gazan had that can of beans you were referring to. many of them don't. >> 245 calories. this must be unlike anything you have seen in recent memory. >> it's the density and speed of the decent into absolute hell. let's not forget, there are 25 million people in sudan suffering from a civil war. people in syria. refugees and elsewhere who need our attention as well. but in terms of density of population, speed of descent, this is in a league of its own. >> thank you so much for your time. that is our show this evening. now it is time for the last word with laura jarrett. >> we have a couple of supreme court experts with us tonight. senator sheldon white house. i'm always taking notes when he speaks and neil catial will join us on the presidential

immunity claim. >> over to you, scotus, april 25th, we'll be watching. have a good show. >> thank you. it is not donald trump who did this. it is the 63 million people who voted for donald trump and put the power of supreme court nomination in his hands for four years. and it's the 62 million people who voted for george w. bush or who volunteered for his campaign or helped out in any way which meant that they indirectly voted for chief justice roberts and justice samuel alito who wrote the opinion overturning roe v. wade. and it is the 49 million people who voted for george h. w. bush who indirectly voted for clarence thomas to serve on the supreme court where he waited for decades to vote to overturn

roe v. wade. they had every reason to believe that it was just political posturing. he wasn't the first. george h. w. bush and the family were supporters of planned parenthood until george h. w. bush had to change his position in 1980 in order to become ronald reagan's vice presidential running mate. an act of ultimate cynicism in politics. no one working in american politics believed that george h. w. bush from connecticut was really opposed to abortion. it is simply what he had to say to get on the republican ticket which was running on an anti- abortion platform that the candidates never emphasized but made sure anti-abortion voters

knew about them. it was the most cynical public act we had yet seen in presidential or vice presidential candidate. the first of president bush's sons did not have to engage in a public reversal of his position by the time he became a politician running governor of texas. george w. bush aligned himself with the anti-abortion politics of the republican party that had taken hold by that time in the 1990s . the next presidential campaigning republican forced by republican politics, not by principle, to get in line with the party on abortion was mitt romney who ran a losing senate campaign in massachusetts against ted kennedy, claiming to be, to the left of ted kennedy. on abortion and other issues. then romney won the governorship of massachusetts

running. mitt romney was completely pro choice as the governor of massachusetts. and then when he ran for president as a republican in 2012, he completely flip- flopped and became as anti- abortion as any other republican. so when donald trump says as he did this week that the republican position on abortion is just politics, he means it. and he is not the first one. he is not the first one to think so cynically about republican abortion politics. last time republican candidates debated abortion was 24 years ago. when john mccain wanted to ban all abortions with exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother. and george w. bush didn't appear to understand his own no exceptions position. >> do you believe in the exemption in abortion for case of rape, incest, and the life of the mother?

you know it is interesting. you are talking about printed material that is mailed out. here is one that says that george w. bush supports the pro life plane. your position is that you believe there is an exception for rape, incest and the life of the mother but you want the platform you are leading to have no exemption. >> the platform talks about, it doesn't talk about what specifically should be in the constitutional amendment. >> it doesn't have the exemptions in it. >> let me finish john. let me finish. the platform speaks about a constitutional amendment. it doesn't refer to how that constitutional amendment ought to be defined. john. >> it has no exceptions. >> we need to keep the platform the way it is. >> then you are contradicts your platform. >> may i finish please? we need to be a pro life party. we need to say life is precious and that is what our platform refers to. that is why we need to leave it

the same. >> george w. bush. the man who became president, clearly did not know what he was talking about. but john mccain didn't either. he was asked by a reporter if he would tell his then 15-year- old daughter that she could not have an abortion if she became pregnant, john mccain said no. i would discuss this issue with cindy and megan and this would be a private decision. that we would share within our family. obviously, i would encourage her to know that baby would be brought up in a loving family. the final decision would be made by megan with our advice and counsel and i think that is such a private matter. yeah. it is. a private matter. all responsible people agreed with that answer. but that was not actually john mccain's position as a candidate and that meant that john mccain was in favor of banning abortion for everyone

except his daughter. so he was forced to go into republican damage control says i misspoke. what i believe i was saying and intended to say is this is a family decision. the family decision will be made by the family, not by meghan alone. that clarified nothing, of course. except that republican elected officials, especially presidential candidates, do not mean what they say about abortion. they have all been posturing and they never wanted to deal with the reality of their position on abortion which we are now dealing with and the people of arizona are dealing with tonight having been thrown back to 1864. to live by a law written by one man no one elected to anything back when arizona was a territory. a half century away from becoming a state.

make america great again now means make america great the way it was in 1864. when the territory of arizona was fighting on the side of the confederacy in the civil war to conserve slavery in america. andthe democrats in the state legislature in arizona tried to repeal that law today and the republicans blocked it and so the republicans in arizona actively made the decision today that the people in arizona must live as if it were 1864 and it wasn't even a state. and so, reporters can and should hound donald trump on the campaign trail about the five-year prison sentences that doctors and nurses and support staff and drivers are facing in

arizona now. but you should also stand outside george w. bush's home in texas and demand an answer from him. is this what he wanted? when he chose samuel alito for the supreme court? or was george w. bush simply playing the game of abortion politics just like every republican did before him? the game was never to win. the game was to keep the game going. if you are anti-abortion, you had to vote for republicans as long as they kept the game going. because they were the only ones who were at least pretending they wanted to stop it. secretly, republican politicians didn't want abortion to stop because then, you wouldn't have to vote for them anymore to stop abortion. you wouldn't have to contribute money to their campaigns. you couldn't ask for a more powerful lesson in how much your vote matters and how long

your vote matters. your vote lives after you. long after you. millions of people who voted for george h. w. burn and voted for clarence thomas to be on the supreme court to overturn roe v. wade are now dead. millions of those voters have been dead for decades. their vote continues to live after them. in the hands of clarence thomas on the united states supreme court. it didn't seem like a life changing election. in 1988. when michael dukakis ran against george h. w. bush. i didn't know anyone who thought the country would take a major turn for the worse because of the outcome of that election. the stakes seemed about as low as they could get in a presidential election. but as i have said before in this program repeatedly, when ever the stakes appear low in a presidential election, you always have to remember the

united states supreme court. and so for the democratic voters who were not excited enough about michael dukakis or the republican voters who voted for a guy who used to support planned parenthood, the truth is that, that time, at that time, they couldn't have possibly known they were going to change life in america profoundly decades later with their vote for george h. w. bush or the decision simply not to vote. same thing in 2000 when george w. bush was running against al gore. the stakes did not seem high. that is why enough people voted for ralph nader as a third party candidate in florida to give the electoral college thanks to the supreme court decision to george w. bush. bush from the connecticut bush

family who pretended to be texans. he couldn't be a real hard core texas conservative could he? the stakes couldn't be that high. turns out a vote for george w. bush was a vote for samuel alito. so yes. you can and should blame donald trump, but you should have to blame the people who voted for donald trump for president in 2016 and you have to blame the voters who voted for george w. bush and the voters who voted for george w. h. bush before that. because if dukasis or gore had won, donald trump could have put three right wing judges on the supreme court and they still wouldn't have a majority. for the voters who voted for joe biden four years ago and are no longer with us because they were lost to covid or cancer or other illness their votes are going to live after them another 30 years that

ketanji brown jackson will serve on the united states supreme court. your vote will live after you. it will live in the supreme court. your vote will live on in the hands of federal judges. in their 40s appointed by joe biden who will serve for another 40 years. your vote will decide what century we live in. will we live in an age of legal and constitutional enlightenment or will we live in 1864? your vote is not just about the next four years. the importance of your vote has never been more clear. not just as a vote to preserve democracy in this country. we already knew about that. your vote for who chooses supreme court justices is

nothing less than an exercise in incredible intergenerational power that will live long after you. leading off our discussion tonight is democratter senator sheldon whitehouse. chairs the subcommittee on federal courts. he is also the author of "captured." senator, i really wanted to be able to talk to you about this tonight. because when i say and i will hold up this little chart that you created that shows the republican multidecade plan to take over the united states supreme court. when i say, people didn't realize how big the stakes were in the presidential election of 1988. or the presidential election of 2000. i didn't know about this chart. i didn't know that this plan was underway to take over the

supreme court in the way that they have taken it over as we have seen in arizona and other places sending us back to 1864. >> i would add one detail to your well told story. that is when george w. bush became president and he had the vacancy to fill, his first choice was harriet meyers who might well have not written the dobbs decision. and george w. bush was attacked from the far right. he was attacked by the creepy far right billionaires for nominating harriet meyers, a conservative lawyer who was his own white house counsel. and from pressure from the far right and the folks who work with that same guy on that graphic you showed. leonard leo, he was forced,

humiliated really, to withdraw his own white house counsel's nomination for the supreme court and replace her with sam alito. so, it is not just the people who voted for bush. it is the people in the republican party who tolerate the right wing billionaire dominance over their party. won't stand up against it and will let them pull out harriet meyers and insert sam alito and put us on the pathway to dobbs. >> yeah. i have been since i started the show, i have been struggling for how to teach the lesson on how important the presidential election is in terms of the supreme court. if there is no other issue moving you or if you are angry about four or five other issues you always have to come back to the supreme court and say which one of these candidates do i

want making the next appointments to united states supreme court. >> particularly when the court has been as weaponnized as it has been and is point by point delivering on the republican agenda through cases that have been spun up by billionaire funded litigation groups. through direction that has been spun up by billionaire funded flotillas who come in and file briefs telling the courts what to do and landing in a court that has been over and over again picked by the federal society and the billionaires behind it to do exactly the job of delivering the goods to the far right. >> senator sheldon whitehouse, thank you as always for your guidance on the supreme court. you have taught us more about it than anyone else working on the subject these days. >> thank you. coming up, 15 historians have filed a brief with the united states supreme court opposing donald trump's claim

of presidential immunity. an immunity he has invented. neil catial will join us next. . now, there's skyrizi. ♪ things are looking up, i've got symptom relief. ♪ ♪ control of my crohn's means everything to me. ♪ ♪ control is everything to me. ♪ feel significant symptom relief at 4 weeks with skyrizi, including less abdominal pain and fewer bowel movements. skyrizi is the first il-23 inhibitor that can deliver remission and visibly improve damage of the intestinal lining. and the majority of people experienced long-lasting remission at one year. 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. liver problems may occur in crohn's disease. ♪ now's the time to ask your gastroenterologist how you can take control of your crohn's with skyrizi. ♪ ♪ control is everything to me. ♪

♪ learn how abbvie could help you save. liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, i've bee telling everyone. baby: liberty. oh! baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪ [coughing] copd hasn't been pretty. it's tough to breathe and tough to keep wondering if this is as good as it gets. but trelegy has shown me that there's still beauty and breath to be had. because with three medicines in one inhaler, trelegy keeps my airways open and prevents future flare-ups. and with one dose a day, trelegy improves lung function so i can breathe more freely all day and night. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it.

do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. ♪ what a wonderful world ♪ ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy for copd because breathing should be beautiful.

my name is oluseyi ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy for copd and some of my favorite moments throughout my life are watching sports with my dad. now, i work at comcast as part of the team that created our ai highlights technology, which uses ai to detect the major plays in a sports game. giving millions of fans, like my dad and me, new ways of catching up on their favorite sport. i am william alden smith, a united states senator investigating the cause of one of the greatest maritime disasters in history. the titanic. your ship, sir. they'll only be compensated if white star and its employees are found negligent. you did not respond, "we are sinking. and our passengers and our crew are in danger. what agreement with the military? war, miss ricard, war.

rated pg seven weeks, jack smith asked for a deadline of march 18th for donald trump's lawyers to disclose any classified everyday they would like to use in donald trump's criminal trial for violations of the espionage act and donald trump's favorite judge aileen mercedes cannon set a date. seven weeks later, jack smith asked for. and so judge cannon gave the trump criminal defense team until may 9th to disclose what classified material they would like to use in defense of criminal defendant donald trump and we are two weeks away from hearing oral arguments in defendant trump's appeal claiming that he has something that the trump lawyers are

calling presidential immunity. from any criminal charges from anything he did while serving as president and after serving as president. a 34-page brief filed with the supreme court by 15 historians and scholars of the founding era including jack rakof who will join us in a moment opposes donald trump's invention of presidential immunity which appears nowhere in the constitution. first, early americans, held a deep antithapy to presidential power. they wanted to create a new executive without the powers and privileges of a king. third, the framers never contemplated giving the president any role in the conduct of elections or transfer of power. fourth, the founders were careful to limit and make explicit the few privileges

they attached to constitutional offices. fifth, advocates for the new constitution sought to assure state ratifying conditions that the new president would not be an elected king. the historian's brief goes onto say there is no evidence in the extensive historical record that any of the framers believed a former president should be immune from criminal prosecution. such a concept would be inimical to the basic intentions, understandings, and experiences of the founding generation. the crime alleged here, a failure to respect the election of a new president is the ultimate crime against the people who are the basis of the government. the president should have no role in the determination of the people's vote. immunity from the crimes here alleged would be most abhorrent to the framers because immunity would upset the constitutional scheme and aid a president in

overriding the people's power over him. the framers would also have been appalled that former president trump despite having left office seeks permanent immunity. joining us now is neil katial. host of the podcast court side. he is an msnbc legal analyst. neil, in your experience, how does the court treat briefs like this coming from parties not directly involved in the case? >> i want to answer that lawrence, but first i have to compliment you for how you started the program. i don't think i have ever heard it better said in a news program. elections have huge consequences and the supreme court has huge consequences over our lives. i have been saying this since every presidential election since 2000s and democrats didn't listen.

if you care about choice, reasonable gun control or reasonable punishment or strong environmental and climate protections, the supreme court has influence over our lives because of life tenure and i get to see them up close. i argued 51 times at the court. i have seen justice ketanji brown jackson and what she can do. i have seen what justice caden can do and sodomeyer and ginsburg before that. this is a huge issue. now i do think the supreme court can take them seriously. particularly when they are as well done as this brief is. they destroy this presidential claim and they say it is. this is a claim that the president is not an elected official. he is a king. and he is above the law. and there is no principle in our constitution that is more

anathema than that. they explained a president could be criminally indicted. that person was donald trump's own lawyer who said don't impeach him. you can indict him after he leaves office. that was one of the few times donald trump's lawyer got the constitution right. >> neil, let's do jump back to this issue of how voting affects who the supreme court justices are. both of us have been trying to make this point and this happens in human experience. sometimes the lesson has to be learned the hard way. and it does seem like some voters have learned this lesson the hard way. in the turnouts we have seen when they are voting on constitutional amendments in their own state to preserve essentially the protections of roe v. wade. i thought why is it that the democrats don't care about courts and i think it goes back

to roe v. wade. we won roe. so right to choose was firmly entrenched in our constitution. so much so it was republican justices in 1992, justices o'connor, kennedy who said we are not going to overturn it. so the democrats grew a bit complacent about the court. and republicans by contrast launched the federalist society, launched an active movement to try to change the competition of the courts. and there are two ways of looking at it. one, it is a nefarious plot. the other is that this was just the plan that was a legitimate plan. there is nothing wrong with trying to use presidential elections to change the composition of the court. that has been the tradition of america throughout. you don't have to take the first view to think elections have huge consequences over our lives and if you care about autonomy and you care about reproductive justice, this

election in november is as critical as anything that has happened in our lifetimes. >> neil, thank you very much for joining us tonight. the historians brief to the supreme court says the founding generation sought to ensure unlike a king the president would not acquire any special status that would carry forward after the end of his term. he would be elected from the mass of the people and on the exploration of the time for which he was elected return to the mass of the people again. founding era history provides former president trump no solace in his efforts to evade the ordinary operation of law. joining us now is jack rakoff. professor of political science whose name appears. he is on this brief to the

supreme court. he won the pulitzer prize in history. professor, you are trying to teach the supreme court a history, they certainly present themselves as if they know all of this. but so often, they seem to veer off in their own historical adventures. >> well, it is true. all kinds of claims were made about history. and historians task, whether we are as individuals or collectively as we do in this brief to come up with the somewhat more complicated rher but also more accurate explanation of what was the mental world that they occupied and how did they think about executive power in the way that they did. so it is basically our task to get the historical record out there. so both the justices but also the american body of politics.

you know, educated intelligence citizens will understand the richness of that history. and therefore, will be better able to recognize the claims in the current litigation. >> you have as historian debated with yourself and been in debates about what does this mean. what were they trying to do and used your professional tools to try to investigate to get the answers in that. in your brief, you say sometimes history speaks ambiguously, but here it speaks with surpassing clarity. talk about that clarity. and how valuable that is in a situation like this. >> the clarity derives from the fundamental fact that the desire and the concern to limit, to cap an executive power was the major motif. a dominant thing in the 17th and the 18th century. in a certain sense, that is

what the glorious revolution of 1688 accomplished in great britain. the american colonists of the 18th century. because of the nature of their dealings with royal governors and to some extent the british monarchy shared those concerns and when they started writing the constitutions the question about what to do with executive power, and how to limit it was really one of the main concerns. i think it was the most difficult concern they faced. we spend a lot of times these days as your prior segment suggests waiting about the supreme court and we spend a lot of time worrying about the gerrymandering of congress. but the design of a national republican executive was a truly difficult problem. but the one thing that really held the founding generations

together was their conviction that the chief task of the president, article two of the constitution said he will shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed. and the better term was that responsibility which really underlaid the whole framework for executive power at the time the constitution was written. so to get the kind of claims about presidential immunity from legal constraints, particularly in a self-serving way, gives the president no authority at all over the conduct of elections. it shows the sheer outrageousness of the claims made by trump and his lawyers. >> well donald trump has decided to comment on the brief tonight. so we will listen to this and i want to imagine. i want you to imagine a stanford student standing up in one of your classrooms and saying this. let's listen to this. >> this is not what the

founders had in mind at all. this is not what they wanted to think about. this is not where they wanted us to be. the founders wanted the president to have immunity so the president can feel free to make decisions. >> uh, what grade does he get professor? >> is this a pass no credit scale? >> i want the standard stanford grading system here. >> well, i always thought trump played a terrible joke on the american people when he swore the inaugural oath on january 20th, 2017. i doubt he has ever read the constitution. i certainly think he has never studied it. it is a pathetic situation. for so many tragic and threatening reasons. that we have a president whose

constitutionally illiterate as well as politically incapable with dealing with the responsibility of his office. >> professor, thank you very much for joining us once again. >> my pleasure. coming un, donald trump's accountant was handcuffed and dragged off to jail once again today. we will consider what is coming for defendant trump in a manhattan criminal courtroom on monday. manhattan criminal courtroom on monday. with nurtec odt, i found relief. the only migraine medication that helps treat and prevent, all in one. to those with migraine, i see you. for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura and the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. don't take if allergic to nurtec odt. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. it's time we all shine. talk to a healthcare provider about nurtec odt from pfizer.

shop etsy until may 12th talk to a healthcare provider for up to 30% off special mother's day gifts that go beyond the usual suspects. save on personalized jewelry, original decor - and other things moms actually love. when you need a gift as unique as she is... etsy has it. ♪ upbeat music ♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ weeds...

they have you surrounded. you're just gonna stand there? or are ya gonna take your lawn back. we're gonna take it back. we're gonna take it back. with scotts turf builder triple action! it gets three jobs done at once - kills weeds. prevents crabgrass. and keeps your lawn growing strong. glorious! -agggghhhhhh! -aaagghhhh. no no no. get a bag of scotts triple action today, it's guaranteed. feed your lawn. feed it.

our next guest was in the courtroom when trump's accountant got handcuffed and dragged off to jail once again. alan weisselberg said three words. the judge asked if there was anything you would like to say. he said no, your honor. adam's live tweeting captured the final moment this way. weisselberg is handcuffed behind his back and escorted out of the courtroom. that's it. he is headed back to jail for perjury involving the civil fraud trial. asking to clarify if defendants and their counsel facilitated

that perjury by withholding of documents. trump's attempt to delay the start of his trial was denied. jury selection remains scheduled monday morning in manhattan. joinings us now is adam who was in the courtroom today and who will be in the courtroom every day for us at the trump trial beginning next week. harry litman is with us. former u.s. attorney and deputy attorney general. he is the senior legal affairs columnist for the los angeles times. and adam, you are in the room with defendant weisselberg. but there is nothing quite like seeing someone walk into a courtroom, then handcuffed and dragged off to rikers island. >> he was certainly dressed for the occasion. he arrived knowing the sentence was baked in. it was going to be a five month sentence and he went into court

dressed in loose fitting athletic wear. dark colored. you would think he was already in his prison uniform. so this hearing was two minutes long. the reason i ended the recording with that's it, that was the pace of it. there was just a quick exchange with the judge. he wanted to say as little as possible and he did. and headed for his second stint at rikers. >> what do you get from him? trump zombie in his 70s who doesn't know any other way, god good soldier? >> he has been a good soldier. a good lieutenant. that has been his entire life. it's not for nothing. this guilty plea was for perjury and if you look at the substance of this perjury plea, it is that he had essentially

lied twice about not knowing when he found out the true size of trump's triplex and didn't know whether trump was present when he had conversations about the size of the new york triplex. these are key issues in the civil fraud investigation. this is why trump is paying such a high penalty and he held out that information. so he is paying the consequences of that again and that is and it is a fitting farewell he says as little as possible in a way that was clearly to the benefit of trump. >> harry, what should the trump lawyers be feeling with attorney general james trying to inquire about whether they facilitated this perjury? >> depends first whether they

did. it was really no secret what weisselberg had done and it was well known from the whole forbes magazine article. so, will the judge, the judge may say enough, we don't have to go too deeply into this. it is just sort of surmised but obviously, they, trump lawyers often wind up immating their client in dangerous ways. just quickly on weisselberg, they say everything trump touches dies and this guy has died more than once. he shows up in his track pants. just like road kill. utterly beaten. his liberty and reputation, credibility all in tatters because he wanted not to, wanted to be loyal to donald trump. what an ultimate kind of casualty.

>> and harry, appeals court in new york today, knocking down donald trump's latest attempt to delay the monday morning reckoning with jury selection. >> at day, another crazy moment from trump and quick rebuff. it was a single judge who said i'm not even giving this to a five judge panel. we can talk next week about the substance if you think we should reform the gag order. there is no reason to. but we can talk about it. but on your delay efforts, in a skinny new york minute, they said no, don't have to serve it up to the the larger court. >> and it seems like there is nothing now between where we are sitting here and jury selection monday morning. >> absolutely. who knows whether trump is back to appellate court tomorrow morning but appellate court has made itself heard three days in

a row. he is coming in with a last minute bid to delay the trial and gets rebuffed by three separate judges. he has tried to halt this trial more than ten times. it is 11 times by the da's count. and every time it gets rebuffed. >> thank you both very much for joining us tonight. >> thanks. coming up, will wisconsin now be forced to go back to 1849 and live under an 1849 abortion law? tammy baldwin running for reelection in wisconsin will join us next. ll join us next.

if advanced lung cancer has you searching for possibilities, discover a different first treatment. immunotherapies work with your immune system to attack cancer. but opdivo plus yervoy is the first combination of 2 immunotherapies for adults newly diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer that has spread, tests positive for pd-l1, and does not have an abnormal egfr or alk gene. opdivo plus yervoy is not chemotherapy, it works differently. it helps your immune system fight cancer in 2 different ways. opdivo and yervoy can cause your immune system to harm healthy parts of your body during and after treatment. these problems can be severe and lead to death. see your doctor right away if you have a cough; chest pain; shortness of breath; irregular heartbeat; diarrhea; constipation; severe stomach pain; severe nausea or vomiting; dizziness; fainting; eye problems; extreme tiredness; changes in appetite, thirst or urine; rash; itching; confusion; memory problems; muscle pain or weakness; joint pain; flushing; or fever. these are not all the possible side effects. problems can occur together and more often when opdivo is used with yervoy.

tell your doctor about all medical conditions including immune or nervous system problems, if you've had or plan to have an organ or stem cell transplant, or received chest radiation. your search for 2 immunotherapies starts here. ask your doctor about opdivo plus yervoy. a chance to live longer. ♪3, 4♪ ask your doct♪r about opdivo plus yervoy. ♪hey♪ ♪ ♪are you ready for me♪ ♪are you ready♪ ♪are you ready♪ and we're done. (♪♪) hmm, what about these? (♪♪) looks right. [thud] [rushing liquid] nooo... nooooo... nooooooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! only bounty absorbs spills like a sponge. and bounty is 2x more absorbent so you can use less and get the job done with one. this works. [thud] kind of.

bounty, the quicker picker upper. and get four rolls in one with the bounty mega roll. our longest lastng roll.

hello, ghostbusters. it's doug. we help people customize and save hundreds on car insurance with liberty mutual. we got a bit of a situation. [ metal groans] sure, i can hold.

♪ liberty liberty liberty liberty ♪ in theaters now. when president biden and democrats say they want to codify roe versus wade, what they mean is that they want to pass senator tammy baldwin's bill, the women's health protection act. senator baldwin is running for reelection in wisconsin against a republican candidate who wants to return wisconsin to 1849, the first year of of wisconsin' statehood by invoking an 1849 law that bans abortion and that republican senate candidate also seems to believe that you should lose the right to vote if you are in an assisted living facility. >> well, if you're in a nursing home, you only have five, six- month life expectancy.

almost nobody in a nursing home is at a point to vote. >> turning us now is democratic senator tammy baldwin running for reelection in 2024. senator, i want to address this thing we haven't heard from anyone other than this person you're running against, which is there's such a thing as being too old to vote if you need help with anything getting through your day. >> can you imagine saying this about your mother or your grandmother? lawrence, i was raised by my grandparents. i was so fortunate to have them their stability and their love. my grandmother lived to 94 years old. she was born before women had the right to vote. when she was 90, she broke her hip and needed nursing care for

her remaining four years. she was proud to cast her ballot and there was nothing that stood -- should stand in her way. thousands of wisconsinites live in nursing homes. eric hovde does not have a clue what he's talking about and if you think about maybe he's trying to prevent older people from voting because he's ashamed of his positions on raising the retirement age and cutting social security and medicare benefits. republicans in wisconsin and throughout the nation have tried to make it harder for young people to vote, communities of color to vote, and now we're hearing this from eric hovde. he is so out of touch and maybe it's not surprising he owns a $2.8 billion california bank and maybe it shouldn't surprise us that he does not have a clue about the realities of wisconsinites and their lives

and while he is self-funding his campaign, if people want to help me fight back, please go to tammybaldwin.com. >> what is at stake on the issue of abortion rights in wisconsin in this election? >> you know, right now we are seeing both president trump, who recently endorsed eric hovde, and eric hovde trying to dance away from their position. when eric hovde ran for u.s. senate in 2012 in wisconsin, he said, "i am 100% opposed to abortion rights," and now we're seeing both trump and hovde dance around should the states decide or should the federal government decide? well, i want women to decide and that's exactly what i'm fighting for with the women's health protection act. >> as we go forward, the possibility of codifying, putting into law, roe versus wade is only possible if the democrats win the house of

representatives and the democrats win the united states senate and if the democrats win and retain the presidency. >> without question that is the fact and when you look at again my opponent who is 100% opposed to abortion rights, even though he's trying to tap dance around that, women in wisconsin will not forget the woman who bled for ten days before she could get care, the woman whose water broke at 17 weeks and faced the risk of sepsis before she could get care. we have three out of 72 counties where there's any care available in the state of wisconsin and we cannot afford to go back to living under that 1849 law and it will take voting making sure i win and continue to be the champion of the women's health protection act to get this across the finish line. >> senator tammy baldwin running for reelection in wisconsin, thank you very much

for joining us tonight. >> thank you so much, lawrence. we'll be right back. paxlovid is an oral treatment for adults with mild-to-moderate covid-19 paxlovid is an oral treatment for adults and a high-risk factor for it becoming severe. it does not prevent covid-19. my symptoms are mild now, but i'm not risking it. if it's covid, paxlovid. paxlovid must be taken within the first five days of symptoms, and helps stop the virus from multiplying in your body. taking paxlovid with certain medicines can lead to serious or life-threatening side effects or affect how it or other medicines work, including hormonal birth control. it's critical to tell your doctor about all the medicines you take because certain tests or changes in their dosage may be needed. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, hiv-1, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeed. don't take paxlovid if you're allergic to nirmatrelvir, ritonavir, or any of its ingredients. serious side effects can include allergic reactions, some severe like anaphylaxis, and liver problems. these are not all the possible side effects so talk to your doctor. commercially insured patients may pay as little as zero dollars.

and the us government is making paxlovid available to medicare, medicaid, and uninsured patients for free. terms and conditions apply to both programs. learn more at paxlovid.com/paxcess and ask your doctor today. if it's covid, paxlovid. >> tech: at safelite, we'll take care of fixing your windshield. and ask your doctor today. but did you know we can take care of your insurance claim? 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. ♪ ( ♪ ♪ ) start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. when dehydration gets real... (♪♪) hey, that's mine! i'll buy you a pony. advanced hydration isn't just for kids. pedialyte helps you hydrate during recovery.

(♪♪) 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]

her uncle's unhappy. i'm sensing an underlying issue. it's t-mobile. it started when we tried to get him under a new plan. but they they unexpectedly unraveled their “price lock” guarantee. which has made him, a bit... unruly. you called yourself the “un-carrier”. you sing about “price lock” on those commercials. “the price lock, the price lock...” so, if you could change the price, change the name! it's not a lock, i know a lock. so how can we undo the damage? we could all unsubscribe and switch to xfinity. their connection is unreal. and we could all un-experience this whole session. okay, that's uncalled for.

senator tammy baldwin gets tonight's last word. the 11th hour with stephanie ruhle starts now. >> tonight arizona becomes ground zero in the battle over abortion rights as republicans in the state scramble to cut off two votes that would repeal the 160-year-old abortion ban. what's next is the issue takes center stage in the fight for pres