Jacob Soboroff (13:26)

Maybe.

Rachel Maddow (13:27)

Maybe there's a good shot at getting to 1 trillion. Maybe. Even though Trump keeps saying all those austerity cuts won't affect anything the American people care about at all, nobody's going to feel these cuts. House Republicans decided to roll out their roadmap of where they intend to make all of these cuts. And turns out mostly they're just planning on cutting your health care.

Andrew Weissman (13:49)

Wait a minute.

Rachel Maddow (13:50)

He never said he was going to cut our health care. He didn't run on that. He said it was all just going to be wasted, that Elon Musk would find the waste. I mean, as transitions go, this has been, this has been a very bad presidential transition, and we should describe it as such. I mean, it has been incoherent. Right. This whole January 6th pardon controversy. The Vice President elect, J.D. vance, says nobody's getting a pardon if they were violent on January 6th. Trump asked the same question, says, yeah, maybe, maybe they will. Oh, but he also says at the same event that Maybe Hezbollah did January 6th. So make of that what you will. It's been incoherent. It's been incompetent on policy. Right. Grocery prices are hard. It's been incompetent on politics. Making Republicans sign on to these horrific nominees and then pulling the nominees anyway. Right. Doing that kind of political damage to the people. You need to get everything done. It's even been incompetent just on process. I mean, their confirmation hearings are finally starting tomorrow, but we're only having one instead of the three they scheduled because they had to last minute cancel. The other two they scheduled because they just couldn't get it together to do them. They can't even manage to start hearings for their own nominees when their own party controls the Senate. Oh, good. Thank goodness they're picking up the nuclear codes next week. They seem so together now. Starting next week, I'm going to be here five days a week again. We are going to do special coverage on Monday week from today for the inauguration. I really hope you're going to be here with us for that. That's going to be a very big deal. But from there on out, for the first hundred days of this new administration, which starts on Monday and goes right through the end of April, I am going to be here on MSNBC at 9pm Eastern, five night a week, Monday through Friday. And that is happening for a couple of reasons. One comes from the mantra that we all learned in the first Trump term, which is watch what they do, not what they say. If there was any question as to whether or not the second Trump term was going to also require us to say that mantra every single day, this shambolic, terrible Trump transition has laid to rest any of those doubts. Right? We're all really conscious here at MSNBC that whatever craziness is coming from the podium, whatever transgressive provocations are emanating from Trump and anybody else in his administration who he allows near a microphone, we are well aware if we didn't remember it from the first term, now deep into the absolutely botched nature of this chaotic, frenetic, pointless, own goal ridden transition. We are well aware that we need to be watching what they do and not what they say. We are well aware that the most important stories are going to be told through fieldwork and Frontline reporting about the consequences of government action, not just the flapping of lips in Washington. And we are very lucky because our beloved colleague Alex Wagner, who is a fantastic field reporter, she has been itching to get out into the world to do more Frontline reporting about the consequences of this new Trump administration's actions, getting out and doing Frontline reporting both around the country and overseas. So for the first hundred days of this new administration for MSNBC primetime, Alex is going to be prioritizing that field reporting. And that means that I will be here at the desk instead of just Mondays. I will be here every weeknight starting on Inauguration Day. And this is not a permanent thing. We're going to go back to our previous schedule as of April 30, when the 100 days is over, that'll be me again just doing Mondays and Alex doing the rest of the week. But for these first hundred days, you and I, we are going to spend a lot of time together. And I apologize in advance that I'm going to speak bluntly and I apologize in advance that I am still likely to wear the exact same thing every single night. Don't get your hopes up on that front. At least you'll get to see this blazer wear out faster than it was before. But even with the two confirmation hearings that have been canceled for tomorrow, the VA and Department of Interior confirmation hearings have been canceled tomorrow because Trump's transition couldn't get its act together to have even their first nominees ready in time for their first hearing. Even with those two cancellations, even this last week of the transition, before we even get to the inauguration, you should expect that tomorrow is going to be a huge day. For one, we're expecting the Justice Department to release half of its special counsel report, the half that details the criminal evidence against Trump which led to his federal indictment for inciting January 6 for trying to overthrow the government. We're going to be talking with Andrew Weissen about the release of that report live here in just a few minutes. Looking at what to expect from that report, looking at some intriguing requests made by at least one state attorney general who's asking to obtain the whole report, the whole case file, for the purposes of possible state charges, which is super interesting. We're going to have more on that in a moment, but we are expecting that report sometime after midnight tonight or sometime during the day tomorrow. Also tomorrow, again, we've got two confirmation hearings that were scheduled tomorrow that have been canceled. But still, the most radical one is apparently still on. Now, while NBC News has not independently verified this reporting, the Washington Post reported when the Pete Hegseth nomination was first announced that the Trump transition had apparently not even been told to try to start vetting Pete Hegseth, to not even start looking into his background until after Trump had already offered him the job of defense secretary. According to the Washington Post's reporting, Trump offered him the job and then only then told his transition folks that they should start looking into this Pete Hegseth guy. Well, when you're running your transition like that, when you're putting that kind of deliberation and care and forethought into making a big important decision for the country like that, yeah, I bet you are. Blindsided by the police report that then surfaces detailing the rape allegation against him and the details of the hush money settlement he paid to the woman who made that allegation. The Trump transition in all its competence, was reportedly equally bewildered to learn of all the workplace allegations against Hegseth, allegations of him drinking on the job and the history of him being forced out of the not one, but two pro Iraq war advocacy groups he ran that were both run into the ground financially under his leadership. Had no idea. Yeah, it turns out you have no idea if you never ask, if you never Google, if you never do any sort of vetting. As the conservative pro Trump Wall Street Journal editorial page notes just tonight, Pete Hegseth, quote, lacks the experience typically required. He has never run an organization of any size, never mind a bureaucracy with as many snares as the Pentagon Wall Street Journal editorial board tonight says, quote, this is too fraught a moment in global affairs for senators not to ask the hard questions. That's the view from the right. The FBI background report on Hegseth has not been given to members of the Armed Services Committee. NBC News reports tonight that whatever background check the FBI did do, they apparently did not speak with any of Hegseth's ex wives or the woman who accused him of sexual assault. Whatever FBI background check was done on Hegseth, it was reportedly discussed with the chairman and ranking member of the committee, but not given to them and not shown to any of the other senators who were supposed to be assessing him for this job. One of those senators is Illinois senator and combat veteran Senator Tammy Duckworth, she has been red hot about this nomination, saying, quote, I need to see his FBI background check, we need to see his financial disclosures, we need to know about any other potential lawsuits he might be facing, any other allegations he might be facing. She says, quote, is he someone who might be. Excuse me, is he someone that is black mailable? I don't know, but I should be able to know if I'm going to have to vote for him for Secretary of Defense. Senator Duckworth continues, quote, I just want to know if he can do the job. Maybe he has hidden talents that he's not telling people about. Maybe he's led an organization larger than a 40 man platoon, which I believe is the largest unit he's ever been in charge of. Maybe he has successfully led an organization with a budget of around $800 billion. I don't know. From what I've seen, he's led two partisan political groups, veterans organizations, both of which said that he mismanaged their finances. But maybe he's run a Boeing or a Northrop Grumman. And I just don't know about it because from what I can tell, the manager of your local Applebee's has more experience managing a bigger budget and more personnel than Pete Hegseth. And I don't want that person in charge of the dod. Like I said, she has been red hot on this nomination. The New York Times did a profile this weekend of incoming White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. And in the course of interviewing her for that profile, they asked Susie Wiles what exactly makes Pete Hegseth qualified for this job? Led to this rather astonishing paragraph in their recent profile of her. Quote, hegseth, a military veteran who has been accused by a woman of sexual assault, which he denied, has no experience leading an agency of nearly 3 million people. Quote, that's what staff is for. Ms. Wiles said briskly, we don't need a Defense Secretary who can run the Defense Department. Quote, that's what staff is for. The little people, they can do it. I'm not sure which is a better, like, take on things from the Trump transition. Right. That line from Trump's incoming White House Chief of staff, oh, he may not be able to do it, but the little people, the staff, whoever they are, they'll run that thing. Doesn't matter that he can't do it. I don't know what's better. That line from Susie Wiles, White House Chief of staff under Trump coming in, or Hegseth himself saying that if he does get confirmed to this job. He promises he will stop with all the drinking if he doesn't get confirmed. Well, hey, but if he does get confirmed, he's promising he'll wrap up this whole drinking thing and so we no longer will have to worry about all the dozens of claims from his previous jobs of him drinking on the job. He says he'll quit. I'm sure he will. I'm not sure which is a better case to the American people for this is the right guy for defense secretary, but they're trying them both. Keep in mind, though, just keep it in perspective. Keep in mind that this nomination, the Hegseth nomination, represents the pinnacle of performance thus far from the Trump transition. This is their best effort. This is the only one of their nominees for whom they've actually been able to get it together enough to hold a hearing. This is the, you know, staff can run it if he can't, and he'll stop drinking if he gets the job. This represents the best that they can do. And this is the level of performance they are demonstrating for the American people even before they have responsibility for governing. So yes, we will watch what they do and not just what they say from now on and for the first hundred days and for the duration. But it is worth saying and being real about the fact that what they are saying thus far and what they are doing thus far have both been utterly shambolic and none of us should be afraid to say so. And none of us here are. Stay with us.

Jacob Soboroff (26:29)

This podcast is supported by Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Planned Parenthood Federation of America exists so all people can get access to the sexual and reproductive care and education they need. Planned Parenthood organizations advocate for health equity and policies that allow people the freedom to control their own bodies, lives and futures. More than 2 million patients a year rely on Planned Parenthood Health center services like STI testing and treatment, birth control, gender affirming care, abortion, cancer screenings and more. Reproductive health care and rights are under attack from public officials who are out of step with the will of the vast majority of Americans. The constitutional right to abortion has been stolen, and politicians in 47 states have introduced bills that would block people from getting the sexual and reproductive care they need. Planned Parenthood knows that equitable access to health care, including safe, legal abortion, is a human right. Right now, Planned Parenthood needs your help to protect access to health care. Donate today by visiting plannedparenthood.org protect for.

Ted Danson (27:32)

More than 90 years, when crises strike, from war and violence to floods and famine, the International Rescue Committee has been there helping displaced families survive, recover and rebuild. The IRC responds within 72 hours of an emergency and stays as long as needed, providing humanitarian aid to millions of families. Right now in crisis stricken places like Gaza, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Ukraine, severe winter weather is putting displaced families at even greater risk. Many makeshift camps can't withstand the extreme cold. Some people live without reliable electricity, while others can't afford the fuel to heat their homes. Pregnant women, children, the elderly and people with disabilities are especially vulnerable. Your tax deductible donations can help the IRC provide critical emergency food, clean water, shelter, fuel, medicine, blankets, winter gear and cash assistance. You can give confidently because the IRC is consistently awarded top marks by charity watchdog groups for their efficient use of donor contributions. Donate today by visiting rescue.orgrebuild that's rescue.orgrebuild the last thing you want to hear when you need your auto insurance most is a robot with countless irrelevant menu options. Which is why with USAA auto insurance, you'll get great service that is easy and reliable, all at the touch of a button. Get a quote today. Restrictions apply. USAA.

Rachel Maddow (28:50)

When the National Weather Service wants to grab your attention, when they want to say you really need to take this weather thing seriously, one of the things they can do is issue something that is called a particularly dangerous situation warning. Particularly dangerous situation like this one from November, a particularly dangerous situation warning of extreme fire conditions in Southern California. They issued that warning one day before fire broke out in Ventura county that burned more than 20,000 acres. There was another particularly dangerous situation warning that they issued December 9th that immediately preceded another fire in Malibu that burned more than 4,000 acres. Then a week ago, the National Weather Service issued another particularly dangerous situation alert for extreme fire conditions. And it was right after that warning when the true calamity began. The Palisades and Eaton fires burning more than 37,000 acres this week, destroying more than 12,000 structures. A collective death toll of 24 so far, and that is expected to rise. Those fires in Los Angeles, of course, are still burning. And while firefighters have made a lot of progress in the last couple of days, there's now a new forecast which I'm sorry to tell you has necessitated a new one of those high end alerts. A new particularly dangerous situation alert for conditions that are starting tomorrow before dawn, Tuesday morning, overnight, Tuesday night until noon on Wednesday. Huge chunks of Ventura in Los Angeles are expecting wind gusts up to 70 miles an hour. And that is terrible news for these fires because that makes it harder for firefighters to fight the fires that are existing. It makes it increasingly likely that they'll spread or even that new ones will start. And while LA is bracing for what's coming in the next two days, tens of thousands of people are still anxiously waiting to see how much damage has already been done. Evacuation zones affecting hundreds of thousands of people. They're still off limits to their residents. National Guard is turning people away at checkpoints. People can't go check on their homes themselves for the most part. Louisiana county has started releasing maps of preliminary damage assessments for both of the two major fires. These maps are really interesting. You can access them online. They show neighborhoods where authorities have been able to survey the damage so far. And each one of those little icons represents a structure. You can zoom in and click on an individual property to see how well or how poorly that property has fared. They have individual pictures of the sites that you can click on. It's harrowing. But because authorities have only just started to have the manpower free to do these damage surveys, this is just preliminary data. They can't tell you everything. For a lot of Los Angeles, the best information people are able to get about the status of their own neighborhoods, their own homes, is coming from reporters. Reporters who are able to be on the ground at the front lines, able to get in to see what they can and to let the public know what they can. Joining us now from near the Palisades fire is our own NBC correspondent, Jacob Sober Raf, who has been doing just tremendous work covering the story. Jacob, thanks for being with us tonight.

Karen Bass (32:12)

Rachel, thank you so much for having me.

Rachel Maddow (32:15)

I know you've spoken to a lot of residents from evacuation zones in the past few days. Can you give us a sense of what proportion of people, how many of the people you're talking to actually know the status of their homes right now?

Karen Bass (32:29)

Oh, I think. I mean, I think that the assumption for most people, Rachel, is that their homes are gone. You know, I grew up here in Pacific Palisades. This was a Ralph supermarket. This was one of the two supermarkets that me and my mom and my family used to go to, Pacific Palisades and Altadena for that matter. But really, here in the Palisades, this community has effectively been wiped off the map of Los Angeles. This is a city that is a patchwork of communities, and the Palisades is one of them. And it has. Has essentially ceased to exist. We're talking about 5,400 structures, largely homes, that are gone. And it is an incredibly eerie feeling to be here tonight. The power is still out in the Palisades. If these TV lights weren't here, it would be pitch black. And you know, first among the concerns are what's going to happen over the course of the next day or so with these winds picking up More than anything, there is an incredibly enormous recovery effort that has to take place and has to begin right now. And I talked to Governor Newsom yesterday. He said it's going to take nine to 12 months alone just to clear the debris, the environmental remediation, before they can even start building here. He said it was the worst natural disaster in the history of the country based on cost alone.

Rachel Maddow (33:41)

Wow. Jacob. I mean, to that point, Los Angeles, we talk about it as LA as if it's one thing. It's 88 independently incorporated cities that, that is, you know, interesting in terms of the way things run at the best of times, but in the worst of times, it raises interesting questions about how the cities and the county and the state and the federal government are all interacting both to protect people, but also to recover and respond. Who is really leading right now, if you can tell that from your reporting?

Karen Bass (34:12)

Yeah, it's a great question. The city alone is over 400 square miles and there are 4 million residents within it. But LA county is the most populous county by population in the nation with more than 12 million people. It's run by a Board of Supervisors. And the city of course, is run by LA Mayor Karen Bass, who is getting an incredible amount of criticism here. You know, she's come back from this international trip and briefed people almost on a daily basis, but you haven't seen her much out and about at least. We requested to talk to her tonight for you on the Rachel Maddows show and they didn't get back to us. I think people want to hear from, from the mayor of L. A, they want to hear from the governor who has been out on the streets. But there are many questions yet to be answered. And obviously the federal government is going to play an enormous role here too. President Biden has committed this 100% disaster recovery for six months. But you were just talking about in the last block of the show that the Trump administration is starting in a matter of days. And President Trump has been calling the response by both Mayor Bass and Governor Newsom criticizing it, you know, at every turn. What is he going to do? Is he going to step up and is he going to provide additional aid? This is something on the scale of which I think we haven't really seen before. And it is going to require sort of a multi jurisdictional during the fire itself. There were fire agencies and first responders all throughout California, actually from Canada and Mexico as well. It's the type of recovery mission that we're going to need here in LA too. And I don't really think that the contours of that are particularly well defined yet. And granted we're only six days into this. Tomorrow will be the one week anniversary, if that's the right word, if this all starting. But this is going to be a project. Governor Newsom calls it a Marshall Plan for Los Angeles. We don't even know what that looks like yet.

Rachel Maddow (35:51)

And Jacob, I mean, in terms of the scale of this, it is hard to understand the scale of the destruction. That's part of why I showed that map where you can click on individual properties, individual homes, and see photos that have been taken from these site surveys. Just trying to get a sense of the overall scale of it and the individual granular tragedy that this represents for each home, for each family that's affected. Is it your sensei mean Katrina was so big that the federal government came in and took over the response? Is it your sense that this is of that kind of scale, that you would expect the federal government, if it was so inclined to come in and say, we're helming this, we're taking over. This is a national, this is a disaster of national scale.

Karen Bass (36:34)

You know, I'm a reporter, not an urban planner, but I don't see how you do this on a piecemeal basis. There are 1600 National Guard troops from California here on the ground. But effectively you have to move out everyone in Pacific Palisades, the toxic fumes and the toxic chemicals that are permeating in this community. You have essentially thousands of people who are made instantly homeless in the unhoused capital of America on top of an already strained system. What are you going to do with all of these people? Where are they going to go? And then how are you going to, you know, are you going to go block by block and have contractors do this on an individualized basis? I don't see how that happens and happens in a timely manner. They have got to clear these communities out, remediate them, make sure they're environmentally safe to go back in, make sure that the building materials are all up to par, that a fire like this doesn't happen again and bring back community. The Palisades alone has 23,000 people. How do you do this without the federal government? And I don't think that we know again the answer to that question tonight.

Rachel Maddow (37:34)

Rachel, NBC's own Jacob Soboroff in his hometown of Pacific Palisades. Jacob, I know this has been a 24:7 around the clock and very emotional beat for you. Thanks for being here with us tonight, my friend. I really appreciate it.

Karen Bass (37:49)

Thank you, Rachel. I really appreciate it.

Rachel Maddow (37:51)

All right, much more news ahead. Stay with us.

Woody Harrelson (37:57)

Hey, friends, Ted Danson here and I want to let you know about my new podcast. It's called where everybody knows your name with me, Ted Danson and Woody Harrelson. Sometimes doing this podcast is a chance for me and my good bud Woody to reconnect after cheers wrapped 30 years ago. Plus, we're introducing each other to the friends we've met since, like Jane Fonda, Conan O'Brien, Eric Andre, Mary Steenburgen, my wife, and Flea from the Red Hot Chili Peppers. And trust me, it's always a great hang when Woody's there. So why wait? Listen to where everybody knows your name wherever you get your podcasts.

Ted Danson (38:37)

Auto insurance can all seem the same until it comes time to use it. So don't get stuck paying more for less coverage. Switch to USA auto insurance and you could start saving money and in no time get a quote Today, restrictions apply.

Rachel Maddow (38:52)

Did you know that parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult.

Jacob Soboroff (38:57)

Life skill to teach?

Rachel Maddow (38:58)

Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families. With greenlight, you can set up chores, automate allowance and keep an eye on your kids spending with real time notifications. Kids learn to earn, save and spend wisely. And parents can rest easy knowing their kids are learning about money with guardrails in place. Sign up for Greenlight today@greenlight.com podcast. It has been two years and 56 days since special counsel Jack Smith launched his investigation into Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election and try to stay in power despite the fact that he lost. While that investigation and indictment, we now know will not result in a criminal trial for Trump, the special counsel and his team did compile a report on what they found in their investigation. And after some legal back and forth, DOJ is now allowed to release that report as soon as the clock strikes midnight tonight. So I have a couple of questions about what's going to happen next. The first is when, when exactly are we going to see it? Like I said, the Justice Department is allowed to release the report at midnight Eastern tonight. Does that mean we're going to see it at midnight? Do you think they're going to wait until business hours tomorrow? Is there any reason to think that it's not going to come out tomorrow at all, could there be some additional delay? All of that is when that's question one. Question two for me is what exactly are we going to learn in this report? Do we expect that we're going to learn something we didn't know from the indictment or from all the hearings related to this case or from the January 6th investigation in Congress? Will there be new stuff that we didn't previously know? And my third and final question is about what this report is based on. Right. This is the report from the special counsel's investigation. The case that the special counsel's office put together, all the evidence they compiled, all the witnesses they interviewed, all that stuff doesn't cease to exist because Trump is no longer going to go to trial. So what happens to all that underlying information? This is a contested matter. Today, the senior Senate Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dick Durbin, asked DOJ to please preserve all records from this case relating to Donald Trump. Preserve evidence from the Trump investigations. What does that mean? And what can the DOJ do that? What would it mean in terms of law enforcement in the future? At the same time, and even more provocatively, the attorney general from the state of Arizona has also just asked the Justice Department to provide her with information on this case. Specifically, she's asked for Jack Smith's full case file against Donald Trump. The evident attorney general is prosecuting some of Trump's allies for their alleged election subversion efforts. She wants the product of Jack Smith's investigation to help in those efforts. So that's my third and last question. Can the Justice Department actually meet those requests? How much of this stuff is likely to come out and to whom will it go? I know just who to ask. Joining us now is Andrew Weissman, former FBI general counsel, former member of Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Andrew, it's nice to see you. Thanks for being here. Here.

Andrew Weissman (42:11)

Nice to be here.

Rachel Maddow (42:13)

Let me ask you about that last question first. The Senate Judiciary Democrats asking the Justice Department to preserve all the information related to this case. The Arizona attorney general asking to please have all the information from this case. How do those queries relate to this report we might see tomorrow? And what do you make of those requests?

Andrew Weissman (42:37)

So that's, I think, really the question, which is how do you make sure that this evidence, the underlying evidence that united Rachel does not disappear? Now, of course, some of that evidence is going to overlap with the January 6th evidence. And so that is something that has been made public by the January 6th Committee. But obviously there's a lot more. The Federal government has grand jury power. They interviewed a host of witnesses. And the name of the game here is if you want to make sure that that is not destroyed by the next incoming administration to, to let's assume that they wanted to do that. We don't know that they would. But if you want to make sure that doesn't happen, the only sure way to do that is to make sure it gets into the hands of people who are outside of the executive branch. So that can be Congress, it can be a state prosecutor, and it can be the court. When I was working for Special Counsel Mueller, we had very lengthy submissions to the courts precisely because we were concerned about the Nixon era Saturday Night Massacre and what would happen if we were suddenly disbanded and what would happen to all of the evidence that we had compiled. So I think this, the shortest way is for this administration to comply with those requests. And they also could give the report and all of the underlying evidence to, for instance, the chief judge in D.C. to make sure that it is in the, in the possession, custody control of somebody outside of the executive branch.

Rachel Maddow (44:17)

Wow. Just locking it up in a safe, effectively, by making sure that it's in another branch of government because of what you expect might happen to it in the executive branch. Okay, that's hairy and interesting. My first question, when do you think we should expect to see this report released? Obviously, they can release it as of midnight. Is this the sort of thing they would release at midnight? They'd wait till business hours. Is there anything that might delay it even past tomorrow?

Andrew Weissman (44:43)

Well, the only thing that could delay it between now and midnight is if one of the judges, Judge Cannon, doesn't seem like she's going to say the 11th Circuit or maybe a last minute reprieve from the Supreme Court. But it's. The clock is ticking. So it really looks like at 12:01 that the Department of Justice is going to have the green light and they need to grab it and growl if they have the green light. They really cannot afford to wait. You know, the public, as you noted, has been waiting a very long time for public accounting. They were denied a criminal trial in this matter for a whole variety of reasons. And this is the, at this point, the next best thing to having some accounting of exactly what happened and also an historical record of what happened. So, you know, I would be really surprised if the department doesn't take advantage of the fact that they have the legal authority at 1201 to go forward and release this to the public.

Rachel Maddow (45:47)

Are you expecting it to have new details in it that we haven't heard before, or will it be a sort of official summation of stuff that we generally know from having watched the case thus far?

Andrew Weissman (45:57)

A bit of both. I think there's no question because of the January 6th committee and lengthy submissions by Jack Smith that we will have a certain this sort of the general narrative is something that we're aware of. I think. I'm expecting that the full litany, the panoply of people who told the then president that he had lost the election, starting with the vice president, his campaign, the Department of Justice, his White House counsel, the people at the Department of Homeland Security charged with whether there was election interference. I think we're going to be sort of overwhelmed with the details of that. But I also think there will be some new information because Jack Smith had the ability to interview other people and to put them in the grand jury. Now, I don't think we'll get all of that grand jury material, but I think there will be sort of substantial details to fill out the historical record.

Rachel Maddow (46:55)

All right, I'm clear on my schedule. Andrew Weissman, thank you very much for your time tonight. Good to talk to you, my friend. All right, we'll be right back. Stay with us. One of the things President Biden has done in his last few days in office is put new sanctions on Russia that are an order of magnitude bigger than anything the US has done before. And this has had a little bit of attention, but it probably deserves more than it's getting. It's a really big deal. Russia is basically a petro state. Its whole economy depends on being able to sell oil and gas. And after they invaded Ukraine almost three years ago, the Western world basically united in an effort to stop them from selling their oil and gas. Russia pretty quickly figured out how to get around those sanctions. And a lot of the ways they got around it was by using something called a shadow fleet of ships that aren't supposed to be carrying oil that have no clear connection to Russia. But they've used those ships to ship oil around the world and sell it basically off the books to keep the Russian economy afloat. Well, now the US along with the UK Were cracking down on Russian state oil companies, on Russian energy officials, and specifically indirectly on nearly 200 of the ships who are believed to be part of that shadow fleet that lets Russia evade the sanctions. These new sanctions will make it pretty much impossible for Russia to use those ships to carry its oil around and sell it. That potentially takes away a huge amount of Russia's ability to earn money through the only thing that it makes and sells itself. I mean, they have oil and gas. They've got weapons. That's it. U.S. officials say the new sanctions have the potential to cost the Russian economy billions of dollars every month. It's a much bigger deal than anything the Biden administration has ever previously done. And of course, these new sanctions will set up a big test for what happens one week from now when Joe Biden leaves office. Will Donald Trump take those sanctions away? President Biden has set a benchmark here at the close of his term with something that is a big deal. If President Trump were so inclined, he could do a huge favor for Vladimir Putin by taking these new sanctions away. Stick a pin in this one to watch. Watch this space. That's going to do it for me tonight. I will see you next week, next Monday for the inauguration starting at 10:00am Eastern. And yes, starting that night, Monday night next week. I will be here with you at 9pm that night and all week long, five nights a week. I'll be here five nights a week for the first hundred days of Donald Trump's presidency. Alex Wagner will be reporting nationwide and overseas on the first hundred days of Trumpland. We're all making an extraordinary effort for what we know is an extraordinary time, these first hundred days. Looking very much forward to spending it here with you. Hey, everybody, it's Rob Lowe here. If you haven't heard, I have a podcast that's called Literally with Rob Lowe. And basically it's conversations I've had that really make you feel like you're pulling up a chair at an intimate dinner between myself and people that I admire, like Aaron Sorkin or Tiffany Haddish, Demi Moore, Chris Pratt, Michael J. Fox. There are new episodes out every Thursday, so subscribe, please, and listen wherever you get your podcasts.