← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
“Trump still has Georgia on his mind”
00:44:31
July 2, 2026; 4pm: Nicolle Wallace and guests talk about the breaking news that the FBI is directing hundreds of analysts to dig into Georgia election probe subjects. Trump lost Georgia by 11,779 votes in 2020, but he has stood firm in his unproven claims that there was election fraud in that presidential election.
Loading summary
Transcript89 lines
- [00:00]
Jimmy Uso
Yo, it's Jey USO from WWE and I'm Jimmy uso. Chumba Casino and WWE are hyped for the biggest event of the summer, SummerSlam. I know I can't wait. There's nothing better to do while we're waiting than playing Chumba Casino. Sign up today and you can win a VIP experience with Chumba Casino and with WWE for SummerSlam. So what are you waiting for? Play Chumba Casino and enter for your chance to win. Let's Chumble.
- [00:25]
Andrew Weissman
Only available in permitted states.
- [00:26]
Ken Delaney
No purchase necessary.
- [00:27]
Liz Oyer
See Terms and Conditions for details. BGW Group would be prohibited by law 21 sponsored by Chumba Casino Listen to your favorite Ms. Now shows anytime as a podcast. Enjoy new episodes of Morning Joe, Deadline, White House and the Rachel Maddow Show.
- [00:40]
Andrew Weissman
Every small D Democratic muscle that we have is flexing.
- [00:45]
Liz Oyer
Plus the Last Word with Lawrence o', Donnell, the Beat with Ari Melber, the Weeknight and more on the Go wherever you get your podcasts for ad free listening to all of your favorite shows, subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [01:05]
Nicole Wallace
Hi there everyone. It's four o' clock in a steamy Washington, D.C. it sounds like somebody's still got Georgia on his mind. Stunning new reporting from our Ms. Now colleague Ken Delaney, and shines a light on an FBI that is seemingly more concerned with pleasing Donald Trump's fragile ego than following the truth or centering the world's premier law enforcement agency around the gravest threats facing our country. Because the objective and verifiable truth is that Donald Trump lost the state of Georgia in the 2020 presidential election. He lost it by 11,779 votes. We all heard him ask beg Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to find just enough votes to undo that result that defeat. But Brad Raffensperger stood firm against Trump's pressure. And it's something that Trump's current director of the FBI either can't do or won't do, even if it damages the credibility and effectiveness of the FBI. Donald Trump's efforts in Georgia are just one of the flashpoints that were investigated by former special counsel Jack Smith. Smith would go on to indict Donald Trump for what was shorthanded the election case, but included allegations that Donald Trump and his co conspirators knowingly spread lies about election fraud as part of and in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy to remain in power. It matters today as much as it did then, because those very same lies undergird actions being taken today and frankly, most days by the federal government. That's what Ken's reporting today highlights. It also matters today because we have our first chance to speak to former special counsel Jack Smith about the cases he was prepared to bring against Donald Trump, cases he believed he could prove beyond a reasonable doubt. This is his first interview. He'll join us live right here coming up in the next hour. Jack Smith's investigations into Trump represent the last rigorous forensic examinations of Trump's attempt to criminally overturn the 2020 election outcome. But unfortunately, that does not mean that Trump isn't still directing activities that, in a healthier democracy, might warrant scrutiny and accountability today. And it doesn't mean those activities will never be scrutinized. But it does mean that for now, all that we have is kendallaneon's intrepid reporting. That reporting found that FBI Director Kash Patel is surging resources into a, quote, priority investigation related to the 2020 election in Georgia. That's according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter, ordering personnel from all field offices to participate. When asked what those analysts would be looking for, one of the officials said, quote, looking for derogatory information is the short answer. The idea is to build a case, look at associations between people, look into their social media, their business activity, travel, contact with other investigative subjects. As Ken writes, quote, it's an extraordinary effort by the nation's most prominent law enforcement agency to find evidence supporting Donald Trump's darkest election fraud conspiracy theories. When contacted by msNow, the FBI declined to comment. That is where we start today with justice and Intelligence reporter Ken Delaney. And also joining us, former top DOJ official and general counsel for the FBI. Our legal analyst Andrew Weissman is with us as well. Ken, take us through what you're reporting.
- [04:33]
Ken Delaney
Well, Nicole, it's important to stress. And thank you, by the way, for having me to talk about this. It's important to stress that these documents that I've obtained and the sources I talked to, it's a partial window onto this investigation, a lot of which we don't understand because these documents speak to a surge of resources from the FBI's analytical division, which is separate from the special agents who are the principal investigators in criminal cases. But they play an important role. They sift through documents, they do analysis behind the scenes. They look at data, and in this case, they've been tasked with doing records checks. So essentially, Cash Patel is ordering analysts from every field office in America, proportion to how large they are, that's how many analysts they're supposed to contribute to this. And he's authorizing them to work overtime, including on weekends and holidays. And he wants this done in the next couple of weeks. He wants each one of them to make 708 so called records checks. And when I asked one of my sources what this could entail, as you mentioned, he said this is them looking for derogatory information, trying to make connections between subjects of investigation. They may be looking at social media, they may be looking at phone records, all kinds of data in support of the special agents who are leading this investigation. Remember, we learned about this investigation when the FBI swooped into Fulton county in January and conducted a court ordered search, a raid really of Fulton county election facilities and seized 600 boxes of of ballots and other election related material. And then when we finally saw the affidavit that supported that search warrant, that convinced the federal magistrate to grant that search warrant, we saw that it was based largely on debunked allegations, things that had already been investigated by Georgia Republicans that did not add up to meaningful fraud that changed the result in Georgia in 2020. And yet here you have the FBI in this massive diversion of resources. And one reason the American public should care about this, even if they're not so concerned about the FBI hunting for baseless allegations of fraud, is that every hour that every FBI analyst spends on this as an hour they're not spending analyzing, for example, terrorism cases or, you know, drug cartels or white collar fraud or all the other things we hope and expect that the FBI is going to investigate that state and local police generally don't investigate. And so it's a huge diversion of resources in the service of essentially a Donald Trump passion project, an obsession, whatever you want to call it, that we have not seen any evidence to suggest that there's any basis here for a criminal investigation.
- [07:10]
Nicole Wallace
Nicole, just correct me if I have these dots not aligned properly, but what is public facing on this story is that the FBI seized ballots in Fulton county and Tulsi Gabbard was there in her official capacity as the Director of National Intelligence. And she got on the phone with Donald Trump as part of that. And now intelligence agents from the FBI will do 708 records checks a day, is that of those ballots? I mean, what is the connection between these 708 records checks looking for, quote, derogatory information and the seizure of all of the ballots.
- [07:55]
Ken Delaney
So that's not 100% clear. But what my sources tell me is based on their understanding of this investigation and how other investigations work, the analysts are doing record checks in support of the agent's investigation. And so it could be a lot of different things. They generally look for, again, connections between subjects of investigations. They may be hunting through social media and phone records and other kinds of data that the FBI has obtained through subpoenas as part of this investigation. It's research. It's kind of back office stuff. The agents are going out and interviewing witnesses and they're serving subpoenas and they're gathering up the investigative material. The analysts are trying to make connections in support of the investigation. And we don't know again, to what end, what is the theory of this case. We don't understand it because all we have seen is the affidavit that, again, detailed essentially the same sorts of conspiracy theories that have long been debunked. And you can the New York Times did a graphic analysis of this where they went paragraph by paragraph through that affidavit and, and highlighted the things that had already been investigated by Georgia Republicans and ruled out as meaningful fraud. And so, again, big questions here. But one thing we do know is that this is a very unusual allocation of resources. It's not often that the FBI approves this kind of overtime for its analysts. They even had to lift the annual pay caps in some cases. I have another document showing that to allow these analysts to be paid for all this overtime. So it's really remarkable.
- [09:25]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, Andrew, the other remarkable piece, again, we only know what has burst into public view. But the first thing that burst into public view was Donald Trump, not with any knowledge of any fraud, but with a number in mind. He told Brad Raffensberger not to root out the fraud, but to find 11,880 votes, which was the exact margin by which he lost. So even Donald Trump didn't have evidence that there were 11,880 fraudulent votes. Votes. He just knew what he needed to make up to flip a defeat into a win.
- [09:59]
Andrew Weissman
Absolutely. And you're going to be able to speak to Jack Smith about why he believed that he had proof beyond reasonable doubt that this was a big lie. I should note that not only do we have all of the evidence from his indictment, all the evidence from the report, but let's add in that all of the claims of election fraud have been rejected by the courts. And Donald Trump has said publicly that he has irrefutable proof of fraud. He actually said he was going to have a press conference and reveal that that day has yet to come. I find it remarkable that we have the FBI director, as Ken so aptly put it, wasting resources that could go to actually protecting this country from crime as serious as terrorism, murder, all sorts of really terrible things on something that the president has said he has actual proof already of, but has not revealed it. I mean, it is, it is remarkable that to, to use your phrase, Nicole, that, you know, here we are on Earth one, trying to get people on Earth two to understand there is no evidence here. And it is, it's not just that the FBI could be doing something more serious. It's that by continuing this big lie, we are undermining faith in democracy. The latest polling is about 2/3 of Republicans believe that there was material fraud in the 2020 election. And there's. And that is based on no zero proof of having been induced of that.
- [11:57]
Nicole Wallace
Andrew, let me ask you about what Ken's reporting suggests the agents will be doing. They will be, quote, looking at social media for derogatory information and finding connections between subjects of the investigation who were the subjects of the investigation. And in terms of reverse engineering, I mean, this is something that judges have started to point out in a sort of separate but related question. They've examined the vindictive prosecutions of Kilmar, Abrego, Garcia. They specifically articulate this reverse engineering of describing someone as guilty and then using the Justice Department and top line specifically to manufacture a case. This does feel like some public facing evidence that it's at least fair to ask if this wild goose chase of looking at social media and 708 record checks a day and looking for connections that are at this point unknown and simply searching for, quote, derogatory information is that same kind of reverse engineering to support a conclusion they've already reached.
- [13:03]
Andrew Weissman
So that's just a great question. So the way the Department of Justice is supposed to work and the FBI, which is part of the Department of Justice is supposed to work is you have factual predication before you start investigating a person or a crime, meaning that you have some facts that you can look at to say, this is why we are opening the case, this is why we are looking at person X. What we don't have in this case is, is. And the reason, you know, you're hearing, I think the same thing for me and from Ken is there is no evidence, there's no factual predication to answer your question of, well, who are they looking at? All we hear from, you know, Ken's excellent reporting is the fact that it looks like a lot of First Amendment activity is going to be looked at by agents and analysts, but with no they're there. In other words, they, there's no factual predication. You don't. The FBI is not supposed to just look at anybody for any reason. There are a lot of internal rules about needing to have some cause for investigating somebody as opposed to doing the sort of Alice of Wonderland, which is essentially, you know, we're going to. It's like off with your head trial to follow. This is not one where you do, you know, an investigation and then say, oh, by the way, let me tell you later what the crime was. You need to be doing that in an opposite order, or else you're going to have the FBI looking at anybody at any time for any reason. And I can tell you, under normal Democratic and Republican administrations, and frankly, every FBI director has been a Republican, that does not happen. The FBI insists that you have factual predication of wrongdoing before you start investigating. And that's the thing that we do not have here. At least there has been no evidence to suggest that that is what they have beforehand. And so it does look exactly, as you said, like reverse engineering.
- [15:10]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, Ken, it isn't just reverse engineering and an incredibly invasive scoop of information if what you've reported is what they're going to be looking for. Connections that suggest a lot of metadata perhaps will be part of the analysis, but they're going to do it in overtime. Right. There's so much. There's such a vast universe. They have so little that they're going to work seven days a week around the clock. What is that in service of, and what does that deprive the FBI of in terms of places where we know we have reason to be worried?
- [15:46]
Ken Delaney
Well, it appears to be in service of a deadline. And why the urgency is unclear to me and to my sources, but Cash Patel wants this done soon, like in a couple of weeks, within the month of July. And so there's some urgency here that we don't fully understand. And just to expand on Andrew's point, because even if there is, it doesn't take a lot to open a criminal investigation. Doesn't take a lot of predication, as Andrew knows. And you know, this affidavit, this search warrant was challenged in court by Fulton county, and they were not successful in getting a judge to rule that it was entirely baseless because there's always some irregularities in an election. There were some things that raised some questions. Even though the judge didn't have all the evidence in front of her, she wasn't maybe aware that a lot of this had already been looked at and debunked. So even if they do have the minimum level of predication that the FBI requires. It's still noteworthy and remarkable and problematic that they are spending all these resources on something where it's not even, I mean, to what end exactly? Unless there's some massive conspiracy that we're not aware of that they have uncovered that happened in the Georgia 2020. It's so clearly in service of Donald Trump's political priorities. And we've never seen that before in American history with the FBI and the Justice Department. And it's happening on a weekly basis in this administration. And that in itself is hugely problematic. And again, to double down on the point, every hour they spend on this is an hour they're not spending on other priorities. And there's massive priority. The things that used to be priorities of the FBI that this FBI has just abandoned, like political corruption, for example, and certain categories of white collar crime. It's just not happening right now. It's not. They're not looking at those cases. And so instead they're spending their time on immigration enforcement and things like this.
- [17:39]
Nicole Wallace
Nicole? Well, it would just be a remarkable indictment of a whole bunch of Trump supporters, because this is the state whose secretary of State was Brad Raffensperger, who campaigned for Donald Trump, voted for Donald Trump and certified the election for Joe Biden. The governor, Brian Kemp, campaigned for Donald Trump, voted for Donald Trump and certified the election for Joe Biden. The Attorney General was Bill Barr, who went out looking for fraud ahead of the election, couldn't find any, and called these theories, quote, bullshit. The inspector General was someone who found wrongdoing on cases that aided Donald Trump sometimes and didn't at other times. John Durham was very Trump friendly and didn't find any reason why the, I mean, everyone that looked at this found the same thing, that there was nothing there that supported any of Trump's wild claims. What does it say? And Andrew, I know we'll talk about this over the next two hours, but what does it say that the FBI is now serving these far flung conspiracies?
- [18:39]
Andrew Weissman
Well, let me just give you a personal story, which is that I worked at the department for over 20 years and I still remember the first day that I went from being an attorney at Main justice as a federal prosecutor to working at FBI, and I worked for Director Mueller. And in spite of sort of the ethos of Main justice and that it's completely apolitical. You got to the FBI and it was a matter of pride that even though the director of the FBI was a presidential appointee at the FBI, he is the only person who is nominated by the president. That is not true for so many other agencies. And there was a real feeling in the FBI that, that we are different and that we just follow the facts. And it's, you know, like that old 1950s. It's like, you know, just the facts now. And that was just so palpable. I oversaw 400 lawyers there. You could feel that ethos. And what you're seeing now, I think is just a complete eradication of that sense of mission, being disentangled from the White House and being apolitical and just looking at the facts and letting the facts dictate what you're supposed to do.
- [20:18]
Nicole Wallace
Andrew sticks around. We'll be coming back to that theme a lot over the next hour and a half. Ken, thank you. It's awesome reporting. Keep us posted. We'll stay on top of it with you when we come back. From things like this, to redistricting, to trying to nationalize our elections, to trying to control the mail, a new look at all of the ways Trump and his allies are once again working to tip future elections in their favor. And then later, our exclusive conversation with Jack Smith, his very first interview since he brought the criminal cases against former president and current President Donald Trump. Jack Smith showed the country effectively just who Donald Trump is and the efforts he would go to to cling to power. He will be our guest in the next hour live, right here in studio. We'll take a short break. Deadline White House continues in just a moment. Don't go anywhere.
- [21:11]
UnitedHealth Group Announcer
A morning walk, some bird watching. It's another easy Sunday. UnitedHealth Group makes these ordinary days possible. With partners like the University of Tennessee Health Sciences helping communities manage their health. Closer to home, 54% of participants have lowered their blood pressure, meaning fewer heart attacks. And more Sundays at the park. This might feel like an ordinary day to UnitedHealth Group. It's the healthcare system working better for everyone. Learn more@unitedhealthgroup.com commitment.
- [21:40]
Range Rover Announcer
There are moments that define who you are and who you're becoming. And when those moments arrive, what you drive should rise to meet them. The Range Rover Sport commands attention from the very first glance. Every line, every detail engineered for impact. Inside, refinement takes over with sculpted 22 way heated seating with available massage and a 13.1 inch touch screen that puts everything within easy reach. But the Range Rover Sport isn't just about luxury. It's about uncompromised performance, too. Delivering a powerful, agile drive that feels as confident as it looks. And with nearly endless Ways to personalize. From interior finishes to wheels to unique colors and accessories, your Range Rover Sport becomes unmistakably yours. For those who expect more from every moment, there's a vehicle designed to meet it. The Range Rover Sport Exclusive offers available now. Explore further@range rover.com all of us strands
- [22:38]
Nicole Wallace
are in real danger. And whatever it is, it's closing in. It started with just a few lost hairs here and there, but now more and more of us are disappearing every day. But listen, we think we have a plan, a way to stop the shedding. Pantene abundant and strong. Go now. It's not too late. Pantene abundant and Strong. It's a three step system that reduces hair by 85%. Only the strongest will survive the shedding.
- [23:10]
Liz Oyer
I've won three elections, you know, so we done, but we did great in the second one. It was a rig deal, that's all. They're good at weaponization and cheating on elections. They turn the cameras off when I talk about it because they don't want good stuff for us, because they don't want us to win elections. And why, I don't know.
- [23:29]
Nicole Wallace
The dangerous and insidious lie about voter fraud persists as Donald Trump lays the groundwork to challenge the integrity of this year's election results as well. Today, the New York Times has some alarming and exhaustive new reporting on Donald Trump's campaign to tip the scales, rooted in the very same debunked conspiracy theories he's been peddling for years. That includes 19 official actions TRUMP has taken to question previous results, which began with granting clemency for nearly 1600 charged insurrectionists while brazenly installing election deniers in the federal government. At least 15 actions to fire, indict or revoke security clearances for people who have worked against the election denialism movement. 21 actions to tighten voting restrictions designed to tip the scales in his favor, and 14 actions to nationalize elections, many of which have failed in court. But as the New York Times reports, quote, while many of Trump's directives have been blocked or delayed by the courts, election experts say that their potential harm remains significant and that some of the efforts have already eroded faith in the process. Joining me at the table, former lead investigator for the January 6th select committee, Tim Hafey is here. Importantly, he is also Jack Smith's law partner at Hafey, Smith, Harbach and Windom. Also joining us, former Department of Justice pardon attorney, now the host of the podcast, is this really Legal? Liz Oyer is back with us. And Andrew's with us as well. Let me ask you about the antibodies in the system. I mean, they weren't enough to avoid a deadly insurrection on January 6, and Trump has stacked the government with election deniers. What are our odds facing all of the things he's doing to mess with our elections?
- [25:14]
Liz Oyer
You still need facts, Nicole, thankfully. Right. If you just keep repeating something, it doesn't make it true. So launching investigations and calling into question the integrity of the election continues to be rhetorical until. Unless and until there's some actual substance to it, which has not emerged all these years later. It's performative, it's distracting. It is meant to decrease confidence in elections. Hopefully, it's not effective because our elections are run really, really well with a lot of security and capable people in this country. My hope is that facts will still matter, and that core narrative remains and makes this a fruitless effort.
- [25:54]
Nicole Wallace
I don't have. I'm not as hawkish on facts. Trump ran the government in 2020, and as I was just talking to Andrew about, these were all of his supporters and backers, people who campaigned for him, people who voted for him, people who liked the things he was selling at a policy level, even though that's sort of wild to me. They were his people. They were running the federal government, and they were running more than half the swing states. He lost. What is. I guess my question for you is what do we have to push back with now that is stronger than it was then?
- [26:26]
Tim Hafey
We have the courts, and I think that Tim is right that facts will continue to matter because the courts are insisting on it. The courts are continuing to apply the facts in the law, and they are shooting down Donald Trump's efforts at every turn to interfere with the elections. He has tried to get voter roll data from, I believe, 10 different states. States and courts have told him every single time. No. There are two court decisions that recently said that Donald Trump cannot order the Postal Service not to deliver mail ballots to people in states who aren't complying with the demands for voter data. So the courts are really working overtime to protect our elections. And at the end of the day, the Constitution gives the President 0 role in elections. The Constitution says that states have the primary authority over elections and that the federal government, through Congress, can make certain laws about elections, but those can only be legislated by Congress. The president himself does not, by executive order or any other means of interference, have any power whatsoever with respect to elections.
- [27:27]
Nicole Wallace
What does it say, though? That he's. That he's sort of chipping around the edges everywhere where he may find an argument to seize some power away.
- [27:36]
Tim Hafey
Well, that's a very important point that you make, Nicole, because it's not about a winning legal strategy. It's about sowing doubt. It's because Donald Trump knows that there is a real risk that he will lose, his party will lose at the midterm elections. And he. He wants to be ready to sow doubt about whether the elections were fair. And he has every intent of doing that. He's laying the groundwork to do that right now. He's also still relitigating the election that happened in 2020, which is something that I think is becoming very exhausting for the American people. But it is having the effect of sowing doubt and chaos because it's coming from the most powerful elected official in the country.
- [28:11]
Nicole Wallace
Thomas Massie just tried to pierce through the insanity with sort of cold, hard reality. And I don't know. I don't know who was listening, you know, on earth, too. But he said, what's wrong with the elections? We control everything. We won the White House, we dominate the Supreme Court, we control the House, and we control the Senate. The elections are just fine, Right?
- [28:29]
Liz Oyer
And they're not seizing on election machines in Texas or in Wyoming or in states in which the president was victorious. They are targeting areas in which he lost, sometimes surprisingly, like Georgia. He's also, frankly, targeting majority black districts. Like, there's this narrative that it's Detroit and it's Atlanta and it's these cities controlled by black elected officials that somehow are riddled with election fraud. Again, Cole, without evidence, and to your earlier question, it still takes fact in America, all right, to have a legal consequence. There is still a rule of law. There are still judges, as Liz says, who are going to say no. It's a huge contrast here between elections and immigration.
- [29:10]
Nicole Wallace
Right?
- [29:10]
Liz Oyer
Immigration, it's an executive function. The federal government controls that. So he has a huge leeway to do things, really robust executive authority things. In the area of immigration, elections are not a federal function, they're a state function. And that limits his power and gives judges the authority to say, no, you can't seize these voting machines. You can't restrict mail in ballots. That's a decision for states.
- [29:33]
Nicole Wallace
Andrew, where do you come down on the power of the lie to mobilize Donald Trump's supporters, as he did for violence on January 6, and the power of the courts to demand evidence and facts?
- [29:45]
Andrew Weissman
So I'm going to give a less rosy assessment than Tim and Liz. I mean, I agree with their points, but I think it ignores something. So it is beyond question that countries like Russia and China, they're not the only two, but certainly they are two countries that interfere with in elections both here in the United States and in other so called Western democracies that that has happened in the past and it is going to continue to happen. We have been lucky to have career people at the Department of Justice, at dhs, in the CIA and in other agencies to thwart those activities. Does anyone think that this administration is going to thwart foreign countries interfering in our elections if they are in favor of Donald Trump? So Russia, which was in favor of Donald Trump in prior elections and is still going to be. Do you think this administration is going to do that? And so that's something that's happening before you get to court, which is the government taking actions to make sure that our elections are free and fair and don't have election interference. And that's something that I think is a real threat to democracy and is another lever to the in addition to the ones that the New York Times has outlined in their terrific article about undermining the upcoming election in the midterms, but also future elections.
- [31:29]
Harry Dunn
Yeah.
- [31:29]
Nicole Wallace
And show me without telling me that you're into that, put Bill Pulte in the job. So we'll stand off of that part of the story as well. Andrew Weissman, thank you so much for being here with us, especially today. Tim and Liz, stick around. Ahead of our interview with Jack Smith. In just a few moments, we'll take a closer look at how some of the strongest evidence in his January 6th case against Donald Trump came from people closest to Donald Trump. Quick break. We'll be right back.
- [32:05]
UnitedHealth Group Announcer
A morning walk, some bird watching. It's another easy Sunday. UnitedHealth Group makes these ordinary days possible, with partners like the University of Tennessee Health Sciences helping communities manage their health. Closer to home, 54% of participants have lowered their blood pressure, meaning fewer heart attacks and more Sundays at the park. This might feel like an ordinary day. To UnitedHealth Group, it's the healthcare system working better for everyone. Learn more@unitedhealthgroup.com commitment there are moments that
- [32:35]
Range Rover Announcer
define who you are and who you're becoming. And when those moments arrive, what you drive should rise to meet them. The Range Rover Sport commands attention from the very first glance. Every line, every detail engineered for impact. Inside, refinement takes over with sculpted 22 way heated seating with available massage and a 13.1 inch touchscreen that puts everything within easy reach. But the Range Rover Sport isn't just about luxury. It's about uncompromised performance, too. Delivering a powerful, agile drive that feels as confident as it looks. And with nearly endless ways to personalize, from interior finishes to wheels to unique colors and accessories, your Range Rover Sport becomes unmistakably yours. For those who expect more from every moment, there's a vehicle designed to meet it. The Range Rover Sport. Exclusive offers available now. Explore further@range rover.com yo, it's Jay Uso
- [33:32]
Jimmy Uso
from WWE and I'm Jimmy Uso. Chumba Casino and WWE are hyped for the biggest event of the summer SummerSlam. I know I can't wait. There's nothing better to do while we're waiting than playing Chumba Casino. Sign up today and you could win a VIP experience with Chumba Casino and with WWE for SummerSlam. So what are you waiting for? Play Chumbo Casino and enter for your chance to win.
- [33:54]
Andrew Weissman
Let's Jumble Only available in permitted states.
- [33:57]
Ken Delaney
No purchase necessary.
- [33:57]
Liz Oyer
See Terms and conditions for details. BMW Group would be prohibited by law. 21/ sponsored by Chumba Casino
- [34:04]
UnitedHealth Group Announcer
well,
- [34:07]
Harry Dunn
with
- [34:07]
Ken Delaney
respect to presenting the case that we charged, one of the central challenges was trying to present that in a concise way because we did have so many, many witnesses. Some of the most powerful witnesses were witnesses who, in fact, were fellow Republicans who had voted for Donald Trump, who had campaigned for him and who wanted him to win the election. These included state officials, people who worked on his campaign, and advisors.
- [34:36]
Nicole Wallace
That was former special counsel Jack Smith earlier this year, on the strength of his case. A lot of that strength, as he said there, was based on the witnesses he developed that were deep inside Donald Trump's inner circle and political coalition. One of those closest to the events in the lead up to January 6th, and faithfully on the day itself, was Vice President Mike Pence. Here's Congressman Pete Aguilar on what Donald Trump did to his own vp.
- [35:01]
Ken Delaney
Let's take a look at the effect of Donald Trump's words and actions. I want to warn our audience that the video contains explicit content.
- [35:13]
Liz Oyer
Mike Pence is going to have to come through for us, and if he doesn't, that will be a sad day for our country. And Mike Pence, I hope you're going to stand up for the good of our Constitution and for the good of our country. And if you're not, I'm going to be very disappointed in you. I will tell you right now, I'm telling you what I'm hearing. The pits I hear in the Pits just caved.
- [35:38]
Jimmy Uso
No.
- [35:39]
Liz Oyer
Is that true? I'm hearing reports the pinch Pence caved. I'm telling you, if Pence cave, we're gonna drag through the streets. You politicians are gonna get drugged through the streets.
- [35:51]
UnitedHealth Group Announcer
Yeah.
- [35:51]
Ken Delaney
I guess the hope is that there's such a show of force here that
- [35:54]
Liz Oyer
Pence will decide to do the right thing.
- [35:58]
Ken Delaney
According to Trump.
- [36:02]
Harry Dunn
Bring out pence, bring out pets, bring out purse.
- [36:17]
Nicole Wallace
Those things really happen. And those people, in their own words, describing the actions they were willing to take because of the lies told to them by the President of the United States, and they're no less horrifying today than they were five years ago. They led to the Vice President of the United States escaping the rioters by running down the stairs. Sent running his family by. Donald Trump avoided them by a matter of minutes. They were closing in on that office space. Joining our coverage, former Capitol Hill police officer, our good friend Harry Dunn. Part of me wants to not feel so horrified every time I see it. Part of me thinks it's good that it still horrifies me. How are you doing?
- [36:58]
Harry Dunn
I'm well. It shouldn't be normal. It should never be normal. And you know what? The video that they just showed, every single one of those people in that video is walking free. Not with a strike on their record. It's just slate wiped clean. Hey, that was just a peaceful day. As they have talked about it so much, we can't get to the point where we normalize this. And that's what Donald Trump is continually trying to do. He's been trying to do it ever since day one of his presidency, from the pardons to most recently the payments to the slush fund to pay the people. He wants to normalize it and erase it and whitewash the day, rewrite it for what happened in his eyes is he thinks that the election was stolen from him and the people there were peaceful protesters.
- [37:43]
Nicole Wallace
I reread a lot of things that you and I have talked about together over the years, and the Congressional committee developed evidence to this end, too. But Jack Smith developed evidence that was in his report, that Donald Trump knew that what he was asking Pence to do was both unconstitutional and illegal. I think. I think the Lawyer's name is Dr. Eastman, is that right?
- [38:04]
Liz Oyer
Yes.
- [38:04]
Nicole Wallace
I'm not sure where the doctor comes from, but Mr. Eastman. Dr. Eastman concedes in this very small meeting that it is a violation of law and likely a violation of the Constitution. All of this knowledge that what they were asking Mike Pence and others to do was illegal. And the ones that walk free are the insurrectionists. How does that land with you and people who protected the Capitol that day?
- [38:29]
Harry Dunn
Well, that's what this Trump 2.0, and that's the difference between Trump 1.0 and 2.0. He's installed people around him that are going to do whatever he says to do, whether it's illegal, whether it's wrong, ethically or morally, it doesn't matter. He just wants people that are going to do whatever he wants them to do, and then he'll forgive them for it. Whether it's say, hey, he'll give them ascending role in the administration or give them a preemptive pardon. I just can't wait to see. I said I can't wait to. I don't want to see all the pardons that are going to come out his last day in office because I believe that he knows that everybody in that administration is complicit, has been committing crimes over and over and over again, and they did it in his name. And as long we've seen it, if you do anything in Donald Trump's name in his honor, he's going to reward you for doing that.
- [39:18]
Nicole Wallace
And the opposite is also true. He seems most angry at the people that are inside his coalition who aren't loyal. You know, the threats against Raffensperger on the call, the things he said, the evidence you developed about Mike Pence, one of the conversations you and I have had for years is what was Jack Smith able to access that the committee wasn't, that the investigation you led wasn't one of them, I think you informed us was Mike Pence and more about his experience. What do you make of the fact that Mike Pence isn't there because he had this falling out with Trump over doing something that Trump was informed of doing the right thing was illegal and unconstitutional. And now his replacement is the guy that says Watergate would be a 12 hour story.
- [40:00]
Liz Oyer
Yeah, yeah. The currency now is loyalty, not competence.
- [40:04]
Nicole Wallace
Right?
- [40:04]
Liz Oyer
All the guardrails and the good people and the truth tellers that said to the President's face directly again and again, sir, you lost the election. There's no evidence of systemic voter fraud. We're not rehired, Nicole. Not only were they not rehired, but the new litmus test is agreeing with the false narrative that the election was stolen. If you want to be in the Department of Justice, if you want to be a federal judge, agreeing with these baseless accusations. And it was a really wide circle. Like, we focus a lot on The President, as we should. But what Jack charged and what we articulated was a conspiracy. Okay, this was an intentional effort by lots of people, the head of the conspiracy being President Trump, but lots of people, to intentionally disrupt the joint session and prevent the transfer of power, mindful that that was unlawful.
- [40:53]
Nicole Wallace
Right.
- [40:53]
Liz Oyer
That's what the essence of a conspiracy is, an agreement to do something that you know is unlawful. So all of the evidence that we developed, all of the evidence that Jack would have presented came from people inside the conspiracy. That's what makes it such a compelling story. This is not political opponents of the president telling the story. This is people like Mike Pence. Mike Pence refused to be a part of the conspiracy. People like Mark Meadows, people like Bill Barr, people that were right there next to him, like Ivanka, like his own daughter that came forward and said, we told him directly that he had lost the election. That's what, again, we can't lose sight of. To Harry's point, we should never normalize this. This was a conspiracy, and there's really strong evidence of that. Didn't see a criminal jury, but it's out there for people continually to reckon
- [41:36]
Nicole Wallace
with, and it's in our politics now for the foreseeable future because there were no consequences. It seems like he's doing it all again, scaling it to the midterms.
- [41:47]
Jimmy Uso
Yes.
- [41:47]
Liz Oyer
Look, as a parent, if my kid does something that is against the rules and there's no consequence, it's more likely that she'll do it again. Right. It's the same concept without accountability, then it's more likely to recur, particularly when you explicitly forgive it with these presidential pardons. Not only those 1600 people, but lots of other people watching Nicole are more likely to do similar things in the future because they feel like they have this get out of jail free card. And that's really dangerous, literally.
- [42:17]
Harry Dunn
But that's what people are upset about. You know, I've had the opportunity, been campaigning and running for office. People are upset that there has been no accountability, and they're angry that it didn't happen. Whether people blame Merrick Garland or the American. I blame the American people for reelecting him because we had the final say in November to elect him or not elect him, and we failed the assignment as Americans. So we're so angry. But you don't get over it. We can't normalize it and we can't remember. Can't fail to remember how we got to this point. And that's by lack of accountability.
- [42:50]
Nicole Wallace
All right, we'll keep Talking about that Jack Smith is in the building. He'll be joining us in a couple minutes. After the break, we'll look back at what Harry's talking about as well as some of the other overwhelming evidence that he developed in his January 6 case, including the first hand accounts of violence carried out by against officers that day by Trump supporters.
- [43:18]
Ken Delaney
I was grabbed, beaten, tased, all while being called a traitor to my country. I was at risk of being stripped of and killed with my own firearm. As I heard chants of killing with his own gun, I could still hear those words in my head.
- [43:35]
Harry Dunn
Today, I too was being crushed by the riders. I could feel myself losing oxygen and recall thinking to myself, this is how I'm going to die. Defending this entrance, I told them to just leave the Capitol. And in response they yelled, no, man, this is our House. President Trump invited us here. We're here to stop the steal. Joe Biden is not the president. Nobody voted for Joe Biden. I'm a law enforcement officer and I do my best to keep politics out of my job. But in this circumstance, I responded, well, I voted for Joe Biden. Does my vote not count? Am I nobody? That prompted a torrent of racial epithets. One woman in a pink MAGA shirt yelled, you hear that, guys? This voted for Joe Biden. No one had ever, ever called me a while wearing the uniform of a Capitol Police office.
- [44:45]
Nicole Wallace
Kerry, that was exactly five years ago this month. But today, the current position that Todd lynch has today is in defiance of a judge. He will not put in writing that a slush fund for the kinds of people who said that to you and did the things to Officers Canal and Fanone that they could be rewarded financially. The current position of DOJ is basically, take my word and testimony, but I will not put in writing that a slush fund to pay that.
- [45:12]
Harry Dunn
Well, I hope that the Senate remembers that when it comes to his confirmation hearings, he can't be trusted. Anything that he says in one ear, out the other, because his job, not the job, he's supposed to be the attorney for the United States of America, not Donald Trump's lawyer. And that's what he can't separate the two. And I believe that that's the type of attorney general he'll be. And with regard to that slush fund, it's insane. But I often called it a retainer, a retainer payment for his mob. On January 20, when Trump was inaugurated and he took office, he forgave them with the pardon and now he's rewarding them and incentivizing them to say, hey, go ahead, commit violence or these acts in my name, and not only will you be forgiven, you'll be rewarded for it.
- [46:02]
Nicole Wallace
We've talked about how they've gone on to commit other crimes, including sex crimes against children.
- [46:07]
Tim Hafey
Yeah, it's really stunning what happens when you grant pardons to a bunch of people who have never been vetted. And all we know about them is that they stormed the Capitol on this dark day in our history. It's really chilling to juxtapose the testimony of these brave officers like Harry with what has happened in terms of a hero's welcome for those individuals in this administration. One of those people, a man named Jared Wise, who is on video watching a police officer be beaten, yelling, kill him. Kill him. He got a job at the Justice Department. Todd Blanche, the deputy Attorney general, now trying to become the attorney general, hired one of these January 6th rioters who was egging on the protesters who were beating a police officer, violently hired him to work inside the Justice Department, which I think just tells you everything you need to know about the values of this administration.
- [47:01]
Nicole Wallace
Liz, you and. You and Jack are all veterans of the Justice Department, of what it was, of what it was until 18 months ago. How does it ever become what it. I don't even know that it could be what it used to be, but how does it ever become an instrument for justice? With people like that working inside, it doesn't.
- [47:20]
Liz Oyer
With people like that working inside, it'll take new people who have the right values for it to be restored. And the important thing to remember here, Nicole, is that I worked for Republican attorneys general, Democratic attorneys general, and it just didn't matter. Right. This. This was not politicized work whatsoever. And while, yeah, there were enforcement priorities that might shift slightly over elections, the core values of the department, its independence, its fidelity to fact and law, did not change. And that's the way it should be. And I think that's the way we should go back to. We benefited because a lot of good people on both Republican and Democratic administrations have observed these norms. But these norms are sort of principles that aren't codified and are not enforceable. So there may be some effort to codify some of that, to make it harder for a rogue executive.
- [48:06]
Nicole Wallace
But didn't the norms get us here where Trump got away with this and the people who carried out violence against Harry got pardons and now they're going
- [48:12]
Liz Oyer
to get paid, and the norms aren't strong enough? Right. The norms might need to be shored up or they might need to be codified. They might need to be new provisions that allow lawyers to go to court and stop things or Congress to step up and reassert its primacy. That's what's so outrageous about the weaponization fund. It is a blatant separation of powers issue. Congress appropriates funds, the executive does not. And for Congress to sit back and say, okay, sure, go ahead, again and again and again, shockingly willing to sort of admit their own impotence, we need to again return to our system that has guardrails that prevent a rogue actor in any part of our government to have such an outsized impact.
- [48:55]
Nicole Wallace
Impotence. Watch out for your social media feed today. They don't like that one. Harry Dunn, thank you for being here. Thank you for helping us keep our eye on the ball.
- [49:05]
Harry Dunn
Absolutely.
- [49:05]
Nicole Wallace
Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you for being here. Tim's book, We Are the Answer how to Save Our Democracy will tell you even more about the answer he just gave me about what's on the other side. Up next for us, Jack Smith is here for the very first time. Very first time in any new studio, for that matter. You don't want to miss that. Don't go anywhere.
- [49:26]
Jimmy Uso
Yo, it's Jey USO from wwe and I'm Jimmy uso. Chumba Casino and WWE are hyped for the biggest event of the summer, SummerSlam. I know I can't wait. There's nothing better to do while we're waiting than playing Chumba Casino. Sign up today and you can win a VIP experience with Chumba Casino and with WWE for SummerSlam. So what are you waiting for? Play Chumbo Casino and enter for your chance to win. Let's Jumbo Geeks.
- [49:51]
Ken Delaney
No purchase necessary. VGW Group Void.
- [49:53]
Liz Oyer
We're prohibited by law. CTNC's 21+ sponsored by Chumba Casino.