tv The 11th Hour With Stephanie Ruhle MSNBC September 20, 2022 11:00pm-12:00am PDT
titled, i know we owed we owe. >> to anyone out there, i only ask that you care before it is too late, that you live aware and awake and that you lead with love and hours of hate. i challenge you to this call. i dare you to shape our free above all. i dare you to do good. so that the world might be great. thank you. >> the poet laureate of the united states, amanda gorman, gets tonight's last word. the 11th hour with stephanie ruhle starts now. 11th hour with stetonight a wars legal team, you can't have your cake and eat it too. the warning came from the judge
chosen by team trump. and we are getting a look at the former president in a way we have never seen. the book makes a frightening connection between trump and his view of power. then, how safe are your most personal secrets on your phone and the internet? a tv weather man loses his job one very private photos are delivered to his boss and his mother. he's here to tell us how it happened. plus the devastation in puerto rico. the island is asking for help as the 11th hour gets underway on this tuesday night. good evening once again. i'm stephanie ruhle. donald trump seems to be getting a lesson in be careful what you wish for. today his lawyers squared off with the justice department attorneys in a brooklyn courtroom during their first meeting with the special master, judge raymond dearie. trump's lawyers soon discovered the judge was ready to challenge them.
jerry was one of the former guy's choices to review the documents seized at mar-a-lago last month, including several papers that were marked as classified. trump has publicly claimed he already declassified some of the seize material, seeing the doj has no case against him up to the documents belong to him. that argument is never been made by trump's lawyers. and today a skeptical sounding judge dearie pushed team trump to describe exactly which documents trump allegedly declassified. after their decline to do so, that's one theory told them, quote, you can't have your cake and eat it too. in other words, you cannot argue trump had the authority to declassify items without saying what he actually did. former mueller investigation team member and an msnbc contributor andrew weissmann was in the courtroom earlier today. he says judge dearie was in no mood to give trump's lawyers the benefit of the doubt. >> if you don't present any evidence to me, trump, then i
am left with the record that i have. i have evidence that these documents are declassified classified. if you decide for whatever reason you don't want to present any evidence, that's fine. you don't have to. but he then went ahead and say said, in this case becomes very easy. and i think that just means he is signaling, i will then have a record in front of me where there is no dispute that these are classified. and he is certainly not going to turn classified documents over. >> the special master also suggested his review might only take four weeks. that is a lot sooner than the november 30th deadline. trump's lawyers were also busy today responding to the doj's appeal to the 11th circuit court over access to the seized documents. they are calling for judges to reject the doj's appeal, arguing that the justice department has yet to prove that some of the records seized are not classified. as for donald trump himself, he
was on far-right tv earlier today, insisting that the search never should have taken place, and that he has done absolutely nothing wrong. >> they had no right to do what they did. and we were talking and negotiating, frankly, i thought getting along -- >> we keep hearing about video recordings at mar-a-lago that would have captured the raid. have you had a conversation conversations about releasing that footage? >> yes, we have. they would rather have me not do it because of the safety of the fbi agents. we have very precise and, it's not a pretty picture, either. it looks like a military coup. >> for fact sake, this was nothing like a military coup. instead, this was a legally executed search, carried out with a warrant, that was signed by a federal judge. but what trump didn't do on tv was give any explanation about why he had the documents in the first place.
with that, let's get smarter, with the help of the superstar lead off panel tonight, peter baker, chief white house correspondent for the new york times, susan glasser, staff writer for the new yorker, together they wrote the divider, trump in the white house, 2017 to 2021. we will get into that book later in the hour. but we're going to get to this he's first and welcome former u.s. attorney joyce vance who spent 25 years as federal prosecutor, and she is also a law professor at the university of alabama. joyce, you know i'm going to you first. i want to share how politico describes what went down today with a right, tension between theory and trump's leader legal team was an ominous sign for the former president, reminding our audience, trump picked dearie. given that, on day one, how bad was it for him? >> well, it was bad for trump, stephanie, but it was nothing that anyone who had where the
law and looked at the facts and the situation wouldn't have anticipated. and i think what is so shocking about this is that we have almost lost our expectation that the former president will be treated like any other litigant in the courtroom. that is exactly what judge dearie did today. but the talk about, you can't have your cake and needed to, was a function of what the burden of proof is in a civil lawsuit that the former president filed -- actually has put evidence in front of the court that suggests that he is entitled to relief, and one way he could do that would be by the claiming claiming he had declassified documents. so, he had a right to have them returned. and judge dearie frustration is that if there is no evidence in the record, then his path is very clear. he simply rose in front of the government. that's the outcome that trump set up and that's likely what he is coming to grips with this evening. >> then beyond putting roadblocks and delays in place,
joyce white vance, does trump's legal team appear to have any real strategy? oes trump' legal team appea>>r they're har client. and you can read so much of trump's voice in these pleadings. this insistence on arguments that don't make sense and don't conform to legal requirements. that's pretty much is hallmark of creating this alternative reality where the facts are what he says the facts are in so it would be a problem for his lawyers going forward. they will be forced to make actual legal arguments. this is something that you can't do if you believe your client isn't telling the truth. so if, for instance and there is some suggestion of, it because in the pleadings up until now the lawyers have stopped short of saying that the former president the classified documents. they haven't said that under oath. they have said that he has the right to do it, but that's where they have stopped. that is a problem for them, because they have a duty of candor to the court.
they can't make representations that they know are untrue, and ultimately, that may be where the rubber meets the road. >> susan, it's not even what trump did. it's what trump has said that now appears to have his lawyers in a tough spot with a special master. is this déjà vu all over again? isn't this what happened with white house lawyers, even white house cabinet members for four years in the trump white house? he would say something, and they would be scrambling to try to clean it up? >> absolutely. donald trump is a master of throwing stuff out there and letting other people construct an ex post facto argument around it. and he even did that with a the nuclear deal with north korea. he declared he had reached fantastic nuclear deal and basically left his aides to try to figure out, which, of course, didn't happen. i think this point that joyce made is absolutely right. donald trump is dictating essentially non legal arguments, and you can hear the former
presidents voice almost saying he has the absolute power to do this and that thing. that's the tell. donald trump has declared absolute power and absolute right to do any number of things he does not in fact have absolute power to do. but i do think that often he benefits because the legal timetable and the legal constraints are not the game donald trump is often playing. he's playing for time here, as you pointed out. explain for political advantage and the rest is a mess for the succeeding waves of lawyers he hires to deal with. >> all right, let's talk about time, peter. six weeks. it has been six weeks until and donald trump has not offered a single word explaining why he took the documents in the first place. at some point as he could have answered this question? he is going on tv. >> yeah, it's a great question. stephanie ruhle, i think you are exactly right to put your
finger on that. -- some ways is a red herring. what was you doing with the documents in the first place? whether declassified or not, they're owned by the american people, the public, the government. a president is not entitled to just walk out of the white house with whatever documents he want. that's not how the law works. you have as a former president the right to access those documents, but he has to go through a process. you want to write a memoir? president obama did, that president bush did that. that's not the way it works. you don't get to walk out and say hey, these are mine. they don't belong to him. he hasn't been offered an explanation for why he needed them in the first place. -- was it to have bragging rights for people? the letters of kim jong-un, that kind of things? we don't know. and hasn't offered an explanation. at some point you have to imagine -- and joyce white vance would know better than this, because she is a lawyer, and i'm not -- >> one would think but he still hasn't told us why we haven't seen his taxes. so, this is a sham. joyce, i want to talk about a
different threat, because today, judge dearie, the special master, that's one of the government's lawyers about how they are going to the 11th circuit to regain access to the documents. when he asked, the doj lawyer sort of implied that the case could go to the supreme court. if that's the case, how long could this thing take? >> there's considerable delay that's involved in these sorts of appeals. the 11th circuit so far has shown a willingness to expedite this case. they entered an order saturday night requiring the former president to require today by noon, which he did. that makes it look like they maybe an expedited track to a decision, but either party, or perhaps even both, if they're disappointed with parts of the 11th circuit order, didn't take an appeal to the supreme court, which might also consider the appeal on an expedited basis and rule on a shadow docket if
it were inclined to -- in this case. but we could be looking at months, more likely than weeks of delay, if that appeal pattern is followed. >> susan, all of this document tug of war is dragging us down the calendar, towards the midterms. do voters care about this or are they impacting trump endorsed candidates? >> well, that is going to be a question that we don't know the answer to yet. it does appear that for now it's one of those classic. process fights. donald trump has run this playbook before. he immediately declares each new investigation to be a witch hunt, the greatest witch hunt of all time, it's a terrible situation, the fbi are a bunch of jack booted thugs. what was the clip we just played here? it's a coup against him. now how you can have a coup against of former president who himself contemplated imposing martial law when he didn't win an election, obviously you can't have a coup against a
former president, folks. so donald trump is, i think, an expert at playing this hand and so far, to the frustration of many people, there's a feeling that he has managed to use the tools of the law and to extend things out and to avoid accountability. as you said, we're still waiting for those taxes. to become public. >> there was no coup. his answer was cuckoo. peter, you expertly laid out all the current investigations involving trump. i guarantee every person who was covering politics now has this hanging in their office. because it's confusing. there are six separate investigations. given all of that, how all consuming is this in trump world? six separate ones. >> of course, yeah, exactly, there's some other similar issues that we don't really cover that article as well on people make the claims about
his liability in various instances. he may be right. six rather extraordinary situations, among them, for instance, let's just give an example. next month i believe it's next month that the trump organization itself goes on trial for basically cheating on taxes. allen weisselberg, the chief financial officer for many years, his right-hand man, when it came to finance, may not be charging trump directly but the trump organization, that's him that's president trump. it was a family run organization and it was all president trump. that is just one example, the documents, to january 6th, congress, so many things -- we are going to hear, perhaps, from laetitia james, the new york state attorney general, about her investigation into some of the business practices. we are looking for to hearing that. he has so many issues on the plate right now that he has a battery of lawyers, ever-changing, of course, cast of characters, some of them leave out of their own exposure or have been paid or what have you. and it is all consuming. it is the war that he is waging right now.
>> it's like peter's reading my mind, joyce white vance. new york attorney general tish james. she is holding, tomorrow morning, what is being described as a major news conference. last week, the new york times reported that james could potentially sue trump -- obviously, we don't know what is coming tomorrow. but given what peter just laid out -- given what i have shared, how worried should trump be tonight about tish james to morrow? >> james rebuffed a settlement offer from the trump folks that would have resolve the case -- that didn't happen. and she is reported to be investigating -- this is a civil matter, not a criminal matter. by the -- far-reaching implications for -- if she indicted -- it i suppose the furthest act she could go would be to use new york's corporate death penalty provision. it is called out because -- bad practices, corrupt
practices, all their sorts of practices, but the law forbids, in new york, cannon essence we shut down. and james is already done this to trump's charitable entity, which no longer functions, it ceased to exist, as a result of that. she has suggested she would not go that far in the sort of a case. but she can still see considerable sanctions against the former president's company. and of course when you get sued in a case like that it has the impact of restricting the cash flow, making it more difficult to find working capital, so, lots of potential implications if that is what tomorrow is about. of course, she could be announcing in the range of lawsuits tomorrow morning. >> peter. it's not just reporters who have your article hung up with the six clear investigations. and not just those in trump world. the likes of mitch mcconnell -- who is never been a trump ally, who's watching the rally donald trump had with j.d. vance this weekend in ohio, that was maybe
two thirds full. what are other republicans, powerful ones like mcconnell, doing and thinking behind the scenes, and they're watching the six-part investigations play out? >> this is exactly the opposite of what mitch mcconnell wants right now. what he wants is for donald trump to be off the stage, so they can focus their strategy on joe biden. they can hit the president on his weaknesses. they can talk about inflation. there you talk about crime, they can talk about all the different things that they think make him vulnerable, and therefore make the democrats vulnerable, to lose control of the senate in the house on the fall. the history, standards republicans ought to go and win -- they have a -- party does. but to have donald trump out, there again, plays into president biden's -- the choices, follow once, again potentially, a revival of the 2020 election, a choice between biden democrats and trump republicans. that is what the democrats want. they want you to say, look, you may not be happy with what we are doing on occasions.
we had a lot of things we can brag about but we really don't want is to return trump and his acolytes the power. trump is playing into that by being so out front in fact. and creating -- -- a referendum on joe biden. >> of course, mitch mcconnell might not like the position he's in. but he put himself there. he did not vote to impeach donald trump. to a sense, thank you. susan and peter, i'm not letting you go. when we come back, we are going to dig into their new, get ready, 650-page book the divider. the because some of the most frightening stories about what actually happened inside the trump white house yet. and later, you are going to meet erika tao me erick adame -- to his mother. what happened? a loss is to do the job and now he is having to fight to find out who did this to him. why would happen to him as a warning to all of us, what is
generals and my military, they have decision-making ability. >> i will leave that decision to myself and my generals and my admirals. okay? not to you. i was upset with my generals because they were not getting it finished. >> the former guy is calling u.s. military leaders, my generals. that did reveal a lot about his approach to power and the presidency. it turns out, we did know the half of it. one retired general quoted in the new book, the trump divide, or says trump just thought journalists were all about power and wielding of power. and obstruction. as promised, peter baker and susan glasser still with us. the full title of their new
book, the divider, trump in the white house, 2017 to 2021. and tonight, it is number one on amazon bestseller list. susan, you both cover trump for four years. the world watched every twist and turn out of that white house. and by the end, nothing could surprise us. but you dug deep. what surprised you in writing this book? >> i have to say, we felt it was important for the historical record at this moment of incredible threat to american democracy, donald trump has done something that no president did beforehand. we will see if anyone does subsequently, refusing to accept a lawful result of an american reelection and we've never had anything like -- that we've decided to go back to report more after trump left office to try to find out what else do we need to know about this. i think the big takeaway -- he talked about my generals in the league in --
we were surprised at the extent and persistence of essentially the undermining of u.s. national security from the very beginning of the trump presidency. trump called on my generals but he never understood the independents, the non partisanship, that is embedded at the heart of our idea of the u.s. military and there was enormous consequences, i think, in that struggle, as it played out over four years. when we found out the contents of the resignation letter that the chairman of the joints of joint chiefs -- mark milley, wrote, did not send -- after that office where a photo op it was a chilling moment to me as a journalist to find out that the chair of the joint chiefs believe the president of the united states was doing grave and irreparable harm. there's a middle east where it's, not mine. gray venerable harm to the country, to our interests, in joining the international order. really, it was just a wow, we
are really in trouble, moment, for me. >> peter -- same question to you. what surprised me the most? >> i think that's right. . one of the things that was really interesting -- we get as much as we could over for years to report everything that was going on in that white house. i would surprise this is how much we didn't know at that time and how much there was still off to learn after we left office -- we learn more about stories we thought we knew about. we learned stories we -- never knew a thing about. small example, the greenland thing. remember what happened, which -- by greenland, a one-off bubble, quite. turns out that was a months long, here's long effort. in fact, prompted by one of his billionaire friends who start talking about this idea. yet the entire national security apparatus to start setting it. even came up with a memo. steph, you will find this -- at least the option. they were really taking this quite seriously, because he insisted on. we do know that at the time. we have learned things like that after the fact. we are serious efforts are the politicization of the justice
department, the military, as susan discussed, and the effort to ban the institutions of american government, to its political uses. that, i think, is the big takeaway from this, january six was not a one-off. it was the ultimate combination for years of war against american institutions and democratic norms. >> susan, people have said for a while, anecdotally, trump as a cult like following. when i look. he seems to be publicly supporting conspiracy theorists -- qanon believers. what is going on? it seems like there is now almost a sharp and drastic turn, just doing this all right out of the open. >> it certainly is very blatant, the imagery from the other night was chilling, i think, to anyone who studies radicalization and politics. that was a really frightening moment to me, to look at those images. and yeah, i would say this -- it's not really surprise. with all trump, the pass is almost always prolonged.
this is a man who came into national politics by promoting a lie and a conspiracy theory, the obama birther theory. and this was at the heart of who donald trump has always been, in fact, no long before he entered politics -- he had a penchant for spreading conspiracy theories, lies, for essentially embracing what i saw in richard hostetter called the -- in american politics, where there's always some hidden forces that work, talk about the deep, the things like that. again, i think that the through line was so significant, to peter and i, as we tried to write a first crack at a full four year history. and the embrace of conspiracy theories of something that has been with donald trump and therefore with all of us the entire time in the public stage. >> yes. but he sort of openness to qanon, until now, who is more a wink, wink, not, not, like you are my boys on the side. but now that he seems to be more overt in embracing it,
peter, do you believe that's because of trump slipping poll numbers? because there's a whole lot of rich republicans who are like, oh, he is tough, but he's getting my vote. and they have left the ship. >> yeah. i mean, a lot of people would have thought that he would have lost more support for many reasons, but for now, obviously. and even would've thought january six would've been the end of that. but you are right, i do think there is a slower motion that seems to be happening, -- it asked the question of republicans, do you consider yourself more of a supporter of donald trump, or more of a supporter of the republican party. and 33% in the most recent poll said they were more supportive of donald trump. and that was the lowest number since nbc start asking the question, back in 2019. it's not a collapse. it's not like he is still the most dominant figure in his party. he is. but there is, i think, a fatigue factor, that seems to be at work here. we will see whether that has an impact on the 2022 midterm elections. but at some point, i think that the republicans were saying, i like trump for a lot of reasons --
i may approve his policies, i may even agree with him about 2020 about time to move on because he's not really representing the republican party regard to this point -- if he's engaging with these qanon conspiracy theory fringe element. >> maybe not the fringe. maybe they're the base of the party. peter baker, susan glasser, thank you so much for joining us. again, the new book, the divider, check it out. 650 pages. a scary story. when we come back, six, privacy, and the internet. images that you are supposed to be private, shared on a website for the people's private pictures. the tv weather forecaster who lost his job and is now trying to find out who did, 20 11th hour continues. hour continues
the internet is making it more difficult to keep peoples professional presence completely separate from their very personal activities. you might think you what you are doing is private but you might be wrong. new york city meteorologist erick adame with fired from his job after photos were leaked of him from an adult web cam site. he says what he thought was he was doing was private. now he says an anonymous person sent the photos to his mother and to his managers at work. today had the chance to speak with erick adame, for until recently worked for a local news station here, ny1. you are sharing this deeply personal crisis that you are,
and it is getting a huge amount of attention because it touches on privacy, how we share ourselves, personally, socially. on the internet, which is largely unregulated. content is getting more racy and more explicit. and we are all figuring out, how do we reconcile that with expectations in the workplace? in our schools? with our families? and that is sort of what brings us to this conversation. i want to start really with what happened to you. your employer, just like nbc, has a morality clause. do you accept that you were terminated from your public facing job because nude images of you were shared? >> i apologized in my statement because i did feel that when looking back at how this played out that, some people probably felt offended. they may have been hurt. maybe even being a coworker of
mine embarrassed them. but i don't think what i did was wrong. i think in my statement i also said that i unequivocally do not apologize for being sex positive and for being myself, being an openly gay man. and as you are saying, the lines sometimes get blurred. corporate america expects us to be under their control 24/7, seven days a week. and we have our personal lives as well. and what i did was something that really, i intended to be private. i never spoke about it at work, obviously. and now it's not. and that was beyond my control, which is the other part of this. someone took that and then sent it to my employer, which inevitably now makes it not private. >> do you feel like you are the time of revenge pornography? >> looking at, and i've had an attorney look at this as well
-- i'm not a lock sport, to look at this particular case. i do feel like i'm a victim. whether or not that is going to be classified as revenge porn or not someone intentionally trying to hurt me and make me lose my career, that is, obviously, a point where i'm a victim. someone did this to me. and it has come out, as well that my mother was sent these images as well. so i'm not sure what the person's point was in doing this, but, as you can imagine, how horrible an experience that would be bringing your personal life and then sending it to your family. >> you said perhaps maybe this offended a coworker. when you think back, as lewd or inappropriate as someone could think this is, 50 years ago, someone would lose their job if they were spotted at a gay bar.
>> right. >> do we need to re-evaluate what we think, what we say is acceptable, when we look at these morality clauses? >> absolutely. i think there is a generational gap here in what is happening. i think there is a whole slew of people that are in this business and in many other businesses, that this is an alien concept to them, that people are doing sexual things on the internet, and a lot of people are doing this all the time. in fact, during the pandemic, the new york city health department encouraged people to have virtual sex in order to be safe. >> from covid? >> from covid. and now that could be used against you. what you did in those sessions, because there is a lot of ability, it's easy to take a screenshot or record what is happening. we're all very vulnerable and susceptible. this could happen to anyone. that's essentially what happened to me. but there is definitely a generational gap between how it used to be and how it is now, and i think there needs to be
some change in how we look at this. so whether or not it's considered immoral in the first place. >> did you think what you were doing was private? because millions of people are on dating apps, social media sites, things more sexually explicit. did you know what you were doing could make its way into the public? >> i also mentioned in my statement, and i thought long and hard about this, that there was a lapse of judgment, being a television person, being a television personality. as you know, the rules can be different. we live in a fishbowl where everyone looks at our actions, and will judge them, honestly quite differently than they judge others. in a way, we are not like the rest of humankind. people just treat us differently. i think that i knew that in the back of my mind and wanted to be like a regular person. and so, yes i wanted to be
private, but i also knew that potentially this could not be private. and i kind of looked at that as a risk that probably would never happen to me. and it did. >> but when you think back, youa teenager? do we need more regulations or protections? because technology has moved really quickly, and regulation hasn't. think about the position you found yourself in, the temptation, the room you were in. what if you are 15 or 16? and you lose your chance to go to college? from things like this? >> i think that there is a lot of risk there for younger generations because it is so easy to grab a cell phone. it's so easy to get on any computer and do what i did at a younger age. and there are two things here there. they are at risk to predators that are out there. and the at risk of exploiting themselves and not knowing the consequences of that later in life. because this stuff stays out there forever. >> do we know what privacy is?
in that i'm guessing you would not have done this in the middle of times square. >> right. >> but when you're just holding a phone, do you think that you're in a private space, when in fact, you're not protected at all? you are in the public square times ten. >> i think that when you're at home, as i was, in the privacy of my home, but you i think you are private, and then when you are interacting with someone on the internet, you think it's just you and that person. what happened to me, on this particular thing that i was using, this adult website, it was captured without my permission, and then shared without my permission, so that it took away my privacy. that has been the hardest part about all of this, is the violation of my privacy. >> okay, so your privacy was violated. you thought you were in a safe place but you weren't. >> right. >> on the other side of the coin, do you think that person
who snapped that picture of you, we then shared it, are they being protected in the same way that twitter trolls who come after us on any given day, say the most horrible things, but if they saw you in real life they wouldn't say a word. that person who has attacked you, their anonymity is protected. yours is all out there. >> there's absolutely -- and i've seen this already on the internet, that people are protecting the person who did this saying well, if he was dame enough to think that he was private, he deserves to be called out. we have definitely developed this culture, where sometimes we protect the person who calls people out. this is not about that. this is not calling someone out on bad behavior. i didn't commit a crime. here i didn't do anything that is illegal in any way. what happened here is the other way around. someone is doing something to me, as i said earlier. >> and you want a court to force the website that you are
on to publicly identify who the that person is. what do you want out of that? i want to find out who it is. there is a good chance that this person -- i've been asked if i am going to sue this person. if i do sue, if there is a lawsuit brought against them, it is not necessarily they take everything that they are worth. that's not the point here. the point is, because i want to keep living my life. i loved doing what i did. >> why do you think you cannot get another job? i get, like, you broke the morality, cause you are fired from ny1 -- but you are really experienced. i think initially i thought there was a risk -- that employers didn't want to take. if you hired me tomorrow, if got to send these images to you, how is that going to make people feel. so i want to find out who this person is -- so i can stop that from happening. but what i've learned in the
last 24 hours he's that, people are on my side. the overwhelming support is more than i could have ever imagined. cynthia nixon even tweeted today, telling me that she supports me, and she doesn't understand why i was terminated in the first place when i am a victim and that i should be reinstated. and that is ultimately the a dream come true. if i could be reinstated and that we could all learn from this. i think it would be a win-win situation for everyone. >> you are forcing us to a much-needed conversation. i am sorry for what you are going through. but i thank you for sharing this time with me. >> and thank you for having me. >> coming up, an update from puerto rico, where most people are still without power tonight, after hurricane fiona devastated the island, when the 11th hour continues.
>> it is simply devastating. we have been in the thick of it for the last few hours, we are expecting the winds to pick up even more, over the next few hours. just to tell you where we are. we are safe. we actually had to move from the floor that we were on higher up into this area where we are at the courtyard surrounded by concrete walls. so, right now we are not getting hit with the worst of the winds. but if you look further down in the direction, you can see the palm trees swaying quite a bit. we have seen utter devastation here in san juan.
we've seen parts of roofs being blown off, on the street, rising water. and there's really no telling right now, the extent of this damage. >> it has been five years since hurricane maria tore through puerto rico, killing nearly 3000 people, and it's during critical infrastructure. residents there were still recovering from maria, when hurricane fiona made landfall this past sunday. the storm has wiped out power, brought devastating floods, and killed multiple people. nbc's gabe gutierrez has more. >> tonight, hurricane fiona is lashing turks and caicos after intensifying to a category three storm leaving a trail of discussion to cross the dominican republic and puerto rico, cars flipped downstream, roads washed away. what's now the first major atlantic hurricane of the season. this morning, in the southern coastal town of selena, we met this family returning to their flooded home for the first time. >> i don't know how to explain, yeah. it's so -- [inaudible] >> all this stuff.
around. >> 80% of puerto rico is still without power. 55% is without water. and nearly 100 emergency shelters are open across the island. around the caribbean, at least four deaths are being blamed on the storm or its aftermath. [interpreter] puerto rico's governor is -- expedited federal help. >> today, the line for -- longer and longer, especially in the southern parts of the island. they need it, not just for their cars, but for their portable generators. some drivers told us they waited here for more than two hours. >> what i'm going to do if i don't get -- >> on this day, marking exactly five years since hurricane maria tore through the island, we toured the latest devastation from fiona. the water here just kept rising, choking off these communities, for the better part of two days. >> thankfully, today with the sun out for the first time, more of the floodwaters are now receding.
but the devastated countless lives across puerto rico. >> the storm is different across from maria. winds before, but not as much rain. >> relief supplies after hard-hit -- now hitting hard. >> it's devastating. the ptsd just come back right away, as soon as i flew the helicopter, eight in the morning. just my heart breaks again. it is coming back on the movie and seeing maria, all the destruction, all the people waiting on top of the roof, requesting for. help it's heartbreaking. >> just like maria, and the infrastructure is still not been completely repaired five years later. my thanks to gabe gutierrez for that report on the ground. and after battering puerto rico, turks and caicos and the dominican republic, hurricane fiona is still picking up speed as it churns toward bermuda.
california, mountains, oceans, natural wonders, diverse and creative people. but when the out-of-state corporations behind prop 27 look at california, they see nothing but suckers. they wrote prop 27 to give themselves 90% of the profits from online sports betting in california. other states get much more. why is prop 27 such a suckers deal for california? because the corporations didn't write it for us. they wrote it for themselves. this thing, it's making me get an ice bath again. what do you mean? these straps are mind-blowing! they collect hundreds of data points like hrv and rem sleep, so you know all you need for recovery. and you are? i'm an investor...in invesco qqq, a fund that gives me access to... nasdaq 100 innovations like...
wearable training optimization tech. uh, how long are you... i'm done. i'm okay. >> in our democracy, your vote is one of your most powerful tools for driving change. so, given that today is national voter registration day, please make sure that you each are registered to vote. there is a website, vote. gov, because there is an important election happening in 49 days. your vote is your voice. and we need your voice. >> the last thing before we go tonight, national voter registration day. we are just under 50 days away
from an extremely important midterm election, as we have been reporting there has been a major uptick in women across this country registering to vote after the dobbs decision. issues like abortion rights, the economy, health care, gun safety and immigration are all on the line. it is vital that we all make our voices heard this november, no matter who we are voting for. luckily, nbc news has got you covered with a plan to vote. watch this. >> the general election is right around the corner. >> if you have voting questions, we have voting answers. head to nbc news.com last plan your vote -- >> early voting dates, vote by mail information and so much more. >> because some of the rules have changed since 2020. >> now is the time to start planning for you november vote. >> what is the state of the united states? >> that is up to you. >> on your mark -- >> get set -- >> plan your vote. >> --
>> visit nbc news.com / plan your vote. and on that vote note, i wish you all a very good night. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thanks for staying up late with us. i will see you at the end of tomorrow. tonight on all in. >> we will decide all this without actually seeing the classified documents. >> the first special master hearing not looking, good for the disgraced ex president, tonight for cuban classified arguments and just where he was getting his legal advice. >> as far as i'm concerned, trump shake it every single record that they took, back not just his passports. down the lawsuit and criminal investigation into the ron desantis stunt. >> somebody saw fit to come from another, state junta, pond pre-pandemic and then take advantage for
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on