tv The Reid Out MSNBC February 8, 2022 4:00pm-5:00pm PST
>> what they were talking about is the six rnc members who january 6 has subpoenaed who weren't even here who were in florida that day. >> fact check, false. quote bob marley, you're running and you're running and you're running away, but you can't run away from yourself, leader mccarthy. that does it for us. "the reidout" with joy reid starts right now. >> hi, ari. they tried it, though, they tried it. >> i'm ready. it's exercise. >> they running, they running, they rung. have a good evening. thank you very much. >> you too. good evening, everyone. we begin "the reidout" with righting historical wrongs and creating new ones. last month, louisiana's democratic governor john bel edwards took a long overdue step, clearing the name of a civil rights hero with a posthumous pardon of homer plessy, nearly 130 years after his arrest for violating
louisiana's separate karst act of 1890. plus, he was new orleans shoemaker and part of a group of activists of color known as the citizens committee who volunteered to challenge louisiana's law, which resulted in his arrest. plessy sued the judge who upheld the law all the way to the u.s. supreme court. and in 1896, in a 7-1 decision, the court ruled that the separate carrs act did not violate the constitution. it's not just what matter what's the court did today, it's how they did it. the justice wrote, quote, laws permitting and even requiring their separation in places where they are liable to be brought into contact do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other and have been generally, if not universally recognized as within the competency of the state legislatures in the exercise of their police power, unquote. in doing so, the court became probably the most notorious supreme court in u.s. history. at the time they were arguing
that legal equality did not ensure social equality. it was on black passengers if they took it poorly that they were riding in cattle cars instead of nice railcars. in other words, harming black people is fine in america. as long as you don't say that you're creating legal racial inferiority. got that? and by enshrining that separate but equal doctrine for the next six decades, that notorious court gave legal cover for segregation and jim crow, clearing the way for a continued assault on the rights of black americans that would last until a modern court overturned it in brown versus the board of education. now the activists on the current court are showing the president doesn't much matter to them. they're declaring open season on the voting rights of americans of color, escalating the war on the voting rights act of 1965 in a bid, it seems, to become the new plessy court. a in a 5-4 ruling, the court cleared the way for alabama to use a new congressional district map, halting a lower court decision that it violated the
voting rights act by denying black voters a new district. the five judicial right wing horsemen of the maga apocalypse decided it is find for alabama to jerry mandatory hurt black people so long as they don't say race. brett kavanaugh beer pong screamed in his opinion it is too close to an election, taking a page from his spiritual father, mitch mcconnell. he also tried out the excuse that the case was not decided on the merits. oral arguments will be held later, but not before the midterm elections, conveniently for alabama republicans. in her dissent, justice elena kagan was having none of that, writing that alabama is not entitled to keep violating black alabamians' voting rights just because the court order game down in the first month of an election year. she argued that granting a stay does a disservice to the lower court's application of justice and most of all does a disservice to black alabamians
who under that president have had their electoral power diminished in violation of a law this court once knew to buttress all of american democracy. now if you need any indication of just how radical this decision is, chief justice john roberts, whose legal career has been devoted to dismantling the voting rights act, finally just gutting it outright in 2013's shelby decision, he sided with the liberals, accusing his fellow partisans on the court of going too far. in the meantime, litigation will continue. the plaintiff evan milligan said in a statement "yes reminded of the strength and digsy displayed by our ancestors who routinely confronted a wide variety of disappointments. we won't dishonor their legacy by putting down the torch they have handed to us." joining me now is elie mystal, joyce vance, former u.s. attorney and co-host of the sisters in law podcast. and senior director of professional development for the
naacp legal defense fund. mr. durrall, i want to start with you first. i want to put this map up. we'll just put this map up, and you can see that essentially one district is drawn. terry sewell's district essentially. one district for black people in that state. yet white alabamians are 69% of the population. african americans, black folks are 27%, just shy of 27%. indigenous people, 0.7. asian american, 1.5. two more more races 1.8. you go down the list. latinos, 4.6%. this is not an all-white state, and yet it's governed as if nonwhite voters have no rights. i want you to take us inside these arguments. what justification could these right wing five judges have to make the decision they did other than the plessy justification of we just wanted to do this? >> i think what justice cavanaugh said which we disagree
with is it's just too close to the election. what he is essentially saying is even though this court, we sue within being enacted, the court acted with lightning speed and ordered briefing and arguments and a hearing over seven days in january, issued a decision a little more than a week after our seven days of hearings ended and said, you know, we're doing everything that we can, that the elections are not close at hand, and that the supreme court disregarded that and as a unit any kind of changes of redistricting from courts for the 2020 election cycle. >> and just to stay with you for just a moment. what it seems to me to be the worry here is there are a lot of other states that want to do similar things to voters of color. this is cut fire from my producers, element 5. arizona has a plan to require people to submit a written excuse to early vote. something that black voters, church voters heavily rely on.
in florida, there is a federal trial over florida's changes to voting laws because they're focusing on restricting registration. we know the very well-known georgia law. what message does this send to litigators like yourself and those at ldf that are fighting these laws? it seems to me that even in a case like north carolina, where democrats win at the state level, at the state supreme court level, all the republicans have to do is try to advance it directly to the supreme court, and it looks like it's got at least five justices who will go along with anything, no matter how perverse. >> yeah, i think that's a difficult thing. as the reason why the supreme court is ruling on this case is because it's the first one out of the gate. it's the first week of february, right? and the court is already saying that it's too late. and right now some of my colleagues are in trial challenging the discriminatory laws that have been passed in places like florida and georgia and texas. and no matter how quickly those courts act now, it seems to be that the supreme court is saying that it's too late, in an
election process that frankly hasn't begun yet for any kind of relief. so i think the spring court is essentially giving states a free pass, or at least the 2020 elections to continue to discriminate, no matter how quickly any court acts. >> that certainly it seems to me what it appears to be. joyce vance, a native alabamian yourself. the black democratic lawmakers have said doj, you need to get in here. this is the letter they wrote. 44 house members, members of the black congressional, said they must be forcibly condemned. congress looks to you, the attorney general of the united states to enforce the constitution of our voting rights laws with unmitigated vigor and tenacity. your thoughts here on whether the justice department is likely to weigh in and what could they theoretically do? >> doj is committed, and they followed through on the commitment to doing the best that they can do with the laws that remain in place.
but as elie and i have discussed with you many times before, joy, the voting rights act has been gutted in many regards, section 5 gutted in shelby county, section 2 gutted last term. so doj can bring claims, but it has limited ability to maneuver. chris england, head of the alabama democratic party tweeted last night it's time for the senate to pass a new voting rights act. the law that was passed by bipartisan majorities over and over. and suddenly fell out of favor with republicans. it's time to restore the voting rights act. >> good luck with that. with the eastman and thurmond wing weighing in, they're nope, can't do that. our donors didn't say we could. so. no elie, i'm going to let you weigh in here. i feel like this is the new plessy court. they've made it very clear that the stare decisis thing, they
don't really care about precedent, they're going to stomp all over precedent because they have a political agenda. it is the same political agenda of donald trump and right-wingers, and they're just going to do it. they don't really care. >> joy, i don't know what to tell people. this is no longer like jim crow. this is jim crow. this is what the court did back during the jim crow era. my mother is 70 years old. she was born in 1950 -- more than 70 years old. born in 1950 in mississippi. she has lived through this. and it's happening again. and i can't seem to get people including democrats to care. at the end of the day, all the court has to do, all the supreme court has to do is to refuse to enforce the 15th amendment and apply it against the states. we've had laws before. we had the civil rights act of 1870 which made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race and voting.
did it matter? no. not when conservatives control the court. we had a law, the act of 1875 that made it illegal to discriminate against people in public accommodations. did it matter? no. not when you let conservatives control the supreme court. so as long as you let conservatives control the third branch of government, nothing stops. nothing happens. only the racism is allowed to continue. that's what brett kavanaugh did. that's what neil gorsuch did and the other rest of the five of them. and don't give any credit to your boy john roberts. >> nope. >> because he made it pretty clear when it comes up on the merits, he is also going to allow the racist alabama maps to go through. i can't help you if you don't -- black people can't help you. black people can't save this country from the trumpers if you don't let us. and the only way you can let us is by stopping conservative control of the supreme court.
>> and let me go back to you, mr. ross. you're the one in the middle of doing these cases. this is what associate justice henry billings brown, this was his logic for separate versus equal back in the plessy decision. he said the most common instance of this separate being fine is connected with the establishment of separate schools for white and colored children which have been held to be a valid exercise of the legislative power, even for the courts of states where the political rights of the color race have been longest and most enforced. you can do discrimination all you want. as long as you don't explicitly say race you do all the discrimination you want and this supreme court is going to back you up. they made that very clear. you can also harm women. you can do whatever you want, really, as long as you're creative in the way you argue it. and so i wonder for you and ldf, as you all go back before these guys, because you know roberts to elie's point is going to side
with them next time. i wonder if there is a legal strategy you can maybe share with us. maybe we don't want to tell them. what next? what do we do? >> yeah, i think it's difficult to say what the supreme court is going to do. i think obviously there are things that justice roberts said that are concerning. i think the reality is we don't know exactly what the court is going to do. i think the three judges below, though, gave us a really great blueprint for arguing that, even though the supreme court may raise the standard for what section of the voting rights act requires to move that black voters are facing discrimination in these congressional maps, that there is still a chance that the court will not say -- the voting rights act is inapplicable in any instance. i think one of the they think the district court said which is made up of two judges even if you apply the height and standard that alabama is proposing the supreme court should apply, plaintiffs still win.
there is no question about it. and even justice cavanaugh and justice alito in their concurrence acknowledged that the plaintiffs presented a robust claim that they were not necessarily ruling on the merits at this point. so, you know, obviously we face a difficult uphill battle. but we're not giving up. and we think we still have strong arguments in our case. >> i wish you luck. ohio is still out there. ohio has rejected the legislative maps that were drawn by republicans there. north carolina, big win for americans in north carolina. political maps were rendered unconstitutional in two gerrymandered, a pennsylvania judge sided with democracy with americans on that congressional map. florida, there is going to be some -- a ruling there. and then the problem is even if, you know, pro-democracy force, it isn't democrats winning. it's people who care about the right to vote win, we now feel like there is a supreme court
that is ready made to say bring it to us. we'll get rid of it. amazing. elie mystal, dueul ross, welcome to the show. up next, the divide in the republican party over calling this legitimate political discourse. the ones who reject that description do not have an election coming up. and then there are people like ron desantis who are scared to say anything at all. also, which prosecutor will indict trump first? georgia's bonnie willis puts the president on notice she is not messing around. and the absolute worst, saying look at us, we're lightly less revolting than our revolting friends. you want a medal for that? "the reidout" continues after this. "the reidout" continues after "the reidout" continues after this targets congestion at the source, with a dual action formula that relieves nasal congestion and soothes sinus pressure by reducing swelling in the sinuses. for instant relief that lasts up to 12 hours, try vicks sinex. from vicks - trusted relief for over 125 years.
[sfx: voice relief] (burke) this is why you want farmers claim forgiveness... [echoing] claim forgiveness-ness, your home premium won't go up just because of this. (woman) wow, that's something. (burke) you get a whole lot of something with farmers policy perks. [echoing] get a quote today. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ that was quick. and rewarding. i earn 3% cash back at drugstores with chase freedom unlimited. that means i earn on my bug spray and my sunscreen. you ready to go fishing? i got the bait. i also earn 5% on travel purchased through chase on this rental car. that lake is calling my name! don't you get seasick? we'll find out! come on. and i earn 3% on dining including takeout. so much for catching our dinner. some people are hunters. some are gatherers. i'm a diner. pow! earn big time with chase freedom unlimited with no annual fee. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours.
(music) who said you have to starve yourself to lose weight? who said you can't do dinner? who said only this is good? and this is bad? i'm doing it my way. meet plenity. an fda -cleared clinically proven weight management aid for adults with a bmi of 25-40 when combined with diet and exercise. plenity is not a drug - it's made from naturally derived building blocks and helps you feel fuller and eat less. it is a prescription only treatment and is not for pregnant women or people allergic to its ingredients.
look, mike pence is a good man. he is an honest man. i think he did what he thought was right on that day, but i will always say it. i just -- i'm not a fan of republicans going against republicans, because the only ones that win when that happens are the democrats and the media. >> did she ever meet donald
trump? that was republican nikki haley, making a point to go after former president mike pence for simply stating the obvious, the truth that he could not overturn the election. now she is the perfect encapsulation of what is wrong with the republican party right now. you are persona non grata if you dare to criticize their dear leader. a violent insurrection is now classified by the official party as legitimate political discourse. haley has a history of ping-ponging between meek criticism and total adoration of the former president, who aptly pointed out once every time she criticizes me she uncriticizes me about 15 minutes later. i guess she gets the base. nikki was appalled at trump's behavior during the primary, culminating in her position as u.n. ambassador. she wrote in her book that she had been deeply disturbed by his charlottesville reports but also claimed that had worked hard to address the country's racial divides.
she stood by him after the election even as he was questioning the results. >> republicans will never let him go. we don't want to go back to how it was before president trump. we want to build on it. we want the make it better, and we want to grow. we owe him that. we owe him that to keep fighting. >> uh-huh. the day after the election, she said his actions since election day would be judged harshly by history. that tone changed a few weeks later. >> they beat him up before he got into office. they're beating him up after he leaves office. i mean, at some point, i mean, give the man a break. >> then weeks after that, she said, quote, we shouldn't have followed him and we shouldn't have listened to him and we can't let that ever happen again. but months later, this ping-pong is crazy. she said she would back trump if he ran in 2424, and now is taking the position of criticizing him for foments a coup. with me charlie sykes, editor at large for the bulwark. charlie, my head is spinning.
this woman can't decide whether trump is the worst thing or the greatest thing ever. and all that it says to me is that somehow in her nikki haley brain, she still thinks she can be president maybe? that's the calculus, right? >> who knows. or maybe she wants to be vice president on the ticket. i wrote this morning the question does she understand how ridiculous she looks ping-ponging back and forth? but again, this is your brain on trumpism. you point out this doesn't encapsulate what is going on in the party. the last several days have been awfully interesting, because a lot of these politicians are being asked difficult questions. who is right, donald trump or mike pence? was this legitimate political discourse? was the -- or was it a violent riot? and you can tell it's a really hard question for a lot of them. this is a very difficult moment. ron desantis refuses to answer the question. nikki haley and marco rubio becrowned themselves. kevin mccarthy runs away, literally in the hallway. and the rest of them are dancing
around. so because this is a deadly question for them, because donald trump is really -- he keeps raising the ante. the price of your loyalty is now not just to believe all of my lies about the election, not just believe -- go along with all of my policies, but now you have to now embrace his crazy anti-constitutional notion that mike pence could have overturned the election. and so this is a really interesting moment where you can see the republicans who are so confident and cocky about the election are starting to worry about it. is this going too far? because they can't answer these questions since you end up looking like nikki haley did there. >> it's rare for republicans honestly, i have to be honest, to take these kinds of hard questions. it seems to me, to stay with you for just a second, charlie, ron desantis mained up. she made an unforced error. when she put that statement out and decided to rebuke these two members of congress, they fell on the wrong side of the intelligence messaging war.
and so now the media has no choice but every time a republican is standing in front of them, was that political discourse was legitimate? was that legitimate political discourse? they are hammered in because they have to answer it now, right? and let me show you what happens, real quick, stay with you for a minute. this is what it looks like when that doesn't matter anymore. you already built your 6-3 maga right wing supreme court that is going to give every rich person and corporation everything they ever wanted and lock in white minority rule forever like it's '80s south africa. this is what it looks like when you don't give a damn anymore and don't have to. here is mitch mcconnell. >> let me give you my view of what happened january 6. way all were here. we saw what happened. it was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful of power. the issue is whether or not the rnc should be sort of singling members of our party who may
have different views from the majority that's not the job of the rnc. >>. >> spoken like a man who is going to retire with his three-pointed sceptor, having done all the devil's work. >> let me push back on that a little bit. mitch mcconnell would not have come out and made that statement unless he was worried about something, unless he thought this issue was hurting his chances to get the majority. everything that mitch mcconnell does is aimed towards these midterm elections, getting back to be the majority leader. and he understands that embracing the crazy, embracing the lunatic, going along with donald trump right now could hurt their chances in those states that will determine who controls the united states senate. so look, mitch mcconnell dropped the ball at the key moment when he voted to acquit the president. but think about what he said. he went beyond what mike pence said. the election was legitimate. he said this was a violent insurrection. he specifically called out the rnc. so this a real moment where you
do have republicans who are at least at the minimum of food fight, maybe it will escalate to something more than that. >> he is doing that now. he wouldn't do that right after january 6. let me go to you, david. you wrote a piece here about the fact that maybe we just can't handle the truth about the insurrection. you wrote the wickedness may be too immense for the nation to absorb. too profound a breach to be fractured by our political system. let me add the atlantic to your political argument. that donald trump can't handle it, that his little brain can't handle losing, and that being a loser is the thing his daddy told him you can never be, and he literally has narcissism and fragile self-esteem cannot handle it. that is what the republican party is chained to. your thoughts. >> this is not about donald trump. he is one man. i bring with you. he is a broken man. he is a narcissist. he is pathological. but this is not about him. this is about 70 million americans. it's about the republican party.
people are buying this hook, line and sinker. i'm raring to go with my good friend charlie here. yes, what mitch mcconnell said today indicates he is worried about this. but let's not go too far back in the time machine to the second impeachment when mcconnell got up there and said trump's responsible. this is dereliction of duty. he is morally responsible. you can't send people into a frenzy and then not take responsibility. literally less than two weeks after that, he said he would absolutely support donald trump if he was the nominee in 2024. so now he is no nikki haley, but he certainly could get bronze in the gymnastics competition, even though it's winter olympics time in terms of flipping back and forth. so today you're right, charley. he calculated that he needed to come out there and try to turn this thing off in some way and push back.
but he -- has he come out and denounced trump, who always denounces him and said he should not be the nominee? i will fight against him? >> no. >> who was derelict of duty when the capitol was being attacked? should still be commander in chief again some day? no. he hasn't said that because it hasn't been in his political interests yet. so until he does that, joy, you said these are hard questions. these are not hard questions. >> they're not. >> they're craziness is that people treat them as they are. >> oh, no, if you're ron desantis and asked who is right, mike pence or donald trump, that's a hard question. >> it's a hard question for you. >> well, it's a really hard question because you know now that if you don't embrace the coup, if you don't embrace the insurrection, if you don't embrace the lies, you're going to be a pariah. so donald trump does not make it easy. but david makes a few important points. the republican party does not have a leadership problem. it has a followership problem.
>> that's right. >> and everybody here is pandering to a base that has bought into all of these conspiracy theories. and until that changes, don't expect that anyone on the top is going to change the overall dynamic. >> if you try to say donald trump is wrong, they will treat you like you, you know, passed out the 1619 project at school or supported black history month. they will run you out of the party. david cord, charlie sykes, thank you very much. still ahead, georgia's immunity will not protect donald trump if he tries to meddle in that state's election results, which he clearly did. and do his recent threats against prosecutors amount to obstruction of justice? we will inquire, when we come back. we will inquire, when we come back delightful chew with pepto bismol chews. what can i du with less asthma? th dup.
yardwork... teamwork... long walks.... that's how you du more, with dupixent, which helps prevent asthma attacks. dupixent is not for sudden breathing problems. it's an add-on-treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma that can improve lung function for better breathing in as little as two weeks. and can reduce, or even eliminate, oral steroids. and here's something important. dupixent can cause serious allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. get help right away if you have rash, shortness of breath, chest pain, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection, and don't change or stop your asthma treatments, including steroids, without talking to your doctor. are you ready to du more with less asthma? just ask your asthma specialist about dupixent.
if these radical, vicious, racist prosecutors do anything wrong or illegal, i hope we are going to have in this country the biggest protest we have ever had in washington, d.c., in new york, in atlanta and elsewhere. >> that was donald trump's not so veiled threat last month to unleash his maga mob on the law enforcement officials who are currently investigating him in new york and georgia. it is no coincidence he is accusing them of racism. given that all those law enforcement officials are african american, that's the thing that right-wingers do. it's a threat that district attorney fonnie willis is taking security. she asked the fbi to secure her office as she investigates trump's effort to steal the election from that state in the race against joe biden. >> i don't want the pretend like i didn't hear what i heard. it would be just crazy for me to not pay attention to that. so i wanted to make sure that they were also paying attention.
>> legal experts tell the guardian that given trump's history of inciting violence, particularly january 6, 2021, his latest threat could cute obstruction of justice. as one former federal prosecutor put it, trump is essentially calling for vigilante justice against the justice system. meanwhile, willis is showing no signs of apprehension about the task at hand. she told cnn she is likely to issue many subpoenas this spring. back with joyce vance. right out of the box, i understood it to be illegal to threaten a prosecutor. how is it not already a crime to simply threaten not one, but two, but three prosecutors? >> you know, joy, one of the hard realities of being a prosecutor is that you get awfully used to and in some ways almost immune to being threatened because it comes with the territory. the real problem here is the context. we know that this is someone who is profoundly uncommitted to the
rule of law, who is very slippery when it comes to dealings, and who in the past has encouraged his supporters in events that resulted in violence. so i think fani willis did the smart thing here. she invoked the fbi. and i would expect her to not tolerate too much more here. if she reaches the point, and i'm singling her out because i think the threats in some way are directed towards her in many ways. but if sees this going to something that's very clearly obstruction of justice, i wouldn't expect to see her indict a premature case. at the same time, this is a strong, smart experienced prosecutor. i don't think she'll tolerate crime. >> it does feel like obstruction. here is another thing that seems like -- i'm a layperson. i'm not a lawyer. to me this seems like an obvious crime. here is donald trump calling brad raffensperger, the secretary of state and said i just need 11,780 votes. >> there is nothing wrong with saying that you've recalculated.
all i want to do is this. i just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. >> and he means one more than we need. you took from the rest of the conversation. that's the context. even if he would try to mitigate it by saying i genuinely believe i had won the election in georgia, the part saying i need a specific number of votes, basically one more than i need, feels like an admission. i'm wondering if you are the prosecutor in this case, what mitigating factor could possibly deter you from indicting somebody for attempting to violate the election laws of georgia? >> this is a pretty good piece of evidence, joy. i'd be proud to take a case to trial if i could play that tape for the jury. but let me try to set the table a little bit to help people understand the difficulties prosecutors face. when we look at that evidence, i think we are -- or at least i start with a little bit of confirmation bias.
it seems very clear to me that the former president was interfering with the election when he did that. in a courtroom, in a criminal case, the judge will tell the jury that the defendant is cloaked with the presumption of innocence, and it's up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. and that means prosecutors are incredibly careful about compiling evidence. and you've identified exactly the important issue here. prosecutors will have to prove what seems self-evident to so many of us, that trump knew he had lost the election and that he was trying to steal it, not that he believed he had won the election and was trying to carry out some form of a duty. so that's why fani willis will use this special grand jury. she'll talk to everyone who came into contact with the former president and put together her case. and then at the end of the day, she'll have that delightful tape to play for the jury. >> let me play a bit more of fani willis, the prosecutor saying that donald trump is not going to stand in her way. take a look. >> this is a criminal investigation.
we're not here playing a game. i plan to use the power of the law. we are all citizens. mr. trump, just as every other american citizen is entitled to dignity. he is entitled to being treated fairly. he will be treated fairly in this jurisdiction. but i plan to do my job. and my job is to make sure that we get the evidence that gives us the truth. i'm not concerned at all about games to delay this. >> she also said she will not be deterred by claims of presidential immunity. i'm going to put up the three sort of possible men use of charges donald trump could face from solicitation of election fraud in georgia to tax fraud in new york to tax fraud and mortgage fraud in a new york civil case. when you look at all of the things he is facing, what seem to be sort of the richest areas for prosecutors in those two states? >> in so many ways, it seems to come down to different species of fraud, whether it's election fraud, whether it's some sort of insurance or business-related
fraud. that seems to be the core of everything that goes on here. but let me caution people and say prosecutors often come up with crimes they don't go into an investigation with, and i think we shouldn't rule out the place that you started, joy, with this notion of obstruction. and ultimately, it may turn out that in trump's case, the cover-up is worse than the crime. >> a very, very -- this is why we love talking with you, sister-in-law, joyce vance. thank you very much. appreciate you. stay right here tonight. absolute worst is straight ahead as conservatives try to ease us into a post trump america. how generous of them. we'll be right back. how generous of them we'll be right back. ♪ i see trees ♪ ♪ red roses too ♪ ♪ i see them bloom for me and you ♪
(music) ♪ so i think to myself ♪ ♪ oh what a wonderful world ♪ do i need to pretreat my laundry? nope! with tide pods, you don't need to worry. the pre-treaters are built in. tide pods dissolve even when the water is freezing. nice! if it's got to be clean, it's got to be tide. if you have type 2 diabetes or high blood pressure... ...you're a target for... ...chronic kidney disease. you can already have it and not know it. if you have chronic kidney disease... ...your kidney health... ...could depend on what you do today. ♪far-xi-ga♪ farxiga is a pill that works... ...in the kidneys to help slow the progression of chronic kidney disease.
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. and don't take it if you are on dialysis. take aim... ...at chronic kidney disease by talking to your doctor... ...and asking about farxiga. if you can't afford your medication,... ...astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪far-xi-ga♪
abortion. it will appear on the ballot for voters in november and is expected to pass in a state where 70% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases. now of course you can't ignore the context. we're awaiting a major supreme court ruling on a mississippi law that bans abortion at 15 weeks. and could very likely spell the end of roe v. wade with a 6-3 conservative court, including three trump selected justices, i think we can all see where this is headed. justice cavanaugh all but announced his intentions during oral arguments in december. >> i think they also then continue because the constitution is neutral that this court should be scrupulously neutral on the question of abortion, neither pro-choice nor pro-life, but because they say the say the constitution doesn't give us the authority, we should leave it to the states. they are saying here, i think
that we should return to a position of neutrality on that contentious social issue rather than continuing to pick sides on that issue. >> uh-huh. so roe is overturned, 21 states have laws in place to ban abortion as quickly as possible. states like arizona, west virginia, and florida want to emulate mississippi with their own 15-week bans. florida was tinkering with the idea of a texas-style six-week abortion ban. but now republicans there are calling 15 weeks generous and very reasonable. mind you, they also voted down exceptions for rape and incest because why should women who faced a traumatic event be treated any differently. but it's their feigned talk of being generous that is the most galling. this isn't charity or some kind of gift being handed out bay benevolent uncle. forget the fact that abortion is presently legal up to the 24th week in florida, but these
republican-run states are trying to do is make a 15-week ban the new normal as they outlaw abortion piece by piece and call it a compromise. they think they're being slick and acting less villains without being called out as villains. but women are on to their game. and that's why these fake generous republicans are the absolute worst. but abortion is one of the many items on governor ron desantis's extremist agenda. he wants to give people in florida the right to sue schools and teachers over what they teach based on white student discomfort. and that's coming up next. comi. yes. formulated to help you body really truly absorb the natural goodness. new chapter. wellness, well done. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪
>> woman: what's my safelite story? i see inspiration right through my glass. so when my windshield cracked, i chose safelite. they replaced the glass and recalibrated my safety system. that's service i can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ meet a future mom, a first-time mom and a seasoned pro. this mom's one step closer to their new mini-van! yeah, you'll get used to it. this mom's depositing money with tools on-hand.
cha ching. and this mom, well, she's setting an appointment here, so her son can get set up there and start his own financial journey. that's because these moms all have chase. smart bankers. convenient tools. one bank with the power of both. chase. make more of what's yours. (music) who said you have to starve yourself to lose weight? who said you can't do dinner? who said only this is good? and this is bad? i'm doing it my way. meet plenity. an fda -cleared clinically proven weight management aid for adults with a bmi of 25-40 when combined with diet and exercise. plenity is not a drug - it's made from naturally derived building blocks and helps you feel fuller and eat less. it is a prescription only treatment and is not for pregnant women or people allergic to its ingredients. talk to your doctor or visit myplenity.com to learn more. wondering what actually goes into your multi-vitamin? at new chapter its innovation organic ingredients and fermentation. fermentation? yes, formulated to help your body really truly absorb the natural goodness.
prohibit public schools and private businesses for making white people make this feel discomfort when they has to dance or teach history or anything. one wonders when black history month will become illegal in florida. parents and employees would also be able to sue if teachings or trainings make them feel discomfort or distress, placing educators in the impossible position of having to teach and discuss topics like slavery or the hollow without addressing the participants or their roles by race. joining me now florida state senator shevrin jones, and nikole hannah-jones, pulitzer prize-winning journalist and creator of the 16 19 project. chevron on where to start with you first. you're on the education committee. this isn't going to pass but which version of it is the likely one because i know there is one that is aimed at is the, believe it or not, because they were doing trainings, because they have international visitors from all over the world, and you had one republican state senators say that's not acceptable, you can't teach anything about treating people of color with
respect, don't like it, and he's got one version. and then you've got the governor's version. what is this bill likely to look like when it actually becomes law? >> considering that we are almost at the halfway point of the session, you will end up seeing that both bills will end up coming together and eventually cut through negotiations so i know for a fact that's not the only thing we're given, but another issue has just arisen, asking about state military, who do implicit bias training. some of our other entreaties who are state workers who have implicit bias training. does this glue them? there is a lot of vagueness within the legislation right now. but i will tell you that as we speak, as both chambers will pass the bill, they will end up coming together. >> i asked this in all seriousness seriousness, is black history month gonna be illegal in florida, if that
makes them uncomfortable, couldn't they sue? >> here's the thing, if you read the bill analysis, in the bill analysis, they do three things. it outlines critical race theory, outlines the 16 19 project, outlines also makes it clear the executive order from donald trump blatantly written in the bill analysis. so they knew what they were doing when they wrote the bill in the first place, and sometimes i don't even read the entire bill analysis, but i chose to read at this time, and i looked at it and i said to myself, we have to be kidding ourselves right now, the fact that we are going down this route. >> it's also unconstitutional. the government cannot tell people what to say in the workplace where people continue to work. it's basic first amendment. and nicole and jones, i'm glad this was mentioned, because i always have a copy of all my favorite band books, and here they don't like the sea horse but because they think it promote lgbt equality and that makes them sad.
of course porn on the water which the book that goes with 16 19. i don't know i don't like this biscuit about. my kids read that is a kid. they don't like this either. but here is the book that this is really about. all of this permutation, honestly, is about you. it's about the fact that you dared to say that slavery was central to our history, and they were so livid that you now have been using the fear of the 16 19 project to pass these unconstitutional laws. i want you to give us some calling context here. florida is a state of about 46% nonwhite. so we're talking about non-white children being told they can't learn about themselves, haitian kids, cuban american kids, black kids. your thoughts. >> well, one, thank you for highlighting this. i think this is such an important issue, because these bills are anti-democratic. let's just be clear. when you ask where we see black
history month being outlawed, challenged in some states like alabama because some white parents think that's critical race theory and they don't want that to happen. it's amazing that all this outrage that, people are engaging in pop music or podcasts or training service to protest a rich man who still reach it has the show. but the silence around politicians, the power of the state, to make it illegal to teach illegal concepts. let's be clear, florida, the where four black teenagers vastly accused of raping a white girl. one was murdered and to receive the death penalty in one received life in prison. this is the state where harry inherit she more, were assassinated in-house bomb. this is the state of rosewood. this is a state where 1920 the election a massacre kissed 60 black people because a white mob didn't like the fact that a
black man tried to vote. so these bills, if you read them carefully, they are not saying we need to ensure history is told truthfully. what they're saying is, we need to ensure that we are only teaching history that doesn't make children, and by children, they mean white children, uncomfortable or feel anguish, or frankly, we should feel uncomfortable about racial apartheid. we should feel uncomfortable about a history that violently suppressed black americans rights for the vast majority of the history of that state. so these are not about truth. i'm glad that you showcased how they are also using against lgbtq communities, against certain books about the holocaust. there was a lot of silence when these bills were only targeting 1619 project, but as i said, it was never going to stop there. it was always going to start encompassing text about other marginalized groups. >> absolutely. and just to make your point, the washington pointed a piece where they talked about the people in florida. they talked about this
extremism in this bill. rick stevens of the florida citizens and i alliance, a citizens group, said we want teachers to take sides slavery was wrong, but they don't need to take sides that one race personally did it. and so now that race is forever condemned in another races forever exalted. that's insane. that is insane, nicole. because how do you teach slavery if you don't say the in enslaved our enslavers? how do you treat asian history to say that these people revolted against these people but we can't say who they were? we can't teach this history without race. >> obviously. slavery was a racist racialized system. you could only be enslaved if you were of african descent. the enslavers were of european slept dissent. so yes, again, these are not about teaching truth. that is why this is called the anti-wolf act, which is the asinine name for a bill anyway. because they're not actually trying to teach truth.
they're trying to teach ally. they're trying to further the lie that we have already been taught. they can just keep teaching the standard history the most kids are getting anyway. it's insulting, it's demeaning. i love how all these people who think the government should be small and restrained are fine with the government telling private companies what they can or cannot do with their own businesses. it's so astounding. >> it's very soviet. the last word to you, shevrin. you have a governor who defends jeff rogan's seth rogan's right to dom drop as many bombs as he want. the n-word, i guess, is okay, and he is okay with, that stick your chest, out joe, rogan don't say nothing about that. but you may not say anything about europeans who had slaves. your thoughts, very quickly. >> my angela say best, when people show you who they really, i believe. this is the same governor that
average orange floyd happened wanted to ban how blacks local riot in the street. we know who governor desantis is. he showed it many times. he showing you again. >> the free state of florida for, you everybody. thank you so much state senator shevrin jones, and nikole hannah-jones. that is tonight's readout. that is >> tonight on all in -- >> i am not -- >> donald trump's rnc drives or wedge into the party. >> we saw what happened. it was about an insurrection. >> tonight, the choice all republicans face as cracks in trump support begin to grow. then what we are learning about the call to mike pence on january 6th and new details about trump's morning calwood jordan. plus, the supreme court's attempt to strangle the voting rights act by way of alabama