tv The Sunday Show With Jonathan Capehart MSNBC April 3, 2022 7:00am-9:00am PDT
go nowhere. "the sunday show" with jonathan capehart begins right now. a potential breakthrough. president zelenskyy and vladimir putin could meet for peace talks as russia pulls back from kyiv, leaving scenes of devastation. but is this a turning point? i'll ask state department spokesperson ned price. here comes the judge and his wife. growing calls for justice clarence thomas to recuse himself as the january 6th committee considers whether to subpoena ginni thomas. committee member and house intelligence chair adam schiff is here to discuss the latest. and desantis versus disney. the florida governor takes on the state's largest private employer for denouncing his
so-called "don't say gay" law. talk about a mickey mouse move. why the sunshine state is center stage many the culture wars. i'm jonathan capehart. this is "the sunday show." we begin this sunday with russia's latest attack on the ukrainian port city of odesa earlier this morning. black smoke filled the sky above an oil refinery after the city was rocked by loud explosions from missile strikes. but russian defense ministry says it destroyed the refinery and three fuel storage facilities. this comes after volodymyr zelenskiy said in his latest address that russian troops are aiming to seize the eastern and southern regions of the country. but even as the ukrainians say they have liberated the kyiv region from russian forces, including the war-torn city of bucha, any celebration is tempered by the sobering destruction left behind.
residents crowded into finally get food and medicine, and we must warn you that the next video you are about to see is extremely graphic and hard to watch. it's important to see these images, but if you need to turn away, please do so now. this video from the associated press purports to show bodies of civilians in bucha and the ap reports that residents say they were killed by the russians without provocation. but amid the heartbreak and suffering, could there be a glimmer of hope? ukraine's negotiators says draft treaty documents are at an advanced enough stage for zelenskyy and putin to start peace negotiations, but according to russia's chief negotiator, the draft is not yet ready for a meeting between the two leaders. joining me now, from lviv, ukraine, gabe gutierrez. gabe, what can you tell us about that missile strike in odesa?
>> reporter: jonathan, good morning. as you mentioned, russian ministry of defense says it destroyed an oil refinery and several fuel storage facilities in the southern port city of odesa, a city that had been bracing for a russian attack for several weeks. it's a key location along the black sea. no word on any injuries of these air strikes this morning, but as you said, a plume of billowing black smoke could be seen throughout the area. jonathan, this comes as russia is expected to intensify its attacks on the eastern and southern parts of the country, even as it pulls its forces from northern cities. and we are seeing that disturbing images, those disturbing images from the northern part of the country in and around kyiv. and the suburb of bucha, which as you mentioned, is now the scene of what locals are calling a massacre. president zelenskyy this morning referring to it as a genocide, as dead bodies were seen on the streets, some with their hands tied behind their backs, some of
the men on bicycles, and witnesses saying that these residents were attacked indiscriminately by these russian forces, but now that those russian soldiers have pulled out, we're starting to see the extent of this devastation. all this as residents many-in mariupol, the southern part of ukraine, are being evacuated, hundreds of them at time. we understand the humanitarian corridor, humanitarian buss are taking those residents outside of that besieged city. and this all comes, jonathan, as you said as there's a potential for a face-to-face meeting between president zelenskyy and president putin. however, there is nothing in writing, and russia's chief negotiator said today that while the peace treaty negotiations are set to resume tomorrow, he does not share the same optimism of a potential meeting. jonathan? >> nbc's gabe gutierrez. thank you for your reporting. stay safe. earlier this morning, i had
a chance to sit down with state department spokesman ned bryce on the ongoing efforts to assist ukraine. joining me now, state department spokesman ned price. welcome back to "the sunday show." >> good morning, jonathan. thanks for having me. >> as we have seen the devastating pictures out of bucha, ukraine's foreign ministry is calling the civilian. killings a massacre. your response to that. >> the pictures we are seeing are just heartwrenching, and these are the latest series and just devastating images that have emerged from this conflict. a couple things on this. we have known for some time that the russians had these kinds of atrocities in mind. in fact, before the russian aggression began against ukraine, we warned of this very type of occurrence. and now we're seeing it in vivid color. when it comes to our sanctions, we've always said that we will continue applying pressure on
president putin, on the kremlin, on all of those around him, including oligarchs and cronies, who were empowering this war of choice against ukraine until and unless the kremlin de-escalates, until and unless the violence diminishes, until and unless these atrocities come to an end. i suspect you will soon see additional pressure applied. when it comes to these images out of bucha, we've already assessed that russia's forces have committed war crimes. what we're doing, we are collecting information, one, to shine a spotlight on presigsly what they're doing, but two, to ensure all of those who have perpetrated these atrocities and all of those who ordered these atrocities are held to account. that's our mission. >> you say that you've determined that war crimes have been committed. does that mean formal action is going to be taken next week to hold russia and vladimir putin accountable? >> well, we've already taken -- long taken formal action to hold vladimir putin and russia accountable. you look at the unprecedented
set of financial sanctions, of export controls, of other economic measureser, that together with our international partners around the world, that we've enacted. you see the kind of account thablt we're talking about. you can measure that in any number of ways. most estimates show that the russian economy will contract by 10%. you see international companies fleeing russia by the day, wanting nothing to do with this market, wanting nothing do with this war effort. you look at the russian stock market. you look at the value of the ruble. you look at inflation. you look at any number of metrics, and you see the toll of the sanctions. but, look, sanctions are a means to an end. they're not an end in and of themselves. the end we're after is bringing this war to a close, diminishing the violence, saving lives. that's why we're holding russia to account with these measures, but it's also why we are providing unprecedented amount of security assistance to our ukrainian partners. $2.3 billion in the course of this administration alone. >> ned, we've got to talk about
the security assistance, but let's talk about the sanctions against russia. you brought up the russian ruble. after 49 days, the russian ruble has recovered almost to its pre-sanctions value. why haven't the sanctions worked? >> they have. this is almost entirely artificial. the ruble is on life support with draconian measures that the kremlin has been forced to take to artificially prop up the value of the ruble. they are preventing russians, preventing others around the world from selling rubles precisely to establish this floor and ensuring that the value we see reflected on the market isn't actually the actual worth of the ruble today. when it comes to the russian economy, 30 years of economic integration have been undone in the past five weeks alone. you look at the stock market. it's still 40% off its high late last year. look at the value of the ruble, artificial as it might be, and it is still off. there is no question that the
measures we have imposed against president putin, against the kremlin, against those who are prosecuting this war have had a significant bite, and that bite will only go stronger as we tighten the noose, as we enact new measures, and as we close any loopholes that may exist with your partners and allies. >> what can you tell us about the administration transferring soviet-made tanks to the donbas region? >> what i can tell you is that we have provided an unprecedented amount of security assistance, $2.3 billion in the course of this administration, $1.6 billion over the course of the past month alone. we have provided supplies directly from our own stocks, working with u.s. industry here in this country to do the same, but then also working with allies and partners around the world to provide the ukrainians with precisely what they need to take on the threat they're facing from russia. and we have authorized countries to provide u.s. origin equipment to the ukrainians, in some cases
countries are providing weapons from their own stocks. now, we are finding precisely and determining precisely what the ukrainians need, whether it's surface-to-air systems, anti-aircraft systems, anti-tank system, drones, and we're providing that. just about every single day the united states or a partner around the world is providing a delivery of security assistance to ukraine. more than 30 countries are providing security assistance. >> ned, how serious are these peace talks in turkey? i'm wondering if the russians are just playing for time as they're pushed out of the kyiv region and moving its attention to east. >> well, jonathan, as the secretary of state said last week, there is what russia says and there is what russia does. unfortunately, there's been a great dissonance between those two elements since the prosecution of this war began. if you listen to the promising accounts that have come out from the russian side, those have been in stark contrast to continued bombardment of kyiv,
kharkiv, mariupol, of other towns and cities across ukraine. we have not seen any indication yet that the russians are truly serious about de-escalating this war. even when it comes to pronouncements of withdrawals. these are not withdrawals. these are redeployments. as the president said in warsaw in his speech, we have to steel ourselves for this conflict going on for quite some time. but rather than sitting back and watching what we are doing is doing everything we can to provide our ukrainian partners with, as i said before, the security assistance that they need, which not only helps them be effective on the battlefield but also strengthens their hand at the negotiating table because ultimately we know that this conflict has to be resolved diplomatically, even if it's not the channel, a channel that exists today. there needs to be a diplomatic resolution to this, and there's what we're working with our ukrainian partners to support. >> ned, less than a minute left. last question for you. "new york times" reported this week that putin's popularity in
russia is soaring at 82%, up from 69% in january. how concerned are you that this will only strengthen putin's resolve? >> well, we're concerned that the russian people are being fed a steady diet of lies, and that is precisely why you've seen some of these indications of rising popularity. but just as the value of the ruble is artificial, much of this is artificial too. when you ask a russian citizen what he or she thinks of vladimir putin, many are too scared to tell you the truth because they know the dire consequences for speaking the truth. you can talk to the 15,000 people, any one of the 15,000 people who have been arrested, detained for peacefully protesting this war in towns and cities across russia, including vladimir putin's hometown of st. petersburg, and the russian people know that the consequences that await them for speaking the truth, and vladimir putin is trying to intimidate, is trying to suppress his own people in every which way he can. but ultimately, that will give way to the truth. that's -- and we see that every
day in russia. >> ned price, state department spokesperson, thank you very much for coming back to the sunday show. >> thank you, jonathan. coming up, the january 6th committee and the doj probe zero in on trump's inner circle. and we'll talk about the role some members of congress may have played in the insurrection. (vo) verizon business unlimited is going ultra! get more. like manny. event planning with our best plan ever. (manny) yeah, that's what i do. (vo) with 5g ultra wideband in many more cities, you get up to 10 times the speed at no extra cost. verizon is going ultra, so your business can get more. ♪ well, the stock is bubbling in the pot ♪ ♪ just till they taste what we've got ♪ [ tires squeal, crash ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive gets you right back to living the dream. now, where were we? [ cheering ]
allergies don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily stops your body from overreacting to allergens all season long. psst! psst! flonase all good. i don't just play someone brainy on tv - i'm an actual neuroscientist. and i love the science behind neuriva plus. unlike ordinary memory supplements, neuriva plus fuels six key indicators of brain performance. more brain performance? yes, please! neuriva. think bigger.
♪♪ i'm using xfinity xfi's powerful, reliable connection to stream “conference calls” on every one of these devices. i'm “filing my taxes” early. “wedding planning.” we're streaming uh... “seminars.” are your vows gonna make me cry? yes! babe. (chuckles) look at that! another write off. that's a foul! what kind of call is that!? definitely “not” watching basketball. not us. i wouldn't do that.
this could be a critical week in the january 6th investigation. the full house could vote soon on a recommendation from the committee that former trump aides peter navarro and dan scavino face contempt of congress charges for defying subpoenas. on thursday, the committee heard from jared kushner for more than six hours. so far, kushner is the most senior member of the trump administration and first trump family member to appear before the panel. his testimony comes just days after reports of a nearly eight-hour gap in donald trump's white house phone logs during the insurrection. joining me now is a member of the january 6th committee, chairman of the house intelligence committee, and author of the book "midnight in washington," congressman adam schiff. welcome back to the show. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> so, "the new york times" reports this morning that president biden has told confidants that he wants attorney general garland to act
less like a ponderous judge and more like a prosecutor willing to take a decisive action. you share that sentiment, don't you. >> i do share the sentiment that i think the justice department is erring on the side of not wanting to create controversy by investigating those that may have committed crimes but nonetheless were high up in the last administration. i just don't think that's tenable if there's evidence of crime, it needs to be investigated regardless of who it is. if you're into the principle that the law applies equally to everyone, it has to apply equally to everyone. you have a federal judge in california saying donald trump among others likely committed federal crimes, tape recordings of the former president on the phone with the secretary of state in georgia demanding that he find 11,780 votes that didn't exist, then i think the justice department has an obligation to follow the law, follow the facts, regardless of who it
implicates. >> chairman, i have a list of who the committee has found in contempt. steve bannon, mark meadows, jeffrey clark, peter navarro, dan scavino jr. so far only steve bannon has had any action taken against him and also as you point out that a formal contempt of congress citing has not yet been made on navarro and scavino, but mark meadows, the former chief of staff, the committee sent it over a while ago. why hasn't the doj moved on that? >> the short answer is i don't know. they have had the referral for some months now. and we hope that they will pursue it. if congress can't enforce its subpoena, and we require the justice department here where someone is in criminal contempt, to prosecute these cases, it makes congress essentially a paper tiger, unable to do its
oversight, witnesses able to simply thumb their nose as a subpoena. that is not the way it's been historically. it can't be the way it is now, or congress becomes a mere play thing with a corrupt executive that knows, well, congress can't do anything if i stone wall all subpoenas. so we hope they move forward on meld does soon, and with respect to scavino and navarro, we will be taking up their criminal referrals in the full house this week, refer to the justice department. these cases, all of them, should be fairly simple given that none of them appeared. and you just don't have a right no matter what privilege you think you have to simply decide i'm not even going to bother to show up. >> somebody who did show up was jared kushner, the former president's son-in-law. he was not at the white house during the insurrection. i'm wondering what value did his voluntary testimony provide the committee? >> you know, i can't comment on any of the depositions that
we've done or may have done, but, you know, i can say more generally that those close to the president, including his family, may have knowledge, whether they were in the white house at the time, whether they were at the mall at the time, what the president was doing, who he was on the phone with, what he was thinking. and they may have had information also about any number of other efforts to overturn the election, just the violent act on january 6th and the multiple lines of effort that included bogus federal litigation, efforts to displace the leadership of the department of justice, that involved efforts to subvert state and local elections officials, so not commenting on any particular witness here, but they may have information about a range of issues of deep interest to the committee and the american people. where do things stand on ivanka trump, jared kushner's wife, and the former president's daughter testifying before the committee? >> you know, again, i can't comment on specific witnesses,
but i can tell you that most of the people that we're reaching out to have been cooperative. there are some, and you learn who they are when we subpoena them, when they're not cooperative and even more so when they refuse even under subpoena, when we make a criminal referral, but happily most people are doing their patriotic duty, and they're coming in and sharing information they know with the committee. as a result, we've interviewed 700, 800 witnesses now. we're compiling a voluminous record of all that went into this effort to overturn the election. we'll be doing very high-profile public hearings soon. and we're compiling a report of the information for the american people. >> you said highly public hearings soon. care to put a specific month to that? >> you know, i think our chairman has said publicly that we're shooting for probably may to begin those hearings. and, you know, there are going
to be i think -- they are going to be highly watched, important hearings revealing for the first time new facts about efforts to -- for the first time in our history, interfere with a peaceful transfer of power. the purpose of this is to inform the public of just how close we came to losing our democrademoc why we're not out tf woods, and what we need to do to safe guard it going forward. >> i interviewed chairman thompson a while back. he said those televised hearings would be in prime time, must-see tv. last question. has the committee been in contact with ginni thomas, wife of clarence thomas, or anyone representing or in contact with her to testify before the committee? >> i hate to have another question i can't directly answer. i can only say that witnesses that can share information with
the committee that's pertinent to an effort to pressure mike pence to ignore his constitutional duty to count the electors and -- or others are of deep interest to the committee. we home they'll voluntarily choose to provide information to the committee, but we're not commenting on specific witnesses. >> you can't blame me for trying. >> i can't blame you for trying. i certainly understand. >> come back again and i'll try again. congressman adam schiff, chair of the house intelligence committee. thanks for coming back to "the sunday show." >> thanks, jonathan. we've got some breaking news out of sacramento, california, where police say at least six people were killed and nine others were injured in a mass shooting in the city's center overnight. no one is in custody. we'll bring you the latest as more information becomes available. this week a federal judge ruled that trump more than
likely committed crimes. but will he face real-life consequences? i'll discover that after the break. wayfair's got just what you need to be outdoorsy. your way! shop the biggest selection of outdoor furniture and furnish your habitat from you habitat. get a new grill and cook over an open flame. now that's outdoorsy! go wild on garden decor. find shelter from the elements and from predators. or just be one with nature. this year spend less and go all outdoorsy at wayfair. ♪ wayfair you got just what i need ♪
we follow the facts and the law wherever they lead. and that's all i can say about the investigation. it's our long-standing norm to not comment on ongoing investigations. the best way to undermine an investigation to say things out of court about how they're going. so i'm going to leave that one aside. the only pressure i feel and the only pressure that our line of prosecutors feel is to do the right thing. that means we follow the facts and the law wherever they may lead. >> attorney general merrick far land is facing enormous pressure to file charges against donald trump after a federal judge found that trump, quote, more
than likely committed a felony by trying to obstruct congress on january 6th. this comes as the justice department expands its investigation into the preparation and financing of the rally that led up to the insurrection. joining me now is former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york, daniel goldman, and melissa murray, professor at nyu's school of law and co-host of the podcast "strict scrutiny." thanks for coming back to "the sunday show." daniel, you haven't been here in a while. is the growing alarm about garland's pace overblown? are you as concerned as members of the january 6th committee that he isn't moving fast enough? >> well, i don't think that he moved fast enough during the year 2021, but i think what came out this week was really significant, not just the opinion from a federal judge, which caries its own weight,
finding more likely than not, donald trump, john eastman and others committed crimes related to the effort to overturn the election, but perhaps more importantly reporting that the january 6th investigation, which is the largest investigation in the department of justice history, has expanded its scope beyond the day of january 6th. and i and others have been calling for that investigation to broaden and widen and include the months leading up to january 6th and the evidence that the judge in california cited for why he thought that more likely than not donald trump and others committed crimes. and so, if we are to take judge garland at his word, which we have no reason not to, then they are following the facts and the law, and they're expanding the scope, and the judge carter out in los angeles laid out the facts, so if you are following
the facts and the law, as garland has promised, then you must include those facts that judge carter cited and that we know to be in the public record. as a former prosecutor, i can say those facts are significant and meaningful evidence that the former president and others committed crimes related to the effort to overturn the election. so i feel much bet they are week than i have in mos past that the department is moving towards an investigation that ultimately will lead up to donald trump. >> melissa, your reaction to what daniel was saying but also to pressure that's being brought to bear on the attorney general. do you feel better this week and you have in previous weeks as daniel feels? >> i almost always agree with
daniel, but let me just say i think the president was in a bind here. he needed a safe pair of hands at the tiller for the department of justice after everything that had happened over the past four years. and merrick garland was surely that. but he was also someone who came from a different kind of work. he had been a federal prosecutor before but spent much of the last part of his career being a federal judge, which is a more deliberative undertaking than perhaps being a federal prosecutor in some regards. so you can't on the one hand want someone to restore the institutional confidence in the department of justice and someone who will accelerate what would be seen as quite an aggressive investigation, unprecedented investigation of a former president. so i think attorney general garland is trying to strike that balance, and i think dan is right on what has happened over the course of the last year, maybe slow, but what build this week. i think judge carter's opinion, which was many the context of whether or not john eastman could invoke the attorney/client privilege, judge carter held there is an exception to that
privilege for communications undertaken in furtherance of a crime. that's where all the discussion of whether or not the former president had engaged in criminal conduct is coming from. but that i think will be an accelerant to pushing this forward and perhaps more swiftly than has previously been the case. >> joy reid interviewed vice president harris earlier this week and sort of asked the same question i just asked the two of you. here's how the vice president responded. >> well, i will tell you maybe as a point of distinction between our administration and the previous administration, we do not interfere or attempt to influence the investigative and prosecutorial decisions of the department of justice. >> okay. we have less than a minute, about a minute left. but i want each of you the answer this question because what the vice president is saying there is the way things should be but "the new york times" is reporting today, you
know, unnamed sources but who are familiar with the president's thinking where they say that the president, attorney general garland would act less like a ponderous judge and more like an aggressive prosecutor when it comes to these cases involving the previous administration. your reactions to that tension there real quickly, daniel, then melissa. >> look, i think joe biden of course, you know, as a politician may want things to move faster, but one of the things i think a year or two down the line that we will be happy about is that merrick garland took his time, was separate was separate from the president and the white house, did this complete oi on his own without any interference, because that will give whatever he decides much more legitimacy and credibility. >> melissa?
>> if you don't want a ponderous judge, don't appoint a ponderous judge. you appointed merrick garland for a reason. i think dan is right. that kind of measure of deliberation will in the end turn out to be the right course. >> i agree with both of you because it could be if he didn't -- if he weren't this deliberative and he went out there with a case and loss could do more damage going that route than if he had done nothing at all. daniel goldman, melissa murray thanks for coming to "the sunday show." up next, the wife of a supreme court justice sending text messages to a sitting president's chief of staff to overturn a legitimate election raises ethics questions. but who calls the shots over there when it comes to ethics rules? we'll find out after the break. ♪ ♪
we believe there's an innovator in all of us. ♪ that's why we build technology that makes it possible for every business... and every person... to come to the table and do more incredible things. to help prevent bleeding gums, try saying hello gumwash with parodontax active gum health. it kills 99% of plaque bacteria
and forms an antibacterial shield. try parodontax active gum health mouthwash. if you have copd, ask your doctor about breztri. breztri gives me better breathing and helps prevent flare-ups. before breztri, i was stuck in the past. i still had bad days, flare-ups which kept me from doing what i love. my doctor said for my copd, it was time for breztri. breztri gives you better breathing, symptom improvement, and helps prevent flare-ups. like no other copd medicine, breztri was proven to reduce flare-ups by 52%. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur.
if you have copd, ask your doctor about breztri. you're a one-man stitchwork master. but your staffing plan needs to go up a size. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire when the supreme court
rejected donald trump's push to withhold documents from the january 6th committee, justice clarence thomas was the lone dissenting vote. he's both the longest serving member of the supreme court and the senior associate justice, second only to chief justice john roberts when it comes to the power of assigning opinions. reports of text messages between his wife and trump's then chief of staff mark meadows urging him to overturn the 2020 election take on a larger significance. i should point out nbc news has reached out to the thomases and meld does, but has not received a response. joining me now is npr's legal affairs correspondent nina totenberg. welcome to "the sunday show." >> my pleasure, jonathan. >> chief justice clarence thomas said they can police himself writing the judiciary's power to manage its internal affairs insulates courts from
inappropriate political influence and is crucial to preserving public trust in its work as a separate and co-equal branch of government. so what do you think roberts is going to do here, particularly with him not being able to force thomas to do anything he doesn't want to do? >> well, i think this is very complicated because, you know, obviously i have no idea what the chief is going to do, but it would be at least within the realm of possibility that he would have a quiet conversation with thomas and say, look, in some of these cases, perhaps not all, but in the january 6th cases where you're now on record as being part of the white house strategy for dealing with this, her actual statements in her texts are part of the official record that may eventually be before the supreme court. and in that sense, the statute
says you're supposed to recuse. now, the statute technically is not binding on the supreme court. it's binding on lower court judges. but at some point the implications for the court's reputation by itself make it i think necessary for some justices on occasion to recuse. they're remarkably untransparent about it normally when they do it, and when they don't do it, actually only one major exception i can think of, don't give extended reasons why justice scla leah, when he did not recuse himself from a case that involved vice president cheney but mainly was styled with his name and involved some decisions of the white house not to make certain documents available, justice scalia did not reexcuse. and when he was asked to do so,
he eventually wrote an extended -- i think he called it a memorandum -- explaining why. but mainly the court justices don't do that, and thomas has give nonexplanation for why he has not recused, and nobody has formally asked him yet. but with one of those cases gets to the supreme court, one might suspect that somebody might ask. >> right. >> go ahead. >> no. finish that last thought. then i want your reaction to something speaker pelosi said. >> well, the court's numbers, political approval numbers, are going way down. and this kind of thing doesn't help. and that's -- the court lives on its reputation. if it doesn't have the trust of the american public, it doesn't have anything. >> so let me have you watch what speaker pelosi had to say on this matter on wednesday. >> why should they have lower
standards than members of congress in terms of reporting and the rest? so, you know, i've heard people say from time to time, well, it's a personal decision of a judge as to whether he should recuse himself. well, if your wife is an admitted and proud contributor to a coup of our country, maybe you should weigh that in your ethical standards. >> so, nina, we have a minute left. but, you know, listening to the speaker, those are strong words but leaves me wondering does congress have the power to tell this supreme court what to do? can congress impose ethics standards on the supreme court? a little bit of "schoolhouse rock" here. >> that's the ultimate question. congress imposes those rules on itself, and typically independent branches of government, the executive, the
legislative, and the judiciary, make their own rules. but there are instances in which the court has upheld rules for each other's branches. and i think that's one of the unanswered questions here. >> i'm going to squeeze in one more question fresh off the heels of judge ketanji brown jackson's contentious hearing and this thomas scandal. do you think the american people are questioning the integrity of the supreme court? the poll numbers are low in terms of its public standing. do those two situations make it even worse? >> they don't help except of course ketanji brown jackson got asked i think by senator cruz if she was going to recuse herself from the upcoming major affirmative action case. and she said, quote, that's my plan. and i think the senator was shocked. but she, unlike othered recently who have dodged and weaved in their confirmation hearings, including justice barrett about whether they would recuse many
the future, she just said yes, i will. >> this is going to be an interesting time to watch the court. nina totenberg, npr, thank you. >> thank you, jonathan. after the break, we go inside one of the midterm races we're following with one of the candidates from maryland's fourth congressional district. you see him right there. discomfort back there? instead of using aloe, or baby wipes, or powders, try the cooling, soothing relief or preparation h. because your derriere deserves expert care. preparation h. get comfortable with it.
my name is douglas. i'm a writer/director and i'm still working. in the kind of work that i do, you are surrounded by people who are all younger than you. i had to get help somewhere along the line to stay competitive. i discovered prevagen. i started taking it and after a period of time, my memory improved.
it was a game-changer for me. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. in our ongoing "on the run", we turn our attention to the democratic primary in maryland's 4th congressional district. glenn ivey for prince george's county is running for a third time for this seat. alongside a crowded field of candidates, including former congresswoman donna edwards and state delegate jazz lewis. joining me now is glenn ivey. welcome to "the sunday show." >> thanks for having me, jonathan. >> all right. i'm asking you the same first question i ask everybody in this, in this segment. why are you running? >> you know, i'm running because so many people, not only in my district, but across the country are really struggling to survive. i mean, many of them are struggling to, you know, avoid
foreclosure or eviction. many of them are struggling to pay for, you know, medical drugs that they need, prescription drugs that they need. many of them are struggling to make -- the ability to get basic necessities and they're being forced to make choices between eating and eating. i know washington can do more to help them so i'd like to go to washington and work ton their behalf. i have experience working on capitol hill and i think i can help deliver that. i worked for congressman john conyers and senator daschle. we got a lot done during that time period and i'd like to do more to help put things in place so they can live their dreams and accomplish their goals. >> so, i mean, we're looking at your policy positions here on the screen right now. police accountability, creating jobs, growing the economy, medicare for all, defending democracy. you just touted your capitol
hill experience. you worked on capitol hill. you know what it's like. the folks you named who you worked for, that was during a time when stuff got done up here at the capitol. these days the place is broke down, so why do you think, why do you think by being elected to congress, you could do -- get anything done, let's say, on the economy? >> well, let me say this. i mean, things were broken when i was there, too. for example, part of what i did when i was working on capitol hill during that time period was the whitewater hearings. and so when newt gingrich and that tsunami came through and the republicans took control of the house and the senate, they turned the banking committee into the senate whitewater committee. because they couldn't beat bill clinton at the polls, they tried to beat him at the hearing room. so i worked at the team under
senator paul sarbanes and others to fight back to make sure republican excesses were controlled and kept in line and we were successful with that. now, if we saw soon to be justice jackson's hearings, if you saw those last week, i think we know what's likely to come if the republicans take control of the house. they tried every trick in the book to try and take her down, and they'll try and take down the biden administration in the hearing room just like they did the clinton administration. so if it goes that direction, i'm ready to hit the ground running and fight fire with fire. >> i was going to say, you know, back then you know, okay, let's say it's a bicycle. maybe back then the front tire was flat. but mr. ivey, these days, the bicycle, the back tire is gone. the seat's missing, and the chain is rusted. just putting it out there. you know, everyone who comes here, i also tell them that it's political malpractice if they do not give their web address.
what is yours? >> go to glenn ivey.com. that's glenn can two ns, i-v-e-y. let me say this rile quick, too. things have gotten done. the biden administration has made historic legislation across the finish line. i think we can do more. and there are pieces of this, like, you know, prescription drug pricing. i think that's legislation that can get passed and i want to be part of the team that helps get that done. >> criminal justice reform? >> absolutely. i think there was a big step that was taken in the right direction, but based on my experience as state's attorney, you know, i know that we can do more to prosecute excesses with police conduct because we did it. and at the same time, we brought about reductions from historic highs and violent crimes to historic lows in violent crime at the same time. so i know that we can do both because we did it here in prince george's county. by bringing people together, working with stakeholders,
including police in community and faith community leaders and we got it done. we can do it again. >> all right. glenn ivey, good luck on the campaign trail. thank you for coming to "the sunday show." >> thank you. i appreciate it. in the next hour i'll talk to a former high-ranking lieutenant general about military shifts in ukraine, plus why you need to be watching what's going on in florida after governor ron desantis signed the so-called "don't say gay" bill into law. stay with us. much more coming up on "the sunday show." derriere discomfort. we try to soothe it with this. cool it with this. and relieve it with this. but new preparation h soothing relief spray is the 21st century way to do all three. even touch free. preparation h. get comfortable with it. ♪ i may be close to retirement, but i'm as busy as ever. careful now. - thanks. -you got it. and thanks to voya, i'm confident about my future. -oh dad, the twins are now... -vegan. i know. i got 'em some of those plant burgers.
-nice. -yeah. voya provides guidance for the right investments, and helps me be prepared for unexpected events. they make me feel like i've got it all under control. [crowd cheers] because i do. okay, that was awesome. voya. be confident to and through retirement. okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete balanced nutrition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪
♪("i've been everywhere" by johnny cash) ♪ ♪i've traveled every road in this here land!♪ ♪i've been everywhere, man.♪ ♪i've been everywhere, man.♪ ♪of travel i've had my share, man.♪ ♪i've been everywhere.♪ ♪♪ welcome to the eat fresh refresh at subway wait, that's new wait, you're new too nobody told you? subway's refreshing with better ingredients, better footlongs, and better spokespeople. because you gotta you gotta refresh to be fresh
>> announcer: i can't even have a meeting with the shelling is going on. first the cease-fire, then we can have a meeting with russian president. if they have an approach that they making this authoritarian decisions, why do we need this bloodshed drama performance for? let's simply sit down together the two of us. >> welcome back to "the sunday show." i'm jonathan capehart. we are now in the sixth week of russia's invasion of ukraine and this morning ukrainian president
volodymyr zelenskyy called for a cease-fire before potential peace negotiations with russian president putin. russian military forces have finally pulled back from the kyiv region, but the destruction left behind is devastating. ukrainian troops rolled through the streets of bucha which lies just outside of the capital, flagging items they deem to be possible explosives, and clearing barricades. and just a warning. the video that you are about to see is graphic and may be hard to watch, but it's vital that we show it. sickening images show bodies strewn in the streets. according to the mayor of bucha, more than 300 residents were killed. ukraine's foreign minister is calling for immediate devastating g-7 sanctions in response to what he is calling the bucha massacre. meanwhile, russia is keeping up its attacks. earlier this morning the russian defense ministry says they launched missiles at the city of
odessa, destroying an oil refinery and three fuel storage facilities. joining me now live from lviv, nbc news correspondent gabe gutierrez. gabe, what can you tell us about this latest attack from the russians, and the new pictures out of bucha? >> reporter: hi there, jonathan. good morning. well, yes, this morning in odessa, that southern port city, an historic city, saw a series of airstrikes. the russian ministry of defense says an oil refinery was destroyed as well as several fuel storage facilities. no word yet on any injuries, but that was an attack on the southern part of the country. we are also hearing of fighting intensifying in the east. jonathan, the pictures are just devastating. as you said, the pictures are extremely disturbing to watch. there are civilians strewn
across streets. witnesses say that men were shot. some on bicycles, some had their hands tied behind their backs. and this comes after residents in that area spent several weeks without food, power, electricity. the ukrainians say that the russian forces were pushed back, and so now we're starting to see the full extent of the devastation. international organizations are already speaking out, calling this a war crime, saying that there needs to be an investigation here. and just this morning, president zelenskyy in an interview calling it an atrocity. take a listen. >> translator: indeed this is genocide. the elimination of the whole nation and people, we are the citizens of ukraine. we have more than 100
nationalities. this is about destruction and extermination of all these nationalities. >> reporter: and president zelenskyy saying that if there were to be any peace agreement, a condition of that would first have to be the withdrawal of all russian troops, that there could be no peace agreement, he says, before that happens. and, jonathan, as you reference, there are now the possibility of a face-to-face meeting between president zelenskyy and vladimir putin, at least that was suggested by the lead ukrainian negotiator yesterday, that would happen in turkey. but, jonathan, this morning a bit of cold water put on that by the chief negotiator for the russians who says that while peace talks or discussions at least will continue tomorrow, he does not share that same optimism of a potential meeting between presidents putin and zelenskyy. jonathan? >> nbc's gabe gutierrez. thank you very much. please stay safe.
let's bring in lieutenant general steven twit ty, general, thank you very much for coming to "the sunday show." first i want to get your reaction to the sound we played at the top of this hour of president zelenskyy calling for a cease-fire before he can meet with president putin for peace talks. is that even feasible? and what needs to happen to actually make it a reality? >> well, what i will tell you is, jonathan, the next couple of weeks will be crucial for both countries. when you take a look at the russians, president putin has asked that he claim victory by may. and when you take a look at that, that's a lofty and ambitious goal if he plans to claim victory in the east and in the south. if you take a look at where he's talking about, that means he's going to have to take the two
autonomous regions that he's claimed. he's going to have to take the donbas. he's going to have to take mariupol, then across in the south all the way from mikalov all the way to odessa. lofty goals with a country that has a ground force that is not up to par and not capable, not well trained, and so forth. on the ukrainian side -- go ahead, jonathan. >> no, go ahead, general twitty. >> i don't think they fought their hard fight yet. the hard fight will be the autonomous region, the donbas. it is critical ukrainians stay on the offense. it is also critical -- if they did this, i was amazed they pulled off the attack in russia.
that is deep in order to fight them on two fronts, in russia's territory and also within ukraine. if they can keep those tight things up and if the west to include the u.s. can continue to supply them with weapons and what they need, i think that the ukrainians will be successful. >> all right. so, i'm glad you broke that down just like that. there was a good tutorial there. i want to start with russia. what do you make of the news out on friday, that russia was conscripting more than 130,000 troops, one, and two, publicly saying that they told those troops that they will not be going to hotspots, i.e., ukraine? what do you make of the conscription and what do you make of the promise to the new troops that they won't be going to ukraine? >> i have a couple of thoughts. yes, when you hear 130,000,
that's a lot. i don't think he'll meet that lofty goal as well. but what i will tell you, these troops are showing up, again, untrained, leaderless. they don't know what they're going into, so they won't have the will to fight. and it will be very similar to what we have seen the past five weeks. soldiers need to know why they're fighting. they need to understand, that way they can have the will to fight. in this case, i don't think the russians have that. >> and when it comes to ukraine, i know a little bit of your thinking in terms of that push you were talking about by the russians to try to wrap this up or make major gains by may. but one of the things i believe you think they will do in order to reach that may goal is use chemical weapons. do i have that right? >> i'll tell you a couple
things. go back to what i said about the lack of a professional ground force in the russian army. the russians are not known foreground warfare. they're not known for urban warfare. what you've seen over the last couple of weeks, the russians get in a bind on the ground, they pull back. then they start pummelling civilians, infrastructure with missiles and artillery and so forth. i think you're going to find the same thing that's going to happen in this east/south fight. they will give up on trying to use the ground force, so they will pummel these cities and make them look like we have in mariupol right now. in addition to that, remember, putin wants a victory and so chemical weapons could come into play. i think, you know, he's put out on the table a victory by his victory day. and so, you know, he's going to try and get that victory and
chemical weapons may be one way he goes about getting that victory. >> and then, general twitty, if he does use chemical weapons, you are a member of the military, retired, but you're a member of the military. if he were to do that, if putin were to use chemical weapons in ukraine, what should the west's response be specifically? >> yeah, i think president biden has made it clear that there will be some type of response. i know the pentagon, plus general walters there at united states european command, they put together what is called flexible response options to provide to the president in the event that chemical weapons are used. so you can anticipate across the diplomatic information, military or economic instruments of power that those levers be pulled in the event of chemical weapons used by russia. >> retired lieutenant general
steven twitty, thank you for coming to "the sunday show." we'll have to have you back soon. >> thank you, good to be with you, jonathan. coming up, the happiest place on earth is vowing to help repeal florida's shameful don't say gaye law. why my next guest says they need to focus on florida. we'll talk about it after the break. t after the break. allergies don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily stops your body from overreacting to allergens all season long. psst! psst! flonase all good.
to come to the table and do more incredible things. ♪ well, the stock is bubbling in the pot ♪ ♪ just till they taste what we've got ♪ [ tires squeal, crash ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive gets you right back to living the dream. now, where were we? [ cheering ] now, where were we? i don't just play someone brainy on tv - i'm an actual neuroscientist. and i love the science behind neuriva plus. unlike ordinary memory supplements, neuriva plus fuels six key indicators of brain performance. more brain performance? yes, please! neuriva. think bigger. >> tech: cracked windshield? make it easy and schedule with safelite, because you can track us and see exactly when we'll be there. >> woman: i have a few more minutes. let's go! >> tech vo: that's service that fits your schedule. go to safelite.com. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪
over its skis on this. look, there are policy disputes and that's fine. but when you're trying to impose a woke ideology on our state, we view that as a significant threat. this wokeness will destroy this country if we let it run unabated. >> oh, brother. florida governor ron desantis is going after disney. the state's largest employer for publicly rejecting the so-called "don't say gay" bill that he just signed into law. he signalled support for
revoking disney's 55-year-old self-governing status after disney issued a statement saying, quote, our goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down in the courts. just the latest sign that florida has become ground zero in the culture wars. joining me now is national affairs contributor for the grio dr. nee quarterlay. >> good to be here. >> you wrote about targeting the lgbt and african american country. why is it important to focus on what is happening in florida right now? >> it's so important that the country really has a laser focus on florida because florida is really the canary in the coal mine. if governor desantis and republicans in florida are successful in advancing their anti-woke agenda, their anti-lgbtq agenda, dare i say
their u.s. apartheid agenda, we can expect to see some really dark days ahead. you know, the "don't say gay" bill and the stay woke act together really represent an existential crisis for people that are both black and lgbtq, focus that live at that intersection. we're talking about a double whammy here. we cannot allow this to happen on our watch. democrats cannot allow that to watch it on our watch. what's the purpose of power if we don't use it? they have the power to pass the equality act and make the president's executive order on racial equity a law. >> um-hmm, okay. come on, you are a student of politics. you've been in politics. you know, one, that this stuff plays well to the gop base. it's boater to make -- better to
make people angry and frightened to pass laws that help everybody. the other thing i hear you on is congress, particularly the senate, passing the equality act, but it is a 50/50 senate. isn't 9 solution to elect more democrats to the senate so that the democratic majority is not beholden to, to senators in particular? >> i think it's all of the above. i think we've got to work the senate as it is. i think we've got to elect senators, both republicans and democrats, that are willing to unapologetically support equality. we're talking about equality. you know, just like we were talking about voting rights. you know, somehow, some way we've gotten off the rails here. the fact that, that trail blazers like you, jonathan, trail blazers like malcolm kenyatta running for u.s. senate
in pennsylvania, people like karine jean-pierre, white house deputy press secretary, states like florida and other places across the country could be erased from curriculum should be shocking to folks. we do not want to live in an america where it's okay to erase the contributions of our fellow americans, whether they are black, lgbtq, or anybody else. >> um-hmm. you are very kind to call me a trail blazer. but in addition to the noxious don't say gay law in florida, we see lots of anti-trans legislation, shocking anti-trans legislation being passed around the country. for democrats or progressives or just everyday americans who just want things to be fair for everyone, how can they push back
either from an activist perspective or even a rhetorical perspective against these efforts to belittle our fellow americans? >> i think the one thing that we can all do is really take a stand against the erasure that's taking place. i'll give you an example. senator from florida, scott, have gotten behind the rescue america agenda. that's what they're calling it. two of the plays in the agenda is getting out of the business of collecting data based on race and ethnicity. and gender identity. i've said this before, i'll say it again. when we're not data, when we're not part of the census, it makes it very easy for the other side to pretend we don't exist, and
really craft a government and government policies that reflect that, that reflect an erasure of who we are. i think that's something we can all do right now, people in the government, people in the private sector and everything in between. >> i like that, no data, no justice. because also the other thing is if you don't exist on these tables, then you don't exist to the focus on capitol hill who are crafting budgets for your states and for your communities. doctor, thank you for coming back to "the sunday show." >> thank you, jonathan. guess who's back. aunt gloria is here and has a lot to say on some of the hottest topics this past week, and i promise she's got the takes you do not want to miss. stay right here. to help prevent bleeding gums, try saying hello gumwash with parodontax active gum health. it kills 99% of plaque bacteria and forms an antibacterial shield.
try parodontax active gum health mouthwash. (vo) verizon business unlimited is going ultra! get more. like manny. event planning with our best plan ever. (manny) yeah, that's what i do. (vo) with 5g ultra wideband in many more cities, you get up to 10 times the speed at no extra cost. verizon is going ultra, so your business can get more. wayfair's got just what you need to be outdoorsy. you get up to 10 times the speed at no extra cost. your way! shop the biggest selection of outdoor furniture and furnish your habitat from you habitat. get a new grill and cook over an open flame. now that's outdoorsy! go wild on garden decor. find shelter from the elements and from predators. or just be one with nature. this year spend less and go all outdoorsy at wayfair. ♪ wayfair you got just what i need ♪ ♪simply irresistible♪ ♪ ♪ ♪simply irresistible♪ applebee's irresist-a-bowls are back.
i'm noninvasive and i detect altered dna in your stool to find 92% of colon cancers, even in early stages. early stages? yep, it's for people 45 plus at average risk for colon cancer, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider if cologuard is right for you. consider it done. centuries ago, native californians ask your provider if cologuard is right for you. thrived on this land. now, we share a destiny with all californians. when voters granted our sovereign nations exclusive gaming rights, it advanced self-sufficiency and created thousands of good jobs. but now, out of state corporations are coming to california. their online sports betting initiative would break the promise between us. it's bad for tribes and all californians. join us. protect the promise.
mind to the oscars slap heard around the world, black america and really all of america has been on one cultural roller coaster, and many people have had lots to say about it. so i want to take just a moment to cut through all the noise and turn to someone i can always trust to tell us exactly how she sees it. joining me now is sunday show favorite, i should just call you sunday show special correspondent, my aunt, aunt gloria evan kennedy. aunt gloria, welcome back to "the sunday show." >> thank you, jonathan. it's good to be here. >> the last time you were here was before president biden had nominated ketanji brown jackson to the supreme court. now that she's on the cusp of making history as the first black woman justice of the supreme court, talk about how it feels to finally be this close to having a scotus -- member of the supreme court of the united
states who looks like america, who looks like you? >> it feels great. i knew she was well qualified and i kept in touch, i could not watch the questioning because i knew what was going to happen. it was so important that she remain calm and not show any emotions, and just answer the questions. because the attacks they made on her was not about her qualifications. it was about trying to aggravate her, to get her to respond, and she did not do that. so this is a great moment. i'm so pleased that we're going to have someone like her on the supreme court. it's unbelievable. everything that's happening in this biden administration is almost unbelievable. we have a vice-president, we have a supreme court person. you know, it's the greatest time for african americans, and we have to live up to that moment.
and i think she will. >> aunt gloria, i know you sporadically watch the hearings because you didn't want to see her attacks. i'm wondering, did you see senator cory booker when he was talking to judge jackson, and when she was wiping away tears at what he had to say? i'm wondering -- >> yes. >> what emotions did you have, not only hearing what senator booker was saying, but watching the reaction of judge jackson? >> she was wonderful. i think she was so proud that someone was defending her and, you know, we've seen it so many times, that people are going to attack you and it was so wonderful that he stood up for her. and i know that made her so proud, that made all of us proud that, you know, we've been through this so many times before that we're always considered less than. and it's amazing how previously
when she was nominated, she was fine. now she's going to the supreme court, people are backing away, you know. what was the difference? you can vote for her then, why can't you vote for her now? she's well qualified. >> right. >> it doesn't make -- but i've seen this so many times. in business and all situation, we are considered less than. it's so great to see someone who is going to be there representing us. the supreme court should be a variety of people, you know, of the country. we need to make sure all positions, there is a variety of people and we are there and represented, you know. >> aunt gloria, you know, senator ted cruz got up in his feelings while questioning judge jackson. lindsey graham said some things -- he's one of those people you're talking about who was just fine voting for her
previous position on the federal judiciary, but not this go around. what are your thoughts about those people, senator cruz, senator graham, senator marsha blackburn? >> they want to keep things the way they were in the past. they are so afraid that they're going to be eliminated or not represented, you know. they have to recognize this country represents all type people, and they are not the leaders any more. we need to have everyone on board, everyone represented. and they are so afraid that, you know, they might be put to the back of the bus when the other people who should be at the front, you know. i think she's probably more qualified than both of them, and they cannot deal with this. >> aunt gloria, when we had
black lady courtroom last week, i can't remember who made this point, but they said -- they reminded everybody that ted cruz and judge jackson were at harvard law school at the same time, and that he might be mad -- might be hating because she's sitting where he wants to be. one more question, aunt gloria, before we go -- before we go to break. i know you've had a lot of thoughts now on the infamous slap at the oscars. would love your thoughts. whose team are you on? >> i'm on chris rock's team. i was so disappointed in will smith. he did not need to do that. it was a joke. you need to handle it after the award show. it was like there was something else going on that we were not aware of because that was not necessary. that was a great show. i was watching it. usually i don't watch them. but what i wanted to see was the young lady from north carolina
who won an award, and that's the thing people should have been talking about, not this slap, you know. i was so proud of the people who -- the producer and everyone who was a part of the show. and that was our opportunity. i still don't understand why he needed to do that. >> um-hmm, aunt gloria, there are a lot of people defending will smith who say, you know, chris rock made a joke about will's wife, and so, you know, that was about love. he was showing his love and protecting his wife and protecting his family, defending them. what do you make of that argument? >> it's no good. i think he felt pressured to do that, which he should not have been doing it. the joke was just a small joke, you know. i could see if he said something really terrible. maybe he didn't know about her hair, but if you're going to be a public figure, you should expect these type jokes. and she -- you know, they were
sitting at the front. some jokes are going to happen, but it was not necessary for him to get up. seemed like he was laughing before he looked at his wife. all of a sudden he gets up and is going to hit chris rock. it just was not necessary. he took away the whole moment for everyone who was winners at the award show and participated in the award show. i thought it was one of the greatest ever. thankfully chris rock did save the show. i still don't understand why will felt the need to do that. it just wasn't necessary. >> maybe one day we will find out. aunt gloria, as always, thank you so much for coming to "the sunday show." i think -- don't tell anybody. i'm going to have you hang around and be a part of black lady courtroom for the rest of this show. stay right there because my all-star panel will be sounding off on those other sunday shows. we'll be right back.
republican colleagues' convoluted reasoning. >> she's certainly qualified. i think she's got a great personality. i think will be a good colleague on the court. i won't be supporting her, but i'll be joining others in understanding the importance of this moment. >> what? well, tell me how you really feel, why don't you. >> well, i think the lifetime appointments have a different criteria than other appointments. i've supported a significant number of president biden's nominees to offices that will end, their time will end while he's still in office or when he leaves office. i think that's a different criteria than putting somebody on the court for life. and she just doesn't meet the criteria that over and over again, i've said in the last decade, that the advise and consent part of the constitution gives the senate more responsibility than just saying she's qualified, you appointed
her, we're going to approve her. >> joining me now, tara suttmeier, adviser to the lincoln project,s former gop communications director. maia wiley, msnbc legal analyst and civil rights attorney, and back with us sunday show special correspondent aunt gloria. thank you all very much for coming to "the sunday show." tara, talk to me about senator blunt. talking about judge jackson, it sounded like he was talking about somebody who was running for miss conjeaniality. she has a great personality. she'll be great with her colleagues. but she doesn't meet the criteria. what in the what? >> hey, jonathan. listen, it's absurd. the rationalizations that republicans are trying to put forth for not supporting this woman are just asinine and they
know it. they're digging. they're trying to find something to justify this. she is more qualified than the last three supreme court justices that donald trump nominated. let's be honest. she has more experience as a judge. she has an impeccable record. she was nominated and successfully confirmed three other times. but you're just getting the musings of mediocre white men threatened by the excellence of this black woman about to make history on the supreme court and they just cannot bring themselves to support her and support history. it is so transparent. and every time they open their mouths and qualify that, well, you know, we're going to appreciate the moment, but we don't think she's qualified. it just shows how absurd the republican party has become. if anyone deserves bipartisan support, it's ketanji brown jackson. >> right. maia wiley, your response to the senator? >> well, you know, tara is absolutely right about the qualifications of ketanji brown
jackson. i just want to point to one thing that senator blunt said that defies the logic he's using not to vote for her. and he is right that he has consistently said it's not just about qualification for a lifetime appointment. he has said that before. i believe he voted for justice kavanaugh who was academically qualified, but demonstrated he wasn't qualified for lifetime appointment based on his behavior and accusations against him. but secondly, republicans, some republicans had voted twice for ketanji brown jackson to have a lifetime appointment. her district court judge appointment was a lifetime appointment. her appellate court appointment was a lifetime appointment. she is not the first vote about whether this esteemed jurist should be appointed to a lifetime gig. she has a lifetime gig right now on the d.c. circuit, republicans
voted for her, including lindsey graham. so i think tara's point about this isn't really about her qualifications. >> um-hmm. >> it's what makes this the most offensive moment i think i've seen in a confirmation process almost -- except we did have kavanaugh, but in the sense that she is so utterly qualified and this isn't about her. i actually think this is much more about politics and looking for wedge issues and finding one for upcoming elections, and they know and understand she's qualified and that's what makes it horrendous. >> um-hmm. and, aunt gloria, you know, maya just brought up something i can't believe i didn't even think of. senator blunt voted for justice kavanaugh, the same man -- if he's going to talk about oh, she's got a great personality about judge jackson. meanwhile, before he was on the
court, remember his supreme court hearing where he is barking at senators and popping off and being downright nasty. what do you make of that? the man who voted for kavanaugh has a problem with jackson? >> it's always the same. they feel like they have -- they can do more than what we can do, you know. she cannot afford to, you know, lash out or be emotional, but he can. they accept their own, but they don't accept us. it is so obvious, this domination, you know. there is a fear that, yes, you may have a diverse congress and more diverse than what it is now, but those who are in power or who have been there so long, it's very difficult for them to understand things are going to change. they want things to remain the same, especially republicans. we cannot go back four years.
we need to move forward. if they can hold it back to the previous four years, they will. you know, it's always been that case. i've seen it myself, you know. we cannot afford to react. we have to be -- we have to make sure we're in control, because if we're not, she's just an emotional black woman. that's what they're going to say. kavanaugh was able to do this and nobody, you know, they weren't concerned about that. we cannot afford that. >> i was going to get you, aunt gloria, to define the "we." i know who the we is. tara knows who the we is. maya knows who the we is. everybody knows who the we is. the we is african americans, black women in particular. sometimes i hear some of these folks who are team will are the same people who were just fine
with judge jackson maintaining her composure when, by all -- i saw what i saw, and if she had gotten up from that table, strode over to lindsey graham and popped him, i would have been like, hey. but we know nothing would have happened. >> right, i understand. >> i would have loved to have seen it. >> you know what? on that note -- we're going to leave it there because i'm already over time. we have to take a break. stay with us. this conversation continues after the break. later, the california congresswoman zoe lofgren joins us to discuss the january 6 committee hearings. watch yasmin vossoughian 3:00 p.m. eastern only on msnbc. 6 y on msnbc ♪
we believe there's an innovator in all of us. ♪ that's why we build technology that makes it possible for every business... and every person... to come to the table and do more incredible things. numbers... ...move you but some can stop you in your tracks. like the tens of thousands of people who were diagnosed with certain hpv-related cancers. for most people, hpv clears on its own. but for those who don't clear the virus, it can cause certain cancers. gardasil 9 is a vaccine given to adults through age 45 that can help protect against certain diseases caused by hpv. including cervical, vaginal, vulvar, anal, and certain head and neck cancers, such as throat and back of mouth cancers, and genital warts. gardasil 9 doesn't protect everyone and does not treat cancer or hpv infection. your doctor may recommend screening for certain hpv-related cancers. women still need routine cervical cancer screenings. you shouldn't get gardasil 9 if you've had an allergic reaction to the vaccine,
its ingredients, or are allergic to yeast. tell your doctor if you have a weakened immune system, are pregnant, or plan to be. the most common side effects include injection site reactions, headache, fever, nausea, dizziness, tiredness, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and sore throat. fainting can also happen. help protect what counts. talk to your doctor or pharmacist about gardasil 9. ( ♪♪ ) ( ♪♪ ) ( ♪♪ )
thomas and those woo chile text messages she sent to the former chief of staff. this is senator leahy about whether justice thomas should recuse himself as a result. >> obviously he should recuse himself just for what it would say about the, about the court in a case like this. more and more comes out of january 6, it goes beyond being an alice in wonder land. it's crazy that people were actually thinking that they could set aside an election, and she has shown that she fully bought into that. and i think for the integrity of the supreme court, her husband should recuse himself from any cases involving january 6. >> and you know what? at the risk of -- i want to play
tara, you go first. >> you know, i've often talked about the cacophony of kookerry on the republican side. the things that ginni thomas believes are not only ignorant but they're scary. the fact that she has such proximity to a supreme court justice, the one who voted, the only one, the lone dissenter, when a january 6th issue came before the supreme court, is concerning. the lincoln project recently put out on friday an ad called "compromise" about ginni thomas and justice thomas. he is absolutely compromised. there's no way you're telling me they're completely separate on this. especially in the text messages when she talks about her "best friend," who is that? from an ethical perspective he should recuse himself from anything concerning january 6th. whether he does it or not remains to be seen but that is
up to the chief justice, roberts, i think, to put some pressure on him to do it. otherwise how can republicans justify clarence thomas not doing that when they have raised cain about democratic appointed justices who have been involved in way lesser controversial things than this? so it seems pretty obvious that they're playing politics with it. >> maya, your thoughts? >> well, first of all, let's remember that chief justice roberts, when he ascended, his wife, who was an active antiabortionist activist, stopped what she was doing because of his role on the supreme court and the appearance it would create about him being biased on abortion cases that came before him. that is the entire point of ethics codes for justice, the appearance of justice matters. people have to have faith in the neutrality and integrity of the judicial process.
it's why every other federal court judge has an ethics code that says that in it. and let's just drill down, tara made the most important point to make which flies in the face of what senator blunt just said. the text message that tara referenced between ginni thomas and mark meadows when she was begging him to tell donald trump to fight this, the fighting was the election results of 2020, and the electoral college vote. and that thomas -- i mean, that mark meadows assured her they were fighting. and then she says, oh, thank god, i was just talking to my best friend about this. the "best friend" language, we can't say for sure she was talking about thomas but everyone knows she publicly refers to him as her best friend. he should have recused himself on the first january 6th case
that came before him on evidence. the fact is he should have already recused himself. the chief justice has to talk to him. the real problem is, the chief justice probably is talking to him because he made the same wise decision himself about his spouse and that in this case, that there's no power or authority to require him to recuse himself, that's a huge problem. and there's legislation pending now in the senate. >> mm-hmm. and aunt gloria, i'm going to give you the last word, you're the voice of the people, the everyman and woman in america watching the nonsense here in washington and what's going on with the supreme court and the thomases. what do you make of ginni thomas and her text messages and what her husband should do? >> her husband should resign. that's how i feel. it's obvious, she's in control. she's looking at every case and she's making the decisions, not
him. so he should resign, you know. but he won't do that because she won't allow him. you know, it is so obvious. they need to go. that's how i feel. >> this isn't the first time ginni thomas has acted crazy. remember when she called anita hill a few years ago and left that whack-a-doo message? she's been acting out of turn for a very long time. those of us who are conservatives, i remember thinking how she was a little -- >> we got 40 seconds. maya, real quick. >> you and i, conspiracy theories, that's what we're talking about here, he should be investigated. >> aunt gloria, you've already said your piece. he should resign.
>> or be kicked out. >> aunt gloria, maya wiley, tara, thank you all very much for coming to "the sunday show" and thank you very much. my friend hallie jackson is in for alex witt and picks up after this break. discomfort back there? instead of using aloe, or baby wipes, or powders, try the cooling, soothing relief or preparation h. because your derriere deserves expert care. preparation h. get comfortable with it. it's 5:00 a.m., and i feel like i can do anything. we've been coming here, since 1868. there's a lot of cushy desk jobs out there, but this is my happy place. there are millions of ways to make the most of your land. learn more at deere.com
(vo) verizon business unlimited is going ultra! get more. like manny. event planning with our best plan ever. (manny) yeah, that's what i do. (vo) with 5g ultra wideband in many more cities, you get up to 10 times the speed at no extra cost. verizon is going ultra, so your business can get more. ♪♪ three times the electorlytes and half the sugar. ♪♪ pedialyte powder packs. feel better fast.
pedialyte asya agulnik md: st. jude was founded with an understanding that no child should die in the dawn of life. to work with many partners all over the world, nothing stops in the way of us achieving that mission, not even war. marta salek md: when there is a need, people stand up and do what is right and ensure that they restart medical therapy as quickly as possible. carlos rodriguez-galindo md: any child suffering today of cancer is our responsibility. if you really wanna find out what you're made of, you can forget the personality tests and social media quizzes. because the only way you're ever gonna know is by heading into the big, wild, raging so-damned-beautiful- it-hurts world and finding out for yourself. were you born to follow a path? or were you born free? these are the things we thought about when we made the new grand cherokee. made for what you're made of. ♪ ♪
hi there, i'm hallie jackson in washington, in for alex witt today. and we're starting with breaking news of a mass shooting in sacramento. we know at least six people have been killed, ten others hurt after the shooting started right around 2:00 a.m. local time, very early this morning east coast time. you've got police looking through the scene outside a couple of different nightclubs. video of it shows a bunch of gunshots and people running through the streets in sacramento, which is of course california's capital. police say they have not made arrests yet. the investigation could take a matter of days now. joining us now on the phone, a community organizer who was there on the scene not too long after the shooting happened. barry, thank you so much for being on the show, good afternoon to you. >> no proble
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on