coming up this weekend, you don't want to miss it. they are hosting a special conversation. at the apollo theater, all to talk about the new book. you can catch it on saturday night at 9:00 eastern. set your dvr if you have plans. for now, i wish you from all of our colleagues across the networks, a very good night. thank you for staying up. ing u okay. this may come as a shock to you but donald trump didn't spend the day in court today, but not to worry, he'll be back in court tomorrow. plenty to watch. when it comes to the case in manhattan, he's in a sit until

proven guilty but let's not forget, he's been found liable for business fraud and sexual abusive facing criminal charges in washington, d.c. and florida and in georgia. he was also named an unindicted co-conspirator in arizona and michigan. right now, the basic thrust of his campaign messages presidents should be immune from prosecution. this is where we are right now. leaders in the republican party are closing ranks around their likely nominee including many who clearly know better. consider this. just a few months ago governor desantis basically mock people who bend the knee and kiss trump's knee. >> you can be the strongest most dynamic, successful republican and conservative in america, but if you do not kiss that ring, he will try to trash you. you know what? you deserve a nominee that will put you first and not himself

first. >> turns out that didn't age well. just this weekend, governor ron desantis went down to miami to do the exact thing he roundly mocked not that long ago. he reportedly met with trump to bury the hatchet and discuss fundraising for the upcoming general election campaign. that's the most recent example of a leading republican what one time called out trump for being the immoral figure he is before falling back in line. take for example the former attorney general bill barr who seem more than willing to tell it like it is. >> he has a lot of people who follow him stubbornly, and one of the interesting things is people who have worked with him , have seen him, seen him behind the scenes, not many of them are supporting him. >> here is the thing. apparently there are a lot of republicans who seem to be tolerant of behavior they do

think is appropriate for the chief executive including now apparently you, mr. barr. >> just to be clear, you're voting for someone you believe tried to subvert the peaceful transfer of power and cannot achieve his own policies. lied about the election even after his attorney general told him that the election was not stolen, and is a former chief law enforcer in the country, you will vote for someone who's facing 88 criminal counts? >> the answer to your question is yes. >> the answer is yes. that was almost hard to watch. how about new hampshire governor chris sununu who had this to say on our show last year. >> you support the president even if convicted of classified documents. you support him even if you believe he contributed to insurrection and even though you believe he's lying about the last election. you support him even if he's convicted in the manhattan case. the answer to that is yes, correct? >> yeah, and 51% of america.

>> okay, governor, you were once capable of speaking truth about the leader of the party you remain in, and that seem to be the governor a few weeks ago. i mean, what's a popular governor who isn't even running for reelection supposed to do? what could he possibly do? lots of things. there is mitch mcconnell, the longest-serving republican leader who in january 6 spoke powerfully of who was to be blamed. it was powerful. >> president trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. >> that was mitch mcconnell on the floor the senate. that was him then and this is mitch mcconnell now. >> is the republican leader, the senate, i'm going to support the nominee of our party. >> you have taken stands on issues you feel are strong

national security interests, and morally imperative. >> what influence have i had? >> you're the most powerful republican leader. >> what we do here is try to make law. >> senator mcconnell, give yourself more credit. you are the senate minority leader. you are quite powerful. you are an observer of history. what have we learned through all of this? well, we learn people like mitch mcconnell and bill barr and ron desantis know better and they've said it out loud. they know who donald trump is and what he is done and what he's capable of. they will still give him their full support in november. you may find yourself wondering, how donald trump continues to survive through indictments and criminal trials, insurrections, and everything else? enablers like the ones i mentioned are a big reason why.

sarah matthews is a former press secretary for donald trump. a staff writer for the atlantic was written about trump's enablers in the republican party. they both join me now. thank you for taking the time. sarah, want to start with you. you have spoken out and consistently spoken out. what goes through your head when you see people who clearly know better defending trump as they did. >> it's frustrating because as you noted, some of the things they said publicly about donald trump are horrible and then they go on and endorse him. i only imagine the things they say privately. i talked with a lot of republicans high up elected officials and things like that who will bash him quietly but many of them will not say it publicly. >> and once bashed him publicly. >> they are still going forward and supporting him. a lot of times what they often say they are supporting him because of the policies. they want the conservative

agenda. where i get frustrated is they are treating this like it's a normal election. normal republican candidate a normal democratic candidate. it couldn't be further from the case. with trump you have a candidate who tried to overturn the last election. who spread conspiracy theories because he could not accept the fact he lost the last election. those theories helped inspire an insurrection on the nation's capitol. to the state donald trump refuses to admit he lost that election. he has not shown any remorse for what happened on january 6. of course, i would love to have a debate of policy ideas in the 2024 election. when we have a candidate on the ballot who will not uphold the constitution, then i feel i have to put policy aside and i want to support the person who is best suited to defeat donald trump. one thing i will know quickly on bill barr specifically in that interview you showed, he mentions this about policies and that's why he is supporting

trump even though he said he shouldn't be near the oval office. i wrote down a quote i found from bill barr in may 2023 where he said of trump reclaim the white house in 2024, quote, you may want his policies, but trump will not deliver trump policies. he will deliver chaos. if anything, lead to a backlash that will set his policies much further back than they otherwise would be. even if you want a conservative agenda, trump is not the person who will deliver that. >> through the mouth of bill barr. let me ask about mitch mcconnell. he did interviews this weekend and what struck me is he seemed to be passive and he is not a passive person. he jammed people to the supreme court. he also had very strong words about donald trump after january 6, two sarah's point. he's not going to be the leader anymore. he doesn't have a big political future.

you cover the republican party, what does he have to lose? >> i was thinking about a story mitt romney told me about mitch mcconnell. he said during the first senate impeachment trial, mcconnell took romney aside and kind of leaned on him to join the rest of his republican colleagues to shut down the trail and bring a quick end to it. he said i will keep an open mind and i want to see the evidence. what he said is mcconnell, when he made his argument, didn't bother to try to convince romney that trump was not guilty of what he was being accused of. what he did is he laid out this catastrophic scenario where he said, look, if we don't circle around our guy, democrats are going to win the white house and win the senate and pushed through a radical agenda. the green new deal. he listed these democratic priorities that he was scared of. i think that helps you

understand the psychology of someone like mcconnell. they are political calculations made by a lot of people you showed. there are people who talk themselves into the idea they can do more good if they're reelected, and so they are making that calculation. then there are people like mitch mcconnell, and maybe bill barr falls in this category, who talk themselves into this idea that they cannot let democrats have power. as bad as trump is, as dangerous as he is, as authoritarian as he might be, giving power to democrats is even worse. i think there is this partisan mindset that is present in both parties, but especially in the trump era gop that is so hard to break out of this idea that giving up our to the other side is the worst thing you can possibly do. >> you have made this point, the fear of gas stoves, more afraid of that than what could end democracy. that defines where bill barr is

coming from. >> and i tweeted about that because that's what bill barr cited, he talked about conservative things like clean energy regulations from the biden administration such as wanting to restrict gas stoves or electric vehicles. don't get me wrong, i don't agree with biden policies. i am a republican but to try to equate those things to something like the end of the constitutional republic, and my eyes, trump is selected, it's absurd. it is partisanship. i think i have said i will put my country over my party. i have never voted for a democrat, but if my choices are donald trump and joe biden, i have no choice but to support biden because i cannot support someone like trump. >> the threats to democracy is bigger than gas stoves taken away. let me ask you, mckay, you've written about this and you wrote a piece in the atlantic about what would happen with these enablers who would be in

an administration. there was a quote that stuck out to me where you said, i think there will be a concerted, calculated effort to ensure that the people he puts in his next administration, they don't have to share his worldview, but they have to implemented. his defenders will argue, i assume, that's what staffers do . how is this different? >> i think that is a fair point. you should expect the president's administration is going to advance the agenda of the man elected. the differences donald trump doesn't have a coherent ideology. he cares about obedience. reporting that piece, the thing i her time and again, talking to people in trump's orbit is he feels burned from his first administration by people who tried to thwart him. he would have some kind of fleeting policy idea, something he wanted to do and his staff would get in the way or they

would resign or leaves the white house and write books about him that were unflattering. this time, he's not going to bother with the adults and low room. you won't get the credentialed republicans like bill barr. he will focus on people who are obedient to him. lapdogs, cronies, people he can control. that will mean a substantive difference between the first trump administration which was defined by chaos and upheaval and infighting and leaking. a second trump administration which could have those things but have a lot of people in lockstep with him. depending what you think of donald trump, that can be more dangerous. >> these older men can learn a lot about you being consistently outspoken. mckay, your book on mitt romney is excellent. people should read it to help understand the republican party. thank you both for joining me. adam schiff is standing by. i will ask him about the new indictments basin trump allies

and the former president's calls for absolute immunity. that's coming up in 60 seconds. and longer-lasting relief than tylenol rapid release gels because advil targets pain at the source of inflammation. so for faster pain relief, advil the pain away.

okay, here's the sign of the times we are living in. want a before trump's lawyers made the preposterous claim he's immune from prosecution for trying to steal the election, we learned he's an unindicted co-conspirator for trying to do the same thing and two states. arizona and michigan. not to mention he has been charged for the same scheme in georgia. as my next guest quote these came together in the january 6 insurrection. and insurrection of trump and cited to disrupt the lawful count of electoral votes and attempt to hold onto power propelled by these slates of illegal fake collectors. and yet, here we are. at a point it will be up to the justices to decide if he is above the law.

is our friend andrew weissmann reminded me, the fact we are at this point means our democracy is in a perilous place. >> i know it sounds like hyperbole, but your opening is correct that we are essentially one-vote away from the end of democracy as we know it with checks and balances. >> that's a stark reminder. frenemies democratic congressman adam schiff of california and he is a u.s. senate candidate. the tweets i read was part of a longer thread you posted. you ended with, quote, if the justices send the case back to the lower court as a means of stalling, the flaws not with the constitution or the court itself, but with the character of the justices serving on the core. there's a lot packed in there. talk to me about what you mean. >> the justices know what they are doing. they know the danger of the argument of immunity.

essentially, if a president is held a man from committing crimes, and particular crimes in office that are designed to hold onto power after losing, that is the end. they cannot go there. what they can do, if they have political focus on this, is they can delay. they can send it back to the lower court. they have already delayed. they have shown in the past, they can move at great speed when they want to. when they wanted to make sure he could appear on pallets, they struck down the ability of secretaries of state to take him off the ballot. they can move fast and delay when they want to. here it seems there purposeful in their delay. i also found it quite ironic. i don't this point was brought to the justices attention. during the first impeachment trial, trump's lawyers argued that any act he undertook while in office, he believed was in the national interest or his own met interest, could not be impeach. he could not be impeached. he had to be prosecuted instead.

here they are making the opposite argument in the court. >> the character, the reference to character and the delay is so important for people to understand, so thank you for explaining that. trump listening, listening on thursday to the hearings. trumps lawyer suggested a president could not be prosecuted for assassinating a political rival. assassination would be an official act and the president could be immune after ordering a coup. there were hypotheticals the justices presented. trumps legal team suggests it's all fine. what were you thinking when you were listening to the arguments on thursday? >> the same thought we've had over and over which is are we really at this point? we cannot lose our sense of shock at just how low the bar has become. is it really possible the supreme court is entertaining the idea that a president could

not only commit a criminal act, but assassinate an appointment, engage in a coup, and this would not be subject to prosecution. there would be no accountability. is that really where we are? you started the segment, glad you did, talking about the enablers. the reason why this is possible is because of these enablers. my take away from all of this, true the justices when talking about character, it is true bill barr and mitch mcconnell, if there oath of office doesn't mean anything, they refuse to give it any content that's based on right or wrong or the truth, then none of it works. the constitution is not strong enough if people who are taking that oath to think it really means anything. >> your point in the enablers, there are potential enables everywhere, including congress. we saw that happen around january 6. there are new protections put in place. mike johnson who is the speaker the house was somebody who was

an enabler. are you fearful that he could play that role with even more power this time around? >> without a doubt. the nightmare scenario is that instead of like the last election where president biden won handily and in many battleground states that it comes to a single state and a narrow margin. that's the most dangerous scenario. the good news is, the positive scenario, if donald trump is voted down again and repudiated again, i do think the mitch mcconnell's, all the neighbors on that list, decide they need to move on because he is a loser. they keep losing with him. they will not move on from him because it's their interest in the country. bill barr made that clear. that's not his priority. they will be forced to move on because they cause the party to

lose. we all have that obligation in november to make sure the country can move on in the republican party goes back to being conservative ideology. liz cheney and adam kinzinger have a home. it's on all of us to bring about an end to this chair -- terrible chapter. >> there are members of the republican partner, marjorie taylor greene threatening to oust speaker johnson. the real possibility is an alternative could be worse. it's a crazy time we are living in. would you support him, vote for him as speaker of that up to you? or other democrats? >> i think what would likely happen if they go forward with this motion to try to unseat him because he brought ukraine funding to the floor, you would have a significant enough group of democrats who simply walk away and do not vote.

which, would probably be the right result. i don't think it does the speaker on a good day of democrats responsible for saving him, but republicans would be voting for the speaker. it's the vote threshold will be lower so the votes of the crazies, marjorie taylor greene, et cetera, are not preventing the house from governing in any way. >> i want to -- we have one minute left. i want to ask about project 2025. one things i have been talking is a includes plans to dismantle the justice department and how important it is. you have sat in so many different seats in different branches of the government. why is that so troubling? >> if you can weaponize the justice department to go after your opponents, or in the case of donald trump, make legitimate criminal charges against you go away, it means we have no rule of law. the whole country is founded on the idea we are a nation of

laws. we are not a nation of individual who holds power. everybody is accountable and i would say this too, it is remarkable that in a courthouse in new york city, 12 ordinary citizens will decide whether a former president is guilty or innocent. it is still possible in this country, and we should take pride in that and take confidence in the. we want to make sure that remains true in the future. >> absolutely. jury of your peers. thank you for joining me tonight. up next, trumps criminal trial resumes tomorrow. with more testimony from michael cohen's former banker. we have two smart legal minds here to break it all down. they join me after a quick break. break.

and they're all coming? those who are still with us, yes. grandpa! what's this? your wings. light 'em up! gentlemen, it's a beautiful... ...day to fly.

donald trump's criminal trial will pick back up tomorrow in lower manhattan. when a former banker to michael cohen is expected to return to the stand. he was the senior managing director and was assigned to cohen . at least in part due to his reputation for being able to handle what he called, quote, individuals that may be a little challenging. that's quite a banking specialty. he helped cohen set up a bank account for the shell company used to pay hundred $30,000 to

stormy daniels. on the eve of the 2016 election. in order to keep her quiet about an affair she said she had with then candidate trump. prosecutor said they have another hours worth of questions for the baker before trial trump's attorneys cross- examine him. thursday, the judge is said to hold another hearing over trump's apparent violations of the gag order. he has yet to decide, what if any, punishment trump will face for violations including four last week. basically, it's another very busy legal week ahead. good thing of two great lawyers joining me. tristan served as assistant attorney general in new york. melissa is a professor of law at new york university of law school and a podcast. they both join me know. tristan, i want to start with you. there's a lot of questions about standard practices at first republic in the staff questioning.

if he used email and if they kept clear records before we got into the evidence. help explain why those questions, which feels mundane at times, so why are they important? >> the word mundane is important to ask what happens at a trial, actually. were trying to follow this as well as we can but those dramatic moments don't happen that often. there is a lot of -- it's less about firing rockets often more about building a wall or a structure. you are doing a lot of brick laying and a lot is boring to watch, but it's necessary for building a good case. that's what they were doing. they are setting the stage to go through the documents and bringing pharaoh when there is holding the foundation, if you will, for the bigger witnesses that are to come and they will get more headlines like michael cohen. >> to continue the analogies, love that. we are looking for fireworks at every moment and that's not how

it works. to his point, bricklaying can be a little dry and hard to follow at times. following the money is always the thing. how do you think looking back, how has the prosecution been doing, getting the jury to understand the importance of all the specifics of this and what they are looking at as they look to the next stage of the trial. >> your question presumes that it will be dry and boring for most people. i am someone who reads supreme court opinions for a living so you can get more boring and confusing than that. >> that is why you are here. >> what the prosecution has done is focused on tying these documents to a story. in many ways, they have unfavorable witnesses. michael cohen has a lot of baggage. documents don't have baggage. they do not lie and they tell stories. it's important they weave these documents into this broader narrative of what happened

about the kind of scepter fusion how it extended through these different parts of trump's networks from his fixer and friends in the media to his fixer's banker so it comes together and these documents are the witnesses doing the talking. >> it sounds like they are predicting there is and i were lessor could go more about tomorrow. is a tomorrow? it is tomorrow. tristan, what do you think they spend their time on? >> we have the prosecution. the kicker is the need to, as melissa was saying, they need to build the story here building this foundation but we need to present is the story. that's what's going to win the case. are you building a better story than the other side. the story is about the lengths they went to. the links they went to to hide this.

the were not hiding it. this is the point they need to make, it's not to hide it from millennia. it was not to keep it from her. you didn't need to set up a shell company then have fake legal invoices and the other things he went through to hide it from her. they needed to paper it through the business. if it came from a business checking account that she had no visibility on, she's not a signatory to those accounts, she never would've known. if they just needed to hide it from her, they just needed to cut a check directly from a business account and nobody would know. journalist would've figured it out or would've come out in investigations. it would've, via subpoena. they did it to hide it from the american people. what is trump's lawyers going to do with farro? they will identify he had nothing to do with donald trump. that's probably the main thing you will hear them go at.

their theory of the case will be michael cohen went rogue. that's what they will try to say. all the other witnesses the prosecution is bringing to bear including starting with david pecker last week are there to say, this was not just cohen. it was a concerted effort and donald trump was in the middle of it. >> the witnesses are cooperating a. melissa, i want to ask about this gag order hearing. prosecutors arguing his violated it more than a dozen times. several last week agree. they held the first gag order hearing. if it was so necessary, why do you think the judge is waiting so long? i think that's what we are wondering? >> these orders take a lot of time to craft and determining whether someone has -- it takes even longer and it takes more time when you have a high profile defended. if it were any other ordinary defendant, we would've had a clear answer about the gag order, and it probably would've

resulted in the defendant being jailed for being in contempt of court. we have a defendant running for the president and who was a former president and constantly goading the judge to go to the line. it's a game of chicken between the judge and donald trump. the judge doesn't want to make donald trump a murder for his millions of followers nor does he want to impair -- imperiled the jurors and witnesses. it's a delicate line he's balancing. i'm not surprised we have not seen a ruling yet. >> you will both be working hard and i will be watching you both. thank you for taking the time. i appreciate it. senator lindsey graham's shrugs off the catch and kill scheme and claims a lot of people do this sort of thing. i have a feeling we have thoughts about these comments. he joins me next. e next. with new poligrip power max hold & comfort. it has superior hold plus keeps us comfy all day with it's pressure absording layer.

time for a bite! if your mouth could talk it would ask for... poligrip. what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

hi, i'm david, and i lost 92 pounds on golo. my life partner connie and i were in really rough shape regarding our health. and our doctors told us that we needed to lose weight. i saw a golo commercial and i thought, "we really need to try this." as the weeks went by, the weight came off. we learned to make healthy choices and be supportive of each other. together, we've lost 170 pounds. golo worked for us. since losing weight on golo, i'm feeling grateful and hopeful about the future. (energizing music)

during trump's criminal trial in new york, the former publisher the national enquirer david pecker city help trump's campaign by buying the rights to negative stories about trump. to keep the stories from coming up. a practice called catch and kill. wild stuff and we learned a lot about it during the trial last week. if you ask a trump ally like lindsey graham, there is nothing to see here. >> david pecker around the the national enquirer's parent

company testified he paid two catch and kill stories about trump's specifically to help his presidential campaign. you don't have concerns about that? >> you know, apparently a lot of people do this. arnold schwarzenegger, tiger woods. i think it's a crock. >> tiger woods is not running for president. >> i think the whole thing is bs. >> the whole thing is because apparently according to lindsey graham. he want to to believe this is common and is not the only one. during opening statements, trump lawyer todd blanche tried to make the same claim. he said, quote, this sort of thing happens regularly. i can tell you as someone who worked in three presidential campaigns and for two presidents, that the practice david pecker described is not normal. it doesn't happen, and i have a feeling my next gas agrees. joining me as someone who's worked for the national

enquirer and media organizations that do not operate like that. lachlan cartwright was executive editor at the inquirer during the 2016 campaign and his special correspondent for the hollywood reporter. there is a lot to dig into and we will do that. i want to ask you because you worked for a lot of media organizations of what lindsey graham, u.s. senator, said. there's nothing wrong with the catch and kill scheme and a lot of people do it. >> the differences a lot of people are not writing for the highest office in the land. i think back to my tenure at american media which was a three-year period and i could probably count on both hands the amount of catch and kill's that went on. that includes the incident with donald trump before donald trump. david pecker last week, they might've gotten the impression that it was a weekly practice that we were catching and killing stories for politicians and businessmen every week.

that is not the case. we were chasing and trying to break stories. that's the reason i went there. sort of weeks before the deal is hatched, i break the rant that men that hulk hogan was kicked out of the world wrestling hall of fame. we were doing newsgathering until we learned 2015 meeting happened sand david pecker makes this deal to be the eyes and ears. this was not normal practice. it is not something that was going on or anyone else running for president. >> or the overwhelming majority of media organizations are white house i've ever worked on. let me ask you about last week. you knew a lot about what had happened. you obviously knew the big witness from last week.

as you were listening to that testimony from david pecker, was there anything that surprised you that you heard in the testimony and what stuck out to you? >> the first thing that surprised me was, i said on this program two weeks ago, i was looking forward to looking at david pecker and dylan howard, and we learned he will not be in court. he will not be testifying because of a spinal injury. that was something i was not expecting. as i said on this program two weeks ago, the underlying matter is this was a case of election interference. david pecker confirm that. this was a scheme to influence a 2016 election. david pecker is an accountant. sitting in court and watching him and listening to him, i was incredibly taken with how meticulous and detailed he was able to lay this out for the

jury. i know the story very well. i am invested and i worked there. i thought to myself leaving court every day, he is doing a brilliant job in setting the table of what actually went on here. >> there were some text messages from dylan howard that were talked about last week. what do you think, if you were to take the stand, people would learn? is there more people would learn that we didn't learn last week? >> where dylan howard will play a role is when we get to michael cohen and the stormy daniels situation. david visibility into a lot of this but as david pecker himself testified last week, when it gets to the stormy daniels matter, this is where the time line is crucial here, that's going on after that access hollywood tape where they are panicking. there worried about the impact

of that tape on female voters and then stormy daniels comes on the scene and david pecker in his own words last week says i am not a bank. he did the two other payoffs. now here is stormy daniels and she wants 130 k mac and david pecker says no. michael cohen and donald trump have to handle it and he tells dylan howard, let them deal with the. dylan howard almost goes rogue and he gets intimately involved in helping the situation. when the defense will be attacking michael cohen's credibility in calling him a liar, dylan howard can back up a lot of that testimony. that's why he would've been key . and those text messages, that was something that surprised me. the text message -- keith davidson to dylan howard the night of the election where he says what have we done? i was in a pub in manhattan

watching the results in thinking, what have i done? dylan howard will play a key role on the stand. >> thank you, lachlan cartwright, always insightful and interesting. i look forward to talking to you more this evening. christine noel him killed her dog and i owe an apology. (♪♪) try dietary supplements from voltaren, for healthy joints.

there are few things that we in the country agree upon nowadays, but love of dogs is about as close as you get. that's probably why was a scandal in 2012 when we learned mitt romney had once strapped is dog to the roof of his car for a 12 hour drive. of course, he was widely ridiculed and as a secretary at the time to the obama campaign, i admit i was critical myself. i still would not defend strapping a dog to the roof of a car, i feel i owe the senator a bit of an apology.

i am sorry, senator romney. that is no longer the worst dog related political scandal in american history. governor kristi noem of south dakota takes that mantle who she seems to be on every shortlist for vice president for trump. she recently told a story about her dog in a forthcoming book. according to the guardian which obtained an excerpt of the book it goes something like this. no one has had a family dog named cricket, a wire haired pointer who was 14 months old. cricket was just a puppy but according to kristi noem, she was an trainable and had what she calls an aggressive personality. apparently cricket and attacked chickens and when she took cricket on a hunting trip, she went out of her mind with excitement, chasing the birds and having the time of her life. i think that sounds like normal behavior for a puppy. if you are unfamiliar with wire haired pointers, they look like

this and known to have a lot of energy. that was too much for kristi noem who writes, quote, i hated that dog. that's the voice i think she use. rather than trying cricket a new home or bring cricket to a shelter or seek out a dog rescue group, she led cricket to a gravel pit and shot her and reported the road, it was not a pleasant job, but it had to be done. that story is horrifying but also illuminating. probably not in the way kristi noem intended. is the guardian reports, she thought breaking about shooting her dog would show, quote, her willingness and politics as well as south dakota life to do things typical, messy, and ugly. okay. her story triggered outrage across the political spectrum including from megyn kelly who said she managed to do the impossible and unite democrats and republicans alike in their anger for this woman who shot her puppy in the face.

the fact that she thought this would make her look tough shows how clueless she is. for once we agree. for her part, even through the negative condemnation and criticism, meagan fitzgerald -- noem has not apologized. she has double downed , amazingly saying, quote, people are looking for leaders who are authentic and do not shy away from tough challenges. i mean, i guess there's nothing more authentic than shooting your dog. it shouldn't be a challenge for anyone to resist killing a puppy, this is what we're talking about in 2024. she certainly has refilled her authentic self. exciting news to share after a short break. stay where you are. re you are.

i'm jonathan lawson, here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price.

a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. options start at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate-lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information, and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling, so call now for free information.

you're probably not easily persuaded to switch mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? you can get two unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. all on the most reliable 5g mobile network—nationwide.

wireless that works for you. for a limited time, ask how to save up to $830 off an eligible 5g phone when you switch to comcast business mobile. don't wait! call, click or visit an xfinity store today. before we go, quick reminder that my new book is coming out next week on may 7. i can't believe it. it has stories about people you probably know. joe biden, barack obama, and others. it's a book about how to become a better communicator and i am convinced everyone can do the. i will be in new york city for conversation with my friend colleague lawrence o'donnell. we will talk about the book and i'm sure we will spend time on all the news happening in the world right now. tickets are available if you'd like to come to the event. we will share the information that the social media. it starts at 7:30 p.m.

next week. i hope to see you there. that does affirm a. the rachel maddow show starts now. >> i'm giving you one. it's coming to you tomorrow. >> okay. thank you, my dear. >> thank you, rachel. all right, thanks to you at home for joining us. really happy to have you here. have you ever seen "veep"?ou it haired for seven seasons on hbo.fo julia louis-dreyfus won a slew of emmys for it, like six consecutive emmys for it. she plays vice president selina meyer who is just this instantly iconic american tv political figure. if you have ever seen, even if you haven't, you probably know about the character. she's really ambitious. she wants to be president, not