment at top schools in those states plummeted. rapidly. it really was about 15%. so let's talk a bit about the broad long term consequences of that kind of draft to drop in. a representation of students of color in these institutions. >> when black latino and indigenous students are underrepresented, as they are to the top 100 most selected institutions, that also extends into the graduate programs. they become underrepresented in

the graduate programs. and whoever's underrepresented in the graduate programs are also likely to be underrepresented in the professions. like doctors and lawyers. or even on the supreme court. so it sort of filters through society when black and brown and indigenous students are being excluded from college admissions. because of the emission factors. it's going to then lead to other elements of society. >> in the affirmative action, ruling the supreme court made a, carve it an exception if you, will for military academies. in her, dissent justice ketanji brown jackson right in the majority of the affirmative action was fine if it meant preparing, quote, underrepresented minorities for success in the bunker, not the boardroom. what do you make of this exception? >> i mean it just goes to show where particularly black people

and other groups of color are accepted. so, we are accepted when we are putting our lives on the line for the united states. we are accepted when we are entertaining people. we are accepted when we are serving people. but for whatever reason, we are not accepted when we are trying to be professionals. >> you know, it really strikes me that we are having this entire conversation, and the supreme court is taking these actions that they have taken, in the wake of an attack on teacher nations history. in schools all across the country. there has been a concerted look at critical race theory. i'm using quotes because not actually what is happening in schools across the country. books are being banned. in the summer that george floyd was murdered, it really seemed like everyone was just -- bookstore flying off the shelves. everybody was trying to figure out how to be anti racist. companies are hiring dei's,

opening up dei and initiatives. there were a lot of diversity dollars, as i like to call it. but three years later, many of those initiatives have dried up. your books, for example, have been banned in several states actually. and now the supreme court thinks we have achieved color blindness. you have politicians celebrating this. what is happening here? and are you surprised by how far the pendulum has swung in such a short amount of time? >> i think that's taking the long view of history, i'm not surprised. because when we look at american history, whenever we have achieved or sought to achieve equity, whenever we have put in place anti racist policies like affirmative action, they have proven to close racial disparities. and colleges and universities, the typical response historically like currently has

banned that these policies are actually the problem. that these policies are somehow anti white and so you have -- these pretty concerning movements to transform anti racism as the real racism. that is precisely what jim crow segregation-ism. did you have been slivers casting abolitionists as the problem. and unfortunately that is still the case today. >> professor ibram x. kendi, -- of the anti racist research at boston university, appreciate your time, sir. >> thanks for having me. >> still to come on this eve of our national celebration of independents, he was once falsely accused of a heinous crime but then donald trump called for him to be executed. now, he is not only exonerated but he is on the verge of acquiring political power. i will talk to him next. talk to him next. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care.

because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today.

love you. have a good day, behave yourself. like she goes to work at three in the afternoon and sometimes gets off at midnight. she works a lot, a whole lot. we don't get to eat in the early morning. we just wait till we get to the school. so, yeah. right now here in america, millions of kids like victoria and andre live with hunger, and the need to help them has never been greater. when you join your friends, neighbors and me to support no kid hungry, you'll help hungry kids get the food they need. if we want to take care of our children, then we have to feed them. your gift of just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month at helpnokidhungry.org right now will help provide healthy meals and hope. we want our children to grow and thrive and to just not have to worry and face themselves with

the struggles that we endure. nobody wants that for their children. like if these programs didn't exist me and aj, we wouldn't probably get lunch at all. please call or go online right now with your gift of just $19 a month. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this limited edition t-shirt to show you're part of the team that's helping feed kids and change lives. if you're coming in hungry, there's no way you can listen to me teach, do this activity, work with this group. so starting their day with breakfast and ending their day with this big, beautiful snack is pretty incredible. whether kids are learning at school or at home, your support will ensure they get the healthy meals they need to thrive. because when you help feed kids, you feed their hopes, their dreams, and futures. kids need you now more than ever. so please call this number right now to join me in helping hungry kids or go online to

helpnokidhungry.org and help feed hungry kids today. what if your entire day glided like dove men? it's made with a plant-based moisturizer and glides on without irritation. so you can glide through your entire day with confidence. ♪♪ feel the dove men glide. feeling sluggish or weighed down? could be a sign that your digestive system isn't at its best. but a little metamucil everyday can help. metamucil's psyllium fiber gels to trap

and remove the waste that weighs you down and also helps lower cholesterol and slows sugar absorption to promote healthy blood sugar levels. so you can feel lighter and more energetic. lighten every day the metamucil way. and for a delicious way to promote digestive health try metamucil fiber thins. >> i am here because of harlem you believed in me. harlan has, spoken i said on the campaign trail, i am not a seasoned politician. so they are for, this was not politics as usual. i have got the opportunity to include in my campaign the voice of the people. the fact that people have hope

in a person whose experience has lasted 34 years, because that is how long i was fighting for freedom justice and equality -- >> that was yusef salaam, who you might remember as a member of the central park five. the black and latino teens who were wrongfully arrested, convicted and incarcerated for the rape and assault about women in central park in the 1989. donald trump famously took out newspaper ads out to the time and called for the death penalty for the five. well today, they are known as the exonerated five, after dna evidence proved that somebody else committed a crime. yusef salaam is now the front runner in the democratic primary race for harlem's ninth city council district. a winner has not been officially declared, but he won twice the number of votes as his nearest competitor. a sitting assemblywoman who's been a fixture in local new york city politics and previously held very council seat. so there is a strong likelihood

that he will not only win the primary but also when the heavily democratic ninth district seat in november. as use of salaam points out, you might be a political outsider but he is no stranger to being in the public eye. so he was poised to win an election for public office. as part of a new generation of politicians, once operating adjacent to the political party apparatus. and now they've decided to get involved. it is a power shift and it is getting the attention of leaders in the community that he hopes to serve. here is what michael a laurent g or, a pastor at 1 corinthians baptist church in harlem told the new york times about yusef salaam's nearest competitor. he, said quote, in endorsing institutions and the names and it did not help. it is only a signal that in, harlem at least right now, the politics is a little bit more open than it may have been ten or 15 years ago. >> well joining us now is yusef salaam, the candidate for new

york city's ninth district seat. he is also as i said one of the exonerated five. it is good to see, you sir. thank you for making some time this evening for us. let's start with talking about this election in this primary. you won twice as many votes as your closest competitor. inez decking's formerly held that seat for at least ten years. why do you think that voters resonated with you in this way? they came out to support you so much? >> the thing about our beloved harlem is that people have been pushed to the back, they've been left out in the divested of and i think the pain is so apparent and there are so many people have been looking for hope, wanting and needing help. and the fact of the matter is that we have to occupy all spaces. if we are not at the table we are the ones that are on the menu. and they are deciding for us what our lives are going to look like. and you know, when i think about my story and my struggles

here i was marching for 12 years after we were found innocent. me and my brothers were out there in the streets marching for justice. there was no one in the halls of power to hear our voices. and the fact that i now have the opportunity, i would say, to lead. to lead our people. leadership is service. and how best to serve them that by being one of those who understands exactly where the pain? is who can be one of the voices of our. people and say you know, what i want -- i can do something about. it

welcome back to our to our special edition of all in, it's 9:00 on the east coast, and our that's normally hosted by the great rachel maddow, don't worry, she will be back next monday. he was busy when he got the phone call but you could tell s

important. but you could tell s >> that was the governor of arizona. don't you see, the former governor should say. only november 2020. certifying the results of the presidential election for joe biden who had won his seat. and in the middle of signing that paperwork, his cell phone rang. i don't know if you caught the ring tone there, but it was hail to the chief, a dead giveaway that it was the then president calling donald trump. do you see sent to trump to voice mail and said he did call donald trump back but he would not publicly disclose specifically what they talked about. well thanks to a massive scoop from the washington post we know know what the two men discussed. according to the post, while tao doocy was certifying the results of the election in

arizona for joe biden, donald trump was called in to ask him not to do it. quote, in a phone call in late 2020 president donald trump tried to pressure arizona governor doug doocy to overturn the straits presidential election results. say that if enough fraudulent votes could be, found it would overcome trump's narrow loss in arizona according to three people familiar with the call. we know the special counsel jack smith is investigating donald trump's similar attempt to pressure georgia secretary of state officials to overturn the election. but according to the washington post, it is unclear if doug ducey has been contacted yet by the special counsel's office. if it is front page news i am out in that governor calling the governor ducey will be added to jack smith's growing to do list if he hasn't already done so. jack smith is under an extraordinary amount of scrutiny as he continues to lead criminal investigations into donald trump. who as we speak is the republican party's front-runner for president. unprecedented might be a word

you are tempted to use here but, investigating someone like donald trump has fact been done before. in 2018, the usual occupant of this hour rachel maddow pointed a podcast about richard and extends vice president -- it was called bad man. in 1973, vice president agnew is facing the real process of assuming the presidency with mixing on his way out the door because of watergate. but in the middle of watergate, agnew is being investigated for his own criminal misdeeds. the three on federal prosecutors who investigated spiro t. agnew faced in all most unfathomable question at the time. what happens if you bring criminal charges against a lucky occupant of the white house? given that we now find that exact question that the splinter of our current political moment rachel second again with those three prosecutors who investigated spiro agnew 50 years ago. and she wanted to see if they have any advice for jack smith or for us, as the country experiences this again. the conversations out today, as

a special bonus episode. back bay, and you could listen to or wherever you get your podcasts. here is a little preview of it now. >> tim, what was your reaction or what's been your reaction overtime as we've seen these indictments of trump? >> no department of justice is worthy of its name that could have failed to bring these charges. those charges had to be brought. and yet they scare the hell out of me. i am terrified that he somehow could be acquitted. and if trump is acquitted, i think that will probably elect him president again. >> i want to bring into the conversation mary mccord, former assistant attorney general for national security at the department of justice. she is also the coast of the msnbc podcast. prosecuting donald trump. laura jarrett is also here, nbc news senior legal correspondent. thank you both for being here. mary, i'm going to start with you.

you are a federal prosecutor worked at the highest levels of the justice department. how might the microscope that jack smith and his team? because there is a team of lawyers working on this. how might they be affected by the microscope and the scrutiny that they are under right now? how does it affect the decision-making? >> i think that they are more affected in their decision-making by understanding the significance of potentially bringing not just one, because they've already brought one but a second criminal indictment against the former president. particularly during the actual election season. while he is the front runner. my own experience when i was at the department both in the u.s. attorney's office and in d.c. and where we call main justice in the national security division, is i was so busy all day every day into the wee hours. i was not consuming all the news where people are pontificating constantly and commenting it's criticizing and speculating, it sattre. we were pretty much zeroed in

on our investigation and making our decisions based on the guidelines and principles for federal prosecution. but also recognizing the potential political aspects of things that we do. so i think he is probably feeling the weight of, what is my evidence? do i have evidence to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt? not just in mar-a-lago where he argued that assessment with respect to january six. and if so, is it the right thing to do as a matter of prosecutorial discretion to bring and seek an indictment against the former president for the events surrounding january 6th? >> i find that i know some lawyers from the justice department and they do not watch the news. some days, it feels like. but some people are talking because there was this washington post story a couple of weeks back. which talked about how the fbi resisted bringing an investigation and looking specifically into donald trump and his role in january six. for about a year.

and obviously now we know the jack smith is following that trail. but in the piece, there are a lot of anonymous individuals who are giving their thoughts from allegedly inside the department of justice. and i just wonder if you think that the hesitancy from the fbi and some folks within the department of justice to take a hard look at donald trump, in his role in january six, it was not until the january six committee came out and had their proceedings, rachel maddow on this very program in this very hour relentlessly stayed on the story. after that we saw some -- and you think the hesitancy has somewhat hobbled to jack smith's investigation anyway or put extra pressure on him? because now he's right up to an election, right up against him. >> i definitely think, first of all i think we don't know everything. that was great reporting, but it does not necessarily mean that everybody was talk to me does not necessarily mean that there is nothing else going on

during this gap of time. i know a lot of the individuals who are mentioned in that reporting, and i can understand why maybe very early on, january in february, there might have been a hesitancy to go full bore on the former presidents upper echelon of advisers. while they were also still busy rounding up the footsoldiers who actually engaged in the violence. but as time went on it became more and more necessary, and just consistent with normal department of justice prosecutorial steps, to start working your way up. working your way up. as that story pointed out, they are working their way up and not working at some point. it just kind of hit a dead and and things got reinvigorated. so yes, i think it would have been great of more had been done earlier. again, it is not clear to me just from that news article that there was not more that was being reported it was being down. and certainly now, there is time pressure on jack smith. i'm not particularly alarmed to read about some disputes between the fbi and the department of justice.

some wanting to go forward. that's how it happens. i mean, i've been in those hundreds of times. we are, partners we work. together but we have differences of opinion. and, frankly the fbi has really been in the hot seat for a while now. particularly vis-à-vis donald trump. not that makes it okay to be hesitant, but i get it. i get where there might be some who are wanting to be super careful. i also get why prosecutors are saying that we have got to amp this up. we have got to really start looking at that inner circle. that is happening, clearly happening, now. >> yeah. i mean laura, the details in the washington post story, the recent story about doug ducey, former governor -- and the phone call, and then we also know about fani willis in georgia. she has been telegraphing the timeline about her investigation and she is investigating similar behavior in her state. which donald trump called election officials there to pressure them. we all heard about that phone call. i just -- what are you hearing and what

your sources tell you about the volume of all of these investigations? and are there any tea leaves? when are some shoes going to drop, laura? >> i think the thing to recognize about the ducey phone call that potentially makes it important is it could speak to a pattern. fani willis is obviously looking at things that happen in georgia. including the call to the secretary of state, brad raffensperger. the ducey call though, to the extent that it follows the same playbook. she could use that in the same way that jack smith is using the fact that the former president allegedly, in the smith telling, was showing off a classified documents to a group of people. he did not charge that in the indictments, but it tells a story and it shows a pattern of behavior. it shows that this stuff is not on accident. it's not a coincidence. it's all part of the same scheme. so that's why to the extent that willis uses that door to the extent the jack smith uses

things that happen in georgia, i think it tells a coherent story. and is certainly appealing to a jury to the extent that gets that far. >> when do you think we should expect a potential charges in either of these cases? look laura, you are very well. sourced in fani willis in georgia are specifically sent out memos in march and her office said something again in may. asking the court to not schedule in-person proceedings, if you will, during the week of august 7th. and august 14th. that is right in the middle of fani willis's vacation, but it seems like something could be happening. >> no kidding. yes. it is kind of unusual, right? you don't usually see this type of preview a, if you will, from a district attorney. so all we can do is try to read the tea leaves there. i will say, though, if we had the investigative grand jury working and growing. she said that the time a

decision was imminent. that was months ago and we really have not seen anything. obviously you want somebody to take their time and get it right. even though everybody is eager to understand what is going on, you also don't want to encourage anyone to be rushing something like this. especially given the gravity of the situation. we also do know, though, that security props have been going on. which suggests that people are at least gearing up for it. the fact that officials from the sheriff's office in georgia were going down to miami, and also looking into the situation in new york, suggest they would not do that if they did not think that something was happening. right? that requires resources and time. and they will make that sort of investment if they think it is realistic. >> they are just so many investigations going, mayor. we have the documents case, january six. the georgia dea, the new york oschmann the case. those are just the ones we know about. there could be investigations we are not yet aware of. do you think that jack smith is worried that the sheer volume

of the number of investigations into the former president could affect the jury, for example, in any of these cases? or any of the prosecutors concerned about that? that maybe it looks overly aggressive on the part of the government? >> i think there's no question that something that he'd be taking into account. will it look like piling on. but i also think he is again going to be guided by the principles of federal prosecution. which is sort of the significance of the case. it's importance and it's the federal interest involved. in mar-a-lago, we were talking about the very important national security interests that were there. and the obstruction of an official investigation. there is a very substantial federal interests. january six and away is almost even more critical of the federal interests. we are talking about the federal government's interest in the peaceful transition of power that is what has sustained our democracy since its founding. and here, what is being

investigated is a very large scheme involving pressure on governors. pressure on secretary of state to find fraud that would overturn the results in those states. when that didn't work, pressure directly on state legislatures to go ahead and overrule the will of the people. and then we have the whole fraudulent elector scheme where the trump electors in the seventh swing states where he lost went ahead and met as though they were the real electors, cast their votes and send them to the former vice president urging him to count them and then of course the pressure on vice president pence. in and they lead up to end on january six. those are pretty significant federal interests there. and i do think that piling on or something that he will be thinking about. but i think we'll be thinking about that in the context of each of his cases. as opposed to where they sit with respect to other cases that local or state dealers are bringing. >> all right. we will leave it. there mary mccoy, former

assistant attorney general for national security at the justice department, and laura jarrett, are extremely well sourced msnbc news local correspondent. thank you for your time tonight and kicking off this hour. coming up, when a mass shooting over the weekend in a major american city says about us as a country. lots more there. brandon scott joins us live. that is next. xt who can i talk to? can this be treated? stop typing. start talking to a specialized urologist. because it could be peyronie's disease, or pd. it's a medical condition where there is a curve in the erection, caused by a formation of scar tissue. and an estimated 1 in 10 men may have it. but pd can be treated even without surgery. say goodbye to searching online. find a specialized urologist who can diagnose pd and build a treatment plan with you. visit makeapdplan.com today. (vo) consumer reports evaluates vehicles for car shoppers in... reliability, safety, owner satisfaction, and build a treatment plan with you. and road-test evaluations... and the results are in.

subaru is the twenty twenty-three best mainstream automotive brand, according to consumer reports. and subaru has seven consumer reports recommended models. solterra, forester, outback, crosstrek, ascent, impreza, and legacy. it's easy to love a brand you can trust. it's easy to love a subaru.

are you still struggling with your bra? it's time for you to try knix. makers of the world's comfiest wireless bras. for revolutionary support without underwires, and sizes up to a g-cup, find your new favorite bra today at knix.com

is it possible to protect my business from cyber threats? it is, with comcast business. helping every connected device stay protected. yours. your employees'. even... susan? hers, too. safe. secure. and powered by the next generation 10g network. with comcast business, advanced security isn't just possible. it's happening. get started wih fast spees and advanced security

for $49.99a month for 12 monts plus ask how to get up to a $750 prepaid card with qualifying internet.

♪ limu emu & doug ♪ what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ type 2 diabetes? only pay for what you need. discover the ozempic® tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. 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. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone. you may pay as little as $25. ancestry made it really easy to learn about my family's history. finding military information, newspaper articles, how many people were living in the house and where it was, makes me curious and keeps pulling me in and the photos reminding me of what life must have been like for them. finding out new bits of information about the family has been a wonderful experience, it's an important part of understanding who we are.

i'm mark and i live in vero beach, florida. my wife and i have three children. ruthann and i like to hike. we eat healthy. we exercise. i noticed i wasn't as sharp as i used to be. my wife introduced me to prevagen and so i said "yeah, i'll try it out." i noticed that i felt sharper, i felt like i was able to respond to things quicker. and i thought, yeah, it works for me. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. are you still struggling with your bra? it's time for you to try knix. makers of the world's comfiest wireless bras. for revolutionary support without underwires, and sizes up to a g-cup, find your new favorite bra today at knix.com

♪♪ when you have chronic kidney disease... there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. if you have chronic kidney disease, farxiga can help you keep living life. ♪ farxiga ♪ and farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure, which can lead to dialysis. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men, and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may lead to death. a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. farxiga can help you keep living life. ask your doctor for farxiga for chronic kidney disease. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ farxiga ♪

♪inspiring music♪ ♪ start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand.

oh, hello! hi! do you know that every load of laundry could be worth as much as $300? really? and your clothes just keep getting more damaged the more times you wash them. downy protects fibers, doing more than detergent alone. see? this one looks brand new. saves me money? i'm starting to like downy. downy saves loads.

mmm, popcorn. (alternate voice) denture disaster, darling! we need poligrip before crispy popcorn. (regular voice) let's fix this. (alternate voice) poligrip power hold + seal gives our strongest hold and 5x food seal. if your mouth could talk, it would ask for... poligrip.

want luxury hair repair that doesn't cost $50? pantene's pro-vitamin formula repairs hair. as well as the leading luxury bonding treatment. for softness and resilience, without the price tag. if you know... you know it's pantene. so, you've got the power of xfinity at home.

now take it outside with xfinity mobile. for softness and resilience, without the price tag. like speed? it's the fastest mobile service around. with the best price for two lines of unlimited. only $30 bucks a line per month. that's hundreds in savings a year when you wave bye to the other guys. save hundreds a year on your wireless bill over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. and right now, get up to $1000 off select samsung phones. washington post, quote, in a switch today.

phone call in late 2020, president donald