fans. i saw the month osha media commenting with how caitlin clark left the court, and they cut away from south carolina celebrating. the cameras were following caitlin clark into the locker room. a lot of people, they saw the headline today, they made sure to mention caitlin clark and every headline that had to do with the carolina. when you go on social media, on instagram, he saw a lot of words highlight accounts -- >> i think we have lost her. i will just ended by saying this, dawn staley had one of the epic swigs of water shutting down -- and attempting to drag trans- athletes into the whole mess. but she was unbothered, as jemele hill is. that is tonight readout. inside with jen psaki starts now. as you probably know by now, donald trump has been claiming something so extreme, so far-fetched and so absurd,

you would think it would've been laughed out of the court. that is trumps arguments that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution. for practically anything they may do while in office. and and i literally mean everything. according to trans-lawyers, that meaning is so broad it allows the president to assassinate a political rival. and face virtually zero consequences, that is the argument they have been making. as a victimless that may be, the question of presidential immunity is before the supreme court. which delayed trumps trial in d.c. -- their decision and the timing of that decision could determine whether tromp is ever held accountable for his actions on and around january 6th. in a scathing rebuke of the former president, special counsel jack smith is hitting back hard. stated "the president's constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed does not

entail a general right to violate them." smith shreds trans-argument that criminal statutes somehow do not apply to presidents. thing "that radical suggestion, which would free the president from virtually all criminal law, even crimes such as bribery, murder, treason and sedition, is unfounded.". there is a lot more. joining me now is lisa rubin and sherilyn ifill -- to brilliant female legal eagles. grateful to be here with both of you. lisa, i want to start with you. i know this came in minutes ago, but you are both brilliant lawyers. i am grateful to you both for being here. give me your first reaction from hearing this on the special counsel? >> the thing that struck me immediately was the concessions that are here. some of these arguments we have seen before. this is the third time the special counsel office is

briefing the issue before federal courts in the federal election interference case before -- for the first time, they are encountering a supreme court that could side with donald trump on more than one issue here, or more than one subpart of what being -- what is being decided. you see they make a new argument, even if the court holds that a former president is entitled to some immunity for criminal prosecution for official acts, that principle does not preclude trial on this indictment. and then they make a number of sub arguments. they say this is the big thing he has been charged with, efforts to subvert an election in violation of the term of office clause of article two in the constitutional process for electing a president is so serious that even if the court decides some sort of immunity is necessary and justifiable

for former presidents, it is not on the stack with these allegations of these crimes. the second thing they said was, look, if he is saying he is entitled for immunity and special acts and you agree, note that much of what we are alleging his private conduct. this guy was acting in his capacity as a candidate. and even if he did certain things in the capacity that involved sitting in the oval office or white house and taking what looks like official acts, he was really involved in a conspiracy with private act first for his own private and personal gain. i think what we are seeing from jack smith and his team are a number of different concessions designed to preserve their case, even if a majority of this court or plurality of this court decide former presidents are entitled to some form of presidential immunity. >> thank you for breaking that down as you did. as a non-for -- nonlawyer, it struck me. as a private citizen. it goes into that. i know we have talked about

immunity and this case so much. it is important to remind people, why is that differentiation important? and what stuck out to you in the portions you are able to read? >> thank you, jen. trump has always wanted to be teflon when it comes to the law. he does not want it to apply to him and he has always had a conception of his role as the president. that it somehow constitutes a lifelong immunity from accountability. for that reason, lisa, did a good job of describing the filing today. i found this incredibly depressing. the reason i found the filing depressing, was this is a case with no legs. this was dealt with in great detail by the court of appeals. this should've been summarily handled by the supreme court. and it is a testament to how reckless this supreme court has become, how unpredictable, how far out of the mainstream it has become. that the special

counsel felt it was incumbent on him to create backstops, and secondary and tertiary positions because he could not trust that a majority of the supreme court would do what every other clear, seen jurist acting not in a political context, but pure legal context, would know had to be true. that our system of government was not created to ensure that one man would lack accountability and could rise to the highest level of government in our country, and that would then constitute a cloak of impunity. this is just simply at odds with the very concept of our country. that is king george. this should have been a slam dunk. the fact that even jack smith clearly is concerned that given the supreme court, it may not be the slam dunk.

it made me uneasy reading the filing. >> that is an important point. this is a lengthy brief. it is not two pages. as you said, he had to really detail .5 .5 point. even though, expertly both of you have repeatedly said there is no basis here. i want to dig into some of the quote that stuck out to me. and you may have other one. another excerpt from this filing talks about president. -- smith's right "the absence of any prosecutions of former presidents until this case does not reflect the understanding that presidents are immune from criminal liability, it instead underscores the unprecedented nature of petitioner's alleged conduct." this is written in a legal brief, i think it is an important and powerful message point that should continue to be repeated. he is facing this, despite what

sherrilyn just said. because of his actions. lisa, talk to me about that and why that was important lewd or whether you would create -- would agree it was important? >> it was, that a critical argument that trump has relied on. in our nations history, we have never seen a prosecution like this. and you know some of the hyperbole that come out of his mouth, he is fond of in, never before have we seen this. -- one of the things he is incorporated into his legal filings is, we have never seen anything like this before. it was important for the special counsel to counter that and say, we have not seen this because no one has acted in office like you have. to your point about the coming an important messaging tool, i have talked about how the political and legal appear to be collapsing in trump various cases. things to come out of his mouth then manifest themselves in legal argument, even though, as

you and i discussed on friday, they seem like an opposition research document than a legal brief. now you're seeing the flipside of that. jack smith, in his quest to defend what should be easy for everybody to understand, someone allegedly broke the law in a big way. and they are being called to account for that even though that person was formally the president of the united states. jack smith is now saying things that should and can be persuasive to the american people in taking back their power with respect to voting in november's election. >> sherrilyn, go ahead. >> i wanted to add. the flipside is, these kinds of arguments are also ones we are hearing if we are think trump is making argument that you would expect from -- and their winding up in legal briefs. there also winding up in judicial decisions. we are hearing that the courts.

the reason why trump is making the argument that never before has happened, is because it was just effective in the section 3 case, where the majority opinion of the supreme court was saying, have we ever seen a state try to keep a federal officer from the ballot? the idea that we are facing this unprecedented, since the civil war challenge, to democracy in this country is being used as evidence that we cannot challenge this challenge. when i read that, i read that as having, again, to confront what has been trump's argument. but what we also have heard from the supreme court and their incredulity that we have never seen this before. thank goodness we do not regularly see insurrections. think goodness we don't regularly have presidents engaging in criminal conduct for which they might be subjugated to criminal investigation -- all of this is uncharted territory. and that is irrelevant to the

question or whether or not he has immunity. i think even fooling around with the notion that because it is unprecedented it means something significant, it is a way the truck does the most outrageous things that no one could have imagined the president doing. and then raises the fact that no one could imagine the president doing it as a defense. that is part of why jack smith is referencing that. that seems to resonate, certainly with the supreme court in the section 3 case. >> you do an effective roundup. you bring us back down to planet earth. >> i am a debbie downer. >> straight talker. -- we need to be aware of things , all super important. let me ask you, lisa. there is a lot of history in here. we talked about nixon a bit. and the president that is not a precedent. he also talked about what the -- the framers supply no support -- how is that argument?

you think as a saint part -- person the argument would be -- how do you think the argument will plate with the conservative justices? that this is not what the framers intended? how likely is that to be something we here? >> i agree with sherrilyn, this is a court that fantasizes history. and the absence of history was one way in which they justified what textually was unjustifiable. the provision of the constitution at issue there interpretively should have led to a different result. and yet, the court new what result they wanted to reach. he reached out and grabbed the asset -- absence of history to get that. to be said there is a counterpunch, it is this framers argument. this is the court also fantasizes originalism. -- what is the history of this

document. and at its founding, i think that is hopefully going to be success will with these folks and getting them to see that there is no basis in our constitutional text or otherwise to immunize this person. the absence of history here is one supporting his interpretation as much as anything else. >> despite the absence of any justification of our constitutional text, sherrilyn, bring us back down to earth. will this be appealing to the conservative justices? what do you think? >> this time, i am a bit persuaded by what lisa has said. this supreme court is quite interested in the framers of the original constitution. they are not interested in the framers of the 14th amendment.

i do not know how you get past article one section 3, it makes it clear that if trump had been convicted during the impeachment, he could still have been prosecuted after he left office. what would be the purpose of that section in the constitution if merely because he was impeached but not convicted he now could not be convicted and or tried in a criminal prosecution? i think it makes that provision of the constitution illogical. and i think that is something that would concern these injustices. i have said this before, i think we raise the nixon scenario because, for most of us, that is the scenario that comes closest in terms of a president running a foul of the law and abusing power in this way. i said before, many of these people including conservative justices on the court are people who believe nixon got a raw deal. and so to the extent nixon is a precedent, i am not sure it is

a precedent that they like in terms of how it turned out. one of the most powerful presidents is nixon accepted a pardon. you do not accept the pardon in less you are and essentially saying you were guilty. to me, that makes it open and shut. and yet, i am betting there are lots of folks around who feel like nixon was railroaded into accepting the party. i just think we are going to find out quite a bit about this case. but i felt myself very worried by the filing today and by the clear realization that jack smith understands we are working with a very, very tricky majority on the supreme court and nothing can be assumed. >> such an important reminder. we have to sneak in a quick break. lisa rubin, thank you for being here. sherrilyn, thank you for sticking around for one more block if you still can't.

-- there are a long list of military leaders fighting with the -- siding with the special counsel. -- he is standing by and joins us in 60 seconds. seconds. n a? thankfully, tide's the answer to almost all of them. why do we even buy napkins? use tide. can cold water clean white socks? it can with tide. do i need to pretreat guacamole? not with tide. this is chocolate, right? -just use... -tide...yeah. no matter who's doing it, on what cycle, or in what temperature, tide works. so i can focus on all the other questions. do crabs have eyebrows? ahh... for all of life's laundry questions, it's got to be tide. >> tech: at safelite, we'll take care of fixing your windshield. but did you know we can take care of your insurance claim? laundry questions, that means less stress for you. >> woman: thanks. >> tech: my pleasure. have a good one. >> woman: you too. >> tech: schedule today at safelite.com. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ do you want to close out?

should i? normally i'd hold. but... taking the gains is smart here, right? feel more confident with stock ratings from j.p. morgan analysts in the chase app. when you've got a decision to make... the answer is j.p. morgan wealth management. as we all digest jack smith brief to the supreme court on presidential immunity. thanks in part to lisa rubin and sherrilyn ifill, we also heard from a group of higher ranking former military officials issued a dire warning in a brief filed with the record. they include sheriffs in general and former secretaries of the army, navy and air force. they served presidents under both parties. from john f. kennedy to donald trump himself. they say presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would

threaten the military's role in american society, our nation's constitutional order and national security. they say immunizing the president will place members in the impossible decision of choosing between following their commander in chief and obeying the laws enacted by congress. they worn it would jeopardize america's standing as a guardian of democracy in the world and feed the spread of authoritarianism. is a powerfully written document. joining us now, lewis caldera. sherrilyn ifill is back as well. thank you for taking the time this evening. is a powerful brief and argument. i try to put in some of the key points. tell us a little bit about how you wanted to sign off as the chief signatory, and what you hope people will take away. >> we thought it was very important to bring these national security issues to the supreme court's attention. these are very -- individuals, but numb have ever served in the military. when you talk about control of

the military and civil military relations, how the immunity of a president or criminal actions. immunity meaning he could not be charged or prosecuted for criminal actions, how that would seriously threaten our national security. for example, as you mentioned, the way the president would accomplish any of these goals, whether it was to assassinate a political rival or to use uniformed military soldiers against demonstrators that he disagreed with on howard street, something that is outlawed in the u.s. -- the way he would do it, he would not do it directly. he would order the military to use it might, soldiers and weapons, in a way that was unlawful. weather on u.s. soil or another way. when he transmits those orders, he transmits them through civilian appointees. secretary of defense, the

service military. to the chief of staff of the army, the commander in chief or joint chiefs, down to the individual service member. all of those individual swore an oath to defend the constitution, to follow the orders of the president and those appointed over them and to obey the law. there is a thing called a duty to disobey. it means you only have a duty to obey a lawful orders. you cannot -- you have a duty not to obey unlawful orders. this goes back to world war ii, germany . saying you were just following orders became untenable as a defense. it is not recognized. you cannot just say, i was following orders. a president who was intent on violating the law because he is not subject to criminal prosecution would put the military officers and soldiers in a position to do things that are unlawful for things where

they could be prosecuted. that's a terrible dilemma to put service workers to. and who would transmit those orders? it would be political appointees would have to decide whether to resign because they could not pass on lawful orders. or they would be so loyal and pass them on and it would be the generals would have to resign or transmit them or pass them on. that will destroy the relationships between our senior civilian appointed officials and the military leaders. the military leaders are career military leaders who have dedicated their life to preserving our country. they are not politicians. the appointees are appointed political leaders. the only way that civilian and military leadership works together if there is a fundamental trust between the civilian and military leaders. that we are all on the same page, all trying to defend the country, defend the constitution, obey the rule of law, do what is in the best interest of the country.

if you have a president intent on using the military for unlawful purposes, you have destroyed the unity that exists. you have destroyed the trust and created chaos in the ranks. you put soldiers in an untenable position, created a dilemma for them. you probably misused the military in a way that average americans are wont to say, wait, our military is being used for political purposes? it will undermine support for the military. and it sent the wrong message to other countries in this world were our country is the vanguard of democracy. one of the things we try to teach in the military is to communicate to militaries and governments in other parts of the world that democracy is the best way to have ability and peace. are the people have a voice. where you follow the rule of law. and that, it will set the example that our democracy does not actually function because we have a president who has the kind of authority that kim jong- un has in north korea.

he can do whatever he wishes and he is totally immune from any accountability. >> secretary, that was a well stated an important message for people to hear. i am grateful that you shared it. i want to ask you, sherrilyn, i asked you to stay. i think it is important for people to know, as a respected legal expert is you, why is this significant? the secretary broke down the impact, which is dramatic on the chain of command. on the men and women serving our country. you summarized it better than i just did. why is this important legally? why is this a big deal in your view? >> first of all, i want to thank secretary louis caldera for the powerful way you explained what is important about it. donald trump has two ways that he is able to hold onto power. one is, he undermined the

unraveled rule of law. the other is, he weakens and unravels core democratic institutes. the military is such an institution. you just heard the values and the laws and rules and ethical guidelines that govern the conduct of those who enter the military. and it is so powerful and important for the supreme court to understand that what -- trump is drowning. a drowning man will often drown others with him. he is grasping and one is cloak of immunity. he is unconcerned about the fact that he will unravel the integrity of the military should he prevail in his argument. remember also, trump has very little respect for those in the military. these are the people he called, suckers and losers. these are the people he feels

if there injured, he does not want them in parades or to be seen near him because they look bad. he does not have respect for the military. the second thing he does not have respect for is the rule of law. i think what secretary louis caldera describe, is what is happening in the civilian population. more people believe the president has impunity can get away with anything, the less they believe that we really are a country that hold dear the rule of law. and once people stop believing that the rule of law is important, that there must be accountability, that no one is above the law, the more that becomes implicated in the american mind. moore will have lawless and dangerous conduct. in the context of the military, that is particularly disturbing. it was donald trump who pardoned a navy seal who had engaged in conduct for which he had been court-martialed. he made a hero of one of these

individuals that he pardoned, who had been reported by his own fellow officers and trump pardoned him. he is a unravel or of institutions. and unravel are of the law. the supreme court needs to hear from these military leaders to explain what the effect of trumps argument would be on the military, core and critical institution of our democracy. >> louis caldera, sherrilyn ifill, what a powerful discussion. i appreciate you both for joining me. coming up, donald trump posted a link the video this morning addressing his stance on abortion. is what he did not say that should give voters pause. we will talk about that after the short break. short break. our food fresher, our families safer, and our planet cleaner. to help us get there, america's plastic makers are investing billions of dollars

to create innovative products and new recycling technologies for sustainable change. because when you push for smarter solutions, big things can happen. hi, i'm greg. i live in bloomington, illinois. i'm not an actor. i'm just a regular person. some people say, "why should i take prevagen? i don't have a problem with my memory." memory loss is, is not something that occurs overnight. i started noticing subtle lapses in memory. i want people to know that prevagen has worked for me. it's helped my memory. it's helped my cognitive qualities. give it a try. i want it to help you just like it has helped me. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. that grimy film on your teeth? dr. g? (♪♪) it's actually the buildup of plaque bacteria which can cause cavities. most toothpastes quit working in minutes. but crest pro-health's antibacterial fluoride protects all day. it stops cavities before they start... crest. some people just know that the best rate for you is a rate based on you, with allstate.

because you... you are not doing this. save with drivewise and get a rate based on you. you're in good hands with allstate. ♪3, 4♪ ♪ ♪hey♪ ♪ ♪are you ready for me♪ ♪are you ready♪ ♪are you ready♪ ooo, that looks complicated. that's why visionworks organizes our frames by shape and price so it's simple to find a pair you'll love. there are the shapes, that's the price. now you get it. visionworks. see the difference. ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪♪ ) constant contact's advanced automation lets you send the right message at the right time, every time. ( ♪♪ ) constant contact. helping the small stand tall. voices of people with cidp: cidp disrupts. cidp derails.

let's be honest... all: cidp sucks! voices of people with cidp: but living with cidp doesn't have to. when you sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com, you'll find inspiration in real patient stories, helpful tips, reliable information, and more. cidp can be tough. but finding hope just got a little easier. sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com. all: be heard. be hopeful. be you. i have active psoriatic arthritis. but with skyrizi to treat my skin and joints, count me in. along with clearer skin, skyrizi helps me move with less joint pain, stiffness, swelling, and fatigue. and is just 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. there's nothing like clearer skin and better movement. and that means everything! ask your doctor about skyrizi today. learn how abbvie could help you save. ohhh crap. now we gotta get france something. wait! we can use etsy's new gift mode!

alright. done. ♪♪ plateau de fromage! oh la la! don't panic. gift easy with gift mode, new on etsy. from chavez and huerta to striking janitors in the 90s to today's fast-food workers. californians have led the way. now, $20/hour is here. thanks to governor newsom and leaders in sacramento, we can lift workers out of poverty. stop the race to the bottom in the fast-food industry. and build a california for all of us. thank you governor and our california lawmakers for fighting for what matters.

okay, former president donald trump another statement this morning on abortion. a very specifically -- that word might be generous in describing the word salad he put up this morning. despite some headlines that suggest otherwise, it definitely was not a clarification or announcement of his position on abortion rights at all. he said a lot of thing and also said recently nothing. some, including the leader of an anti--- sought -- she said "we are deeply disappointed in

president trump's position. unborn children and their mothers deserved national protection and national advocacy from the brutality of the abortion industry." is a pretty strong word list against donald trump. before we start painting donald trump, the guy who once said there should be some sort of punishment for women who get abortions, and who is was possible for nominating three of the supreme court justices who overturned roe, is anywhere near moderate over this issue. reading the statement he issued as moderate is the wrong read. listen to what he is actually saying here. >> the states will determine by vote or legislation or both, whatever they decide must be the law of the land. in this case, the law of the state. now it is up to the states to do the right thing. >> he says he wants to leave it up to the states. let's dive into what that really means. it means, too bad who live in the more than 20 state to face

bans or restrictions in early pregnancy. the state will decide for you. it means for women in florida that will soon live under a six week abortion ban, before most people know they are pregnant, they will have to deal with it. under a trump administration, they will likely hear more stories like kate cox, who found out when pregnant that her baby had a fatal diagnosis. in which he tried to terminate the pregnancy to save her own life, the texas board said no. forcing her to leave the state to have the procedure. or amanda, who could not get medical attention because of her state laws. which caused her to get sepsis and almost died. -- while donald trump tries to avoid to take the position, dodging questions and restating with the law currently is. what is most revealing is what he did not say. he did not say how he would treat mifepristone, the abortion pill facing a legal fight. he did not say how many weeks

he believes is appropriate -- and he did not say he would sign a national abortion end. to be clear, not addressing a national abortion ban does not mean he will not find one. if you put out state and saying, i will not sign a national abortion and, by all means, they should say that. that is not what he did. trump might have talked a lot in this video. he is put out a lot of statement today saying a lot of words, he offered very little. no specifics, no answers on the most pressing questions. the thing is, he is intentionally muddying the waters because he knows that this is a losing issue for him. read the polls, it is up-front. is also interesting, bold even, given this is a mess that he himself created. let's go back in history. in 1999, he was pro-choice. listen to this that we have of trump in his own words. >> i thought i would read a statement because so many

people have been asking my views. that is the following, i am pro- choice. by the respective use of those were not. i think this is a very important situation that must be left to women and their doctors, not the politicians. >> that was 1999, in 2011, when he was -- and it was politically advantageous for him, he was pro-life. in 2016, he decided to out pro- life and ran on a pledge to appoint pro-life justices to the supreme court to overturn roe v wade. of course, during his presidency, he nominated three of the justices who did overturn roe. and he has bragged about his role in that. here is the thing, no one should be tricked to his word salad statement. to him, he could care less about women's rights or freedom. that is clear. is guiding principle on the issue is political expediency,

that is also clear. even literally admitted as much in his announced saying ", you must follow your heart on this issue, but remember, you must also win elections." winning, that all it ever been about for donald trump. we had a state like ohio, one that is trending red, -- they passed a constitutional amendment protecting abortion access. let's call this what it is. your healthcare, that of your daughter, granddaughter, sister, wife, it is all political games for trump. when he was president, he did not protect those rights, he paved the way to have them take away. senator brown is standing by and he will join me next. we will be right back. k. that's why he switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults. no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this:

leo learned that most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking dofetilide. this can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. if you have a rash or allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. serious or life-threatening lactic acid buildup and liver problems can occur. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. dovato may harm an unborn baby. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: you could stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about dovato. you know, i spend a lot of time thinking about dirt. at three in the morning. any time of the day. what people don't know is that not all dirt is the same. you need dirt with the right kind of nutrients. look at this new organic soil from miracle-gro. everybody should have it. it worked great for us.

this is as good as gold in any garden. if people only knew that it really is about the dirt. you're a dirt nerd. huge dirt nerd. i'm proud of it! [ryan laughs] uhhh. katie! i knew i'd find you here. i know, it's wild. i'm you from the future! anyway our doctor figured it out. all that constipation with belly pain that keeps coming back, it's ibs—c. she said linzess could help you get ahead of it. whatta you say? yess! get ahead of your ibs—c with linzess. linzess is not a laxative. it's a once—daily pill that helps you get ahead of your symptoms. it's proven to help you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. and helps relieve overall abdominal symptoms... belly pain, discomfort, and bloating. do not give linzess to children less than two. it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe.

if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. these aren't all the side effects. imagine...what could relief from ibs—c mean for you? talk to your doctor and say yess to linzess. learn how abbvie and ironwood could help you save. feeling sluggish or weighed down? talk to your doctor and say yess to linzess. could be a sign that your digestive system isn't at its best. but a little metamucil everyday can help. metamucil's psyllium fiber gels to trap and remove the waste that weighs you down... so you can lighten every day the metamucil way. i bought the team!

kevin...? i bought the team! i put it on my chase freedom unlimited card. and i'm gonna' cashback on a few other things too... starting with the sound system! curry from deep. that's caaaaaaaaash. i prefer the old intro! this is much better! i don't think so! steph, one more thing... the team owner gets five minutes a game. cash bros? woo! i like it. i'll break it to klay. cashback like a pro with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? chase, make more of what's yours. when enamel is gone, you cannot get it back. but you can repair it with pronamel repair. it penetrates deep into the tooth to actively repair acid weakened enamel. i recommend pronamel repair. with new pronamel repair mouthwash you can enhance that repair beyond brushing. they work great together. hi, i'm jason. i've lost 228 pounds on golo. ♪ you can enhance that repair beyond brushing. i don't ever want to go back to wearing a 4xl shirt or not being able to climb up stairs without taking a break. so i'm committed to golo for life.

when it comes to how the issue of abortion might affect -- races, few people don't understand what is at stake quite like my next guest. here is sherrod brown, up for election this year. thank you for sharing your time. -- let me start with trump statement on abortion this morning. what did you make of it when you read it this morning? >> i pretty much made of it what you just said. across the country, i'm not one

to talk about my opponent or the three republicans in the primary. -- the winner of the primary, transkei, he had the first six week band, no exceptions. they are dancing about. in the end, it is who you trust? do you trust women and their families and physicians, or do you trust columbus politicians. or washington politicians? that is why ohio -- a lot of you try to say there trending conservatives. overwhelming, 14 points, 57-43 said no. in places we would not have asked acted communities we would have not expected. but women spoke out and we won. >> it's an important point. i will say, my husband is from ohio. i have been there many times. and as you said, it is an issue

that is trending among women, independents, among men as well. it is one they are concerned about. that abortion constitutional amendment last year, 57% of ohioans supported it. did that surprise you? and how important is due -- is it to you -- >> i thought we were going to win. all of the political people in columbus, the governor, the state officeholders, the secretary of state but is some on skill change. with all of that, we still won by 14 points, which tells you the turnout was expected. it was the middle of august, the secretary of state's at eight or nine points. too much minutia. they did all kinds of things to defeat us. republicans in ohio, they do

not quite know what to do. they know they are on the wrong side. think of americans, even though the voters said by 14 points, no, there are still the arrogance of trying to stop it using the courts, calling the national abortion ban, which would override all of those things. it shows a disregard for the voters. that's built into the whole election. because my opponent has the arrogance and a host of issues. if you are that much against women's rights and women and their families making these personal decisions, it usually means you are wrong on civil rights and human rights and worker rights. my opponent is against the minimum wage. you can line up all of the issues that matter to most people. i do not look at politics left and right. -- whether it is standing up

for the drug companies, or wall street or the oil companies, or the railroad in east palestine where they had the derailment, they do not think of liberal -- >> no question about it. your neighbors do not talk about things in the way people talk about it in washington, d.c. let me ask you, you have been re-elected twice in ohio. you are popular in the state. it has been trending red, people question, can a democrat win the senate race? tim ryan ran a good race and still lost by seven point. how can you win this race and how it will you defeat your opponent? >> let me give you a quick story. the building trades around ohio understand they have to get more women in and people of color. they are doing that. the certification graduation i spoke to in columbus, a few weeks ago, mostly were young people who were looking for an opportunity.

they took this class. they will be ready at the end of the 13 week certification to join -- they will get an apprentice carpenter or type layer or bricklayer or operating engineer. and at the end -- will make $18 an hour at the beginning, no student debt. we have to deal with the student debt issue properly. they will be making close to $40 an hour with benefits. they were all wearing a t-shirt that said, direct path to middle-class. the democratic party has to learn how to work -- talk to workers. i often talk about the dignity of working. i asked those people to come to my website and help us get the word out about the dignity of work. regardless of where you punch a clock or swipe a badge, whether you work in an office, or work

for tips, if you stand on the side of workers, you win elections and make the right decisions. i wear this canary pin. it is a depiction of the canary bird indicates. they had no union 100 years ago, strong enough, or government that care to protect them. i wear this to focus on workers, and focus on how you help people join the middle class. that is what we are doing in ohio. and what we can do around the country. >> i love a canary pin. i think that is a special and powerful message. thank you so much for joining me and talking about such important issues in your state. coming up, the great american eclipse was just plain cool to most of us. to others, like marjorie taylor greene, there was something more sinister going on apparently. i will explain more after this break. break. when you have chronic kidney disease,

there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure which can lead to dialysis. ♪ far-xi-ga ♪ ♪♪ farxiga can cause serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections and low blood sugar. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. when you have chronic kidney disease, it's time to ask your doctor for farxiga. because there are places you want to be. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ far-xi-ga ♪

(vo) dan made progress with his mental health... ...but his medication caused unintentional movements in his face, hands, and feet called tardive dyskinesia, or td. so his doctor prescribed austedo xr— a once-daily td treatment for adults. ♪as you go with austedo♪ austedo xr significantly reduced dan's td movements. some people saw a response as early as 2 weeks. with austedo xr, dan can stay on his mental health meds- (dan) cool hair! (vo) austedo xr can cause depression, suicidal thoughts, or actions in patients with huntington's disease.

pay close attention to and call your doctor if you become depressed, have sudden changes in mood, or have suicidal thoughts. don't take if you have liver problems, are taking reserpine, tetrabenazine, or valbenazine. austedo xr may cause irregular or fast heartbeat, or abnormal movements. seek help for fever, stiff muscles, problems thinking, or sweating. common side effects include inflammation of the nose and throat, insomnia and sleepiness. ♪as you go with austedo♪ ask your doctor for austedo xr. ♪austedo xr♪

today, millions of americans across north america and the u.s. had a rare chance to watch the solar eclipse. the total solar eclipse, nicknamed the great american eclipse for his long path over north america, was visible in 15 states. there were varying views of a partial clips that were enjoyed throughout the country. including members out of our team in it d.c. and new york. it was only back in august, 2017 that the last solar eclipse cut across the u.s. just like today, americans throughout the country paused their day to safely gaze at the sun through their protective shades.

with of course, the notable exception of this guy. in past millennia, solar eclipses were tied to mass rescission and fear a long time ago. instead, there are rare moments of collective are where people can watch a very cool celestial event. but sometimes, even in this day and age some folks try really hard to make it something more. like on friday, the day of the earthquake rumbled part of the northeast and mid-atlantic. marjorie taylor greene posted this. quote and -- "god is sending america strong sign to tell us to repent. earthquake and eclipses and many more things to,. i pray that our country listens." i am just going to pause on that statement for a moment. it is something and you need to read it. her post was quickly tagged with a community note that point out the u.s. averages

about four earthquakes a day. that is what happens. and solar eclipses are able to be predicted well in advance. but have no fear, congresswoman greene double down on her post. thing, many have mocked and scoffed at this. yes, eclipses are predictable and earthquakes happen. however, god created all of these things and uses them to be signs for those who believe. another explanation is sometimes these things are just coincidences, maybe? but even fox news attempted to not so subtly tie the eclipse to their favorite all-time political issue. >> foxnews alert a rare celestial event collide with the policy failure on the ground. the southern border will be in the path of totality when the moon covers the sun for nearly four minutes. >> the funny thing is back in 2017, the last time there was a solar eclipse in the u.s., no

serious person was trying to spin it this way. in the larger context of the language that the right is pushing seven months out from election day, fear mongering about invading migrants in livable cities. and donald trump morning about a bloodbath if he is not elected, this is more about the fear their eagle to -- eager to inject into any and everything under the sun. coming up, an assignment i've been working on for a really long time. it involves my book and her journey on the road. coming up. coming up. some after the first dose. serious side effects, including suicidal thoughts and behavior, infections and lowered ability to fight them, liver problems, and inflammatory bowel disease, have occurred. tell your doctor if these happen or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. (♪♪) start to get yourself back, with bimzelx. ask your dermatologist about bimzelx today. higher shipping rates may be “the cost of doing business...” but at what cost? turn shipping to your advantage.

with low cost ground shipping from the united states postal service. ♪♪ here's to getting better with age. here's to beating these two every thursday. help fuel today with boost high protein, complete nutrition you need... ...without the stuff you don't. so, here's to now. boost. if you have bladder leaks when you laugh or cough- like we did- there's a treatment that can help: bulkamid. and the relief can last for years. we're so glad we got bulkamid. visit findrealrelief.com to find a physician near you.

at st. jude, the mission is just something that everyone can truly get behind. look at our little st. jude pin there on the fridge! we're just regular people donating. yeah. and i think it's cool to be able to make a difference in someone's lives in a way that is meaningful.

before we go tonight, i have exciting news. my brand-new book, say more, is coming out -- i can sure tonight i will hit the ground running that week. i will be in new york city on may 8th. i will be visiting many cities and having conversations with some of my favorite people who you also probably know. i will be sure to share all of the information with the shows social media channel for everyone interested in attending. i look forward to seeing you out there on the road and taking questions due to. that does it for me. rachel maddow show starts now. >> tell me the title. >> the book is called, say more. i will bring you a copy when i see you in new york. it's all about how to communicate. i wish i had this book years ago. for you, i have some books about dealing with bullies like the kremlin, for example.