Updated
Summary
Department of Justice reportedly received phone records of former chief of staff Mark Meadows, while his former aid Cassidy Hutchinson said to be cooperating with DOJ coup probe. Trump`s Washington speech not covered by TV networks including FOX News, and one poll revealed 75 percent of Democratic primary voters wanted a different candidate than Joe Biden. Former Secret Service special agent Evy Poumpouras join THE BEAT with Ari Melber to talk about the Secret Service facing lethal risk that was sparked by the president they protect. Samantha Bee, the beloved Emmy-winning host of Full Frontal with Samantha Bee joins Ari Melber on one of his “MAVERICKS” series and they get to talk about politics, human rights, comedy, and how her spirited approach can really shape and change minds.
Transcript
ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: I believe you served in high levels in the White House. So just get the MD, and then do that next. You can do anything.
WALLACE: Yes, in my free time, right?
MELBER: Yes. Yes. Nice to see you.
WALLACE: Nice to see you, friend.
MELBER: Absolutely. Welcome to THE BEAT. I am Ari Melber, and we`ve got a lot for you tonight. I`m going to tell you everything that`s coming up but we begin with a brand-new heat on the DOJ probe.
New peril for Donald Trump and we`ll explain. Federal investigators have a new search warrant to access the contents of the coup lawyer you see right here with his last brush with the federal agents of course caught on tape. That was when they were seizing coup lawyer John Eastman`s phone in June. Now he has tried to fight them from gaining access, and he is allowed to do that in court. But the news is he is losing that legal battle.
Also in recent days, Trump`s name coming up in these grand jury proceedings. If you ever catch your news on the phone or on the internet, you have probably seen more than one news alert from the “Washington Post” and “New York Times” about the DOJ criminal probe. I`m going to break that down with a very special guest joining me in moments.
The thrust of those news reports, whether you heard about them or not, is this. The grand jury is pursuing questions about Donald Trump, which thus means, potentially, his alleged crimes. Two top aides to Vice President Pence asked about the electoral fraud scheme, and now, new today, news that a star witness from those hearings, Cassidy Hutchinson, cooperated with the federal criminal probe. And that appears to be intensifying.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST, THE LAST WORD: Well, it is happening, Donald Trump is being investigated.
CHRIS JANSING, MSNBC ANCHOR, CHRIS JANSING REPORTS: Today, federal prosecutors are asking questions and digging deeper.
CHARLIE SYKES, THE BULWARK PODCAST: What would Trump 2.0 look like, do you think?
ANDREW WEISSMANN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: The abuse of the pardon power I think would — which we already saw, I think would create a completely lawless society. He could essentially engage in crime and that other people would engage in crime, and then pardon them.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: The widest ranging probe in Justice Department history. And based on the breaking news, potentially the highest reaching probe as well.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Everyone is watching and waiting to see what they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MELBER: That`s what it sounds like that and we go to the one of the voices you just heard, a seasoned prosecutor, Andrew Weissmann, who was Robert Mueller`s deputy in that Russia Mueller probe. He`s also worked at the FBI, knows these issues inside and out. And I know you don`t necessarily take sheer emotional pride in it, but there`s been many an account of people getting more nervous when you have been assigned to prosecute their cases.
Welcome, sir.
WEISSMANN: Nice to be here.
MELBER: We played some of what you just said there, and you have obviously followed the news accounts I mentioned. Multiple stories with different emphases, but I think it`s fair to say, the overall point is that this DOJ is doing certain things that look like they are going up the political line, to government elite, White House officials, looking at conduct, including then President Trump`s, whatever jargon want to use.
And that`s striking because BEAT viewers, in my experience, Andrew, they keep a close eye on this. So they recall many that you were one of these voices saying in the middle of the hearings, the DOJ looked like it wasn`t doing enough by virtue of the evidence they were surprised by some of what was in the hearings. Explain where we are now.
WEISSMANN: So I think the most significant thing that happened was actually the Lester Holt interview with the attorney general because what you saw there was the attorney general, who by all accounts is, you know, a straight shooter and a truth teller, saying, one, if the proof is there, I am going forward. He was very, very direct with Lester Holt about, you know, nobody is above the law.
I thought that was really good. I also thought what was good is the way he framed the investigation as not being solely about what happened on January 6th, but rather, anybody who was interfering with the lawful transfer of power so that —
(CROSSTALK)
MELBER: Now I have to nerd out on you, and then I`ll let you continue, but do you think that`s because that was his governing legal theory? Or do you think that`s because he read your article, which made waves at least in the legal circles?
WEISSMANN: I certainly am not going to say because he read my article that is what changed it. I do think, if you remember the attorney general said he was going to be listening very closely and watching the hearings, either live or later. And that was the governing theory and the way in which the evidence rolled out. I mean, my op-ed was really, it was not original in saying that you should look at the holistically.
I listened to the hearings and said, gee, that`s the way we should be proceeding. My concern was whether the Department of Justice was essentially picking up what they were putting down.
[18:05:03]
And I think what the attorney general said the Lester Holt was that he was proceeding in a, sort of, broad way. Obviously, the proof is going to be in the pudding. And, you know, just to use a lot of happy metaphors, you know, we`re going to have to wait and see whether he is going to carry out his very strong statements to Lester.
MELBER: Yes. And I take your point that others have observed that, although, you`re probably one of the most high-ranking recent DOJ prosecutors, certainly from a special counsel probe, but really, period, that had aired that out in public in that way. And you told us that DOJ folks responded.
Stay with me here as we remind everyone about the other pieces of news here, because the DOJ also got the phone records of these Trump officials, including Mark Meadows, who successfully ducked the House committee. Then you have, as mentioned, that interesting AG Garland interview with Lester Holt. Let`s listen to a bit of that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LESTER HOLT, MSNBC ANCHOR: There`s been a lot of criticism, a lot of pressure that the DOJ is kind of behind the power curve here, behind the committee, not moving quickly enough on what appears to be solid evidence in some cases.
MERRICK GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL: As I said, we have been moving urgently since the very beginning. We have a huge number of prosecutors and agents working on these cases. It`s the fundamental tenet of what we do as prosecutors and investigators is to do it outside of the public eye.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MELBER: Andrew.
WEISSMANN: So, I think everything he said is fair. You know, I would have some follow-ups to that. I doubt he would answer them, but I think that he`s somewhat alighted the nature of the investigation because everyone knows that there was a very active investigation into the people who attacked, actually attacked the Capitol.
MELBER: Sure.
WEISSMANN: I`d be very interested in when they proceeded that sort of broader investigation, and also, I`m really interested in who is on that investigation, how many prosecutors and agents. I don`t think that`s a terribly secret thing. I mean, that`s something that was revealed in a non- investigation and the special counsel investigation. But, you know, that is all looking backwards. But it would be nice to know going forward just exactly how big the staff is and have a little bit better sense of the (INAUDIBLE).
Even though I understand that the attorney general is unlikely to name names, it would be nice to know what exactly is the scope of the investigation. Is it just fake electors? Is that the DOJ scheme or as we would say, the whole enchilada that they`re going to really look at?
MELBER: You know, it`s dinner time on the East Coast. You`re making me a little hungry. But you mentioned that we can kind of go through some of what you just referred to because you have this seditious conspiracy, which also obviously and inherently includes the violence of the 6th. You have obstructing a government proceeding, which a lot of lawyers have said is the straight up thing that was sabotaging the 6th.
Then you have the electoral fraud, which, of course, is separate, Andrew, because elector fraud, like voter fraud, can be its own independent crime, even if it`s done by random citizen. And then you have the question of how electoral fraud was, according to the evidence that`s emerged, going to be the pretext or, stay with me here, but I`m not going to use a legal term, the big, obvious, knowing lie that would be invoked by people on the 6th by the members of Congress or Pence, according to the memos that we`ve now obtained.
Do those all congeal into one giant conspiracy that Donald Trump benefits from?
WEISSMANN: So, this after a thorough investigation will really be a question of what is the strongest way to charge it. Personally, I view this as one conspiracy, if you`re thinking of charging Donald Trump, he is the head of this. And he engaged in a multifaceted conspiracy. And it`s pretty simple, if he wanted to stay in office, even though he lost the election. And so all of these are components of how he did that with all sorts of backup plans and fail-safes, with the culmination being January 6th, because that`s when the vote was actually going to happen.
But that day itself was just the end date of — you know, of the scheme. But there is a lot that happened before then. And again, if you look at the attorney general`s language yesterday, I think he clearly was signaling that he understands that this is not just about the people who attacked the Capitol on January 6th.
MELBER: Yes. Which, as you say, is vital if we`re going to deal with this as a national security event and attempted coup. Now I`m going to go deep in the weeds with you. Are you ready to go weed whacking?
WEISSMANN: Ready.
MELBER: Do you remember your colleague Andrew Goldstein?
WEISSMANN: Yes. Of course. Terrific guy.
[18:10:03]
MELBER: Mueller team. Yes. I should mention, by the way of full disclosure, we did invite him on the program. He`s currently passed. Invite is open. We have a lot of different people on. But he is saying here in public that the, quote, “considerations” when you talk about a political leader are different and harder. You have the very clear and important rule. DOJ should try in every way possible not to interfere with elections, to not take steps using the criminal process that could end up affecting the political process.
Now, I know you all hold each other in high regard, but that`s really pretty far if not opposite of what you`ve been saying in public. He seems to be suggesting that enforcing the law itself could be perceived as affecting the political process, so there should be a different, or he says, harder more intricate standard if Donald Trump is or becomes a candidate. In some ways he is acting like a candidate in waiting.
And I`m curious if you`re going to be straight with us or just be really nice and euphemistic because you guys are respected colleagues. But both of you can`t be right. And this matters, and so I`m curious if tonight you can settle once and for all what`s going on because he sounds — I`m going to keep it high-level and then the audience will hear you. But I would tell everyone, he sounds like Comey 1.0.
If someone can accuse us of somehow being political, then we should act differently to avoid that accusation. Now you`ve handed the keys over to people, sometimes bad faith actors, making accusations. You sound like something different, which is saying, go forward and follow the evidence. Who is right?
WEISSMANN: Well, of course, I`m right. That`s a pretty easy question. But I have to say, once you accused my colleague Mr. Goldstein as being Comey- esque, those are harsh words.
MELBER: Only depending on who hears him. But go ahead.
WEISSMANN: Yes. So what I would say is I — you know, there is a very interesting, to be really nerdy, article that came out of the “New York Review of Books” on this issue about what is the proper role of the attorney general, and should he be considering things like what this will do to the country and the divisiveness, or whether you`re giving a platform to Trump if he gets indicted to continue his shenanigans.
And it basically said, those are not proper considerations for the attorney general. Those might be appropriate things for the president to consider in deciding whether to pardon or not pardon, but the attorney general has a very narrow focus of applying the justice manual.
MELBER: Right. And just to build on that —
WEISSMANN: The attorney general said that yesterday.
MELBER: Yes. You`re saying that Garland in your view is going in that direction. I mean, Goldstein and Comey are just talking about this endless politicization as the defense to politicization, which just doesn`t make logical sense. And I would add to your concern, there is no real reason to think that an American jury of 12 people randomly selected would not also take into consideration whether they want to see a former president, whoever it may be, actually incarcerated. They have their judgment and jury nullification if it gets to that point. But you would say people like Goldstein that are getting this wrong.
WEISSMANN: Yes. I mean, I have to see the full context and that`s sort of being, you know, little, you know, giving him the benefit.
MELBER: And I read the quote, but go ahead.
WEISSMANN: I`d like to know sort of a little bit more about what his thinking was. But I don`t think that you should be considering anything other than what`s in the Justice manual. I agree with Merrick Garland that there is a narrow scope to the role (INAUDIBLE) and what you`re supposed to be considering. And whether it`s divisive or not cannot be one of the factors for the Justice Department.
You know, what I hope is that we get to the point, Ari, where this academic and nerdy discussion we`re having is one that becomes, you know, really live and, you know, we`re really dealing with it because, you know, we`re months from now, we`re discussing, you know, a really active investigation where we really suspect charges are going to be brought in that way. I do think that`s a ways away, unfortunately.
MELBER: Well, understood. And you have been there and bet on these hard calls and made these decisions. So we wanted to hear from you. And I appreciate you being our leadoff one-on-one guest here.
Andrew Weissmann, we have our shortest break right now, 60 seconds, with a surprise on Capitol Hill. A potential breakthrough that actually involves Manchin going towards Biden, and then the story we`ve been covering, this Trump-FOX relationship, the fallout. I have both Michael Steele and Howard Dean. We`re back on that story in just 60 seconds.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:15:43]
MELBER: When did Donald Trump learned that he was the loser of that last election? Why does that matter, given these hearings that explore his knowing loss, which many investigators say contributed to his criminal mindset?
Well, Jared Kushner writes about election night in a new book and says there was real dismay across the room when FOX News accurately reported Biden was beating Trump in Arizona, the key state that would make such a difference. Jared says, “I dialed Rupert Murdoch and asked why FOX News had made the Arizona call.” Sorry, Jared, said Murdoch. I`m not going to do the accent but this is Murdoch talking.
“Sorry, Jared, there`s nothing I can do. The FOX News data authorities says the numbers are ironclad. It won`t be close.” Those are the kind of little vignettes you can get if you buy Jared Kushner`s book. But what`s interesting is what that reflects. At that time, someone at FOX News saying, facts, truth would win the day over Donald Trump`s lies, in that case that he thought he won, or lied he won, or claimed he won.
Now, we also have a split at FOX News. Just last night, you have Hannity going on out of the way to praise Donald Trump`s Washington speech. And that is a type of coverage. But here is what`s different. Remember all those speeches that were covered, especially on FOX, but really by a lot of media? This was Donald Trump`s first time in Washington since becoming the loser in that election. And during the day, take a look at what happened.
During the Trump speech, no Trump. They just had normal FOX coverage. That`s what I`m showing you on the right. However, during former Vice President Pence`s speech, who took a different approach to January 6th and also still is mulling a run for president, well, they aired 17 minutes of that Pence speech yesterday and zero, zero for Trump.
This is how Rupert Murdoch tells you he`s changed his mind, much of the way he told Jared that night but in much more of a sick burn for someone who wants TV coverage now. Meanwhile, “Rolling Stone” reports Trump is obsessing over all of this, worried the FOX problem is getting worse. He`s also, remember, kicked off so many social media platforms that he has fewer ways to get heard and seen, even if you feel like, well, you`ve heard him enough.
Murdoch has his own reasons. $4 billion, his company faces in potential defamation fines if they continue to have legal setbacks in these cases about what, not just any random problem, no, about how far they went to echo Trump`s lies about the elections. Smearing voting machine companies in ways that judges have said will go forward because there was real damage.
And then you have the polls that show less than half of Republicans even want Trump as the nominee. 55 percent want someone else. And that`s not just bad news for that former president, there are signs that some Democrats also want someone else other than the current president.
Want to get to it all independently and factually, as we try to do around here, with the chairs. Two people who have run both major parties of the United States after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:23:22]
MELBER: We`re back with the chairs, the former chair of the DNC, the Democratic National Committee and a former presidential candidate himself, Howard Dean, and the former chair of the RNC and a former lieutenant governor, Michael Steele.
You guys know each other, right?
HOWARD DEAN, FORMER DNC CHAIR: We do.
MICHAEL STEELE, FORMER RNC CHAIR: Yes. We`ve seen each other around the way. OK.
MELBER: This is something good we can do in America, I believe. So I appreciate you guys doing this. We did this before.
Michael, I start with the side-by-side we showed, which people may not realize is both unusual and something that has the Republican Party paying attention. Other candidates yesterday getting plenty of live coverage, but not Donald Trump on his first return to Washington combined with this larger split. What do you see here?
STEELE: Well, you know, I see FOX and other outlets, the “Wall Street Journal,” you know, trying to do the Heisman at this point to create some distance between Trump and their organs, if you will. And I think, you know, this sort of pivot you hear inside GOP circles towards DeSantis, for example, and certainly sort of an elevation of Vice President Pence means that folks are trying to create a lane that they can run separate and apart from Trump.
You know, I don`t know how that`s going to play itself out. I think when Trump decides that he really wants to throw down and engage, I mean, a Washington speech is not engagement. When he is in Mississippi or Missouri or someplace like that, there is a different level, a different vibe. So we`ll see how he responds, ultimately, to this light.
[18:25:01]
I think from Trump`s perspective, yes, it grates on him. But he knows he holds more cards than these organizations do in the end.
MELBER: Yes. That makes sense.
Howard, I have a question, a version of that about Biden for you but I did want to let you respond to this, including the fact that evidence can still get out these days, the reporting shows FOX did cover most of the six daytime January 6th hearings, but none of Trump`s response yesterday.
DEAN: Yes. I don`t think the Murdochs have ever been too subtle about what they want to do. And I think it`s pretty clear that the polling evidence shows, and I actually said this I think the last time I was on the show, and I rarely say things like this because they often come back to bite you, but I hope Trump is the nominee because I think we have a great chance of beating him in 2024.
So we`ll see. I think now a bunch of Republicans are starting to come up with that. But the problem for the Republicans is that he`s still got a huge influence in the Republican primaries. Fortunately for us, he`s managed to allow a whole bunch of crackpots around the country to get nominated for important positions that we`re now likely to win. Just as I was looking at a projection that now shows the Democrats will win the Senate fairly easily.
So, you know, he`s doing damage to his own party now more than anything else.
MELBER: Yes. Yes, you lay that out, and I mentioned in the setup how much public opposition there is within even diehard Republicans who may be extreme in other ways, primary voters, to Trump. The only person facing worse intraparty standing than that, according to polls, is Biden.
Take a look at this, Governor. I know you defended a lot of what Joe Biden is doing, and he`s got headwinds. But 75 percent, you see, 75 percent when asked, writ large, Democratic primary voters, should it be someone, anyone other than Biden, OTB, Governor. That`s the reaction. Your response?
DEAN: Well, look, I understand that. We have high inflation and so forth. It`s always been a part of the Republicans strategy to try to let nothing pass, especially when you have a Democratic president. So then the Democratic president gets blamed because nothing passes. The real problem is Manchin won`t pass anything, although apparently today, he`s yielded a little bit on that.
I think Biden is doing a good job. I think a lot of the number that you just read is young people who want a lot more in real change. And I think he is going to have to deal in a serious way with student debt if he wants to have the kind of turnout that he is going to need in the 2022 races. And he has, I think, getting there slowly, but it needs to happen sooner rather than later.
MELBER: So you think the status quo doesn`t work for Biden, something has got to change for him?
DEAN: I do think so. The economy has got to get a little bit better. Inflation is going down, gas has dropped 70 percent of the last three weeks, $.70 in the last two or three weeks. But I do think the student debt is absolutely critical. He`s got to get young people to the polls, and that`s the issue that will motivate them.
MELBER: Makes sense. I appreciate your straight talk. You mentioned — the next thing we want to get to, which broke late in the day, Joe Manchin, a potential possible breakthrough.
Michael Steele, you know we love lyrics around here, and here`s the headline. Domestic spending package including climate energy programs and tax increases, Manchin, as the “Times” put it, in a reversal agrees to this package which in principle seems like something.
And, Michael, I`m sure you remember Jimi Hendrix, hey, Joe, where are you going with that 50th vote in your hand? Classic. Classic.
STEELE: Classic.
MELBER: Classic. And I would just say, the last time I caught up with you off air, Michael, you were discussing what it takes and the difficulty of pushing someone like Manchin, who what everyone thinks of him is in a state where being blasted by whatever you want to call it, Democrats or liberals, out of his state does not hurt him, which makes it tricky. And yet at times he has seemed like he doesn`t even know what he wants. Decode this news for us tonight.
STEELE: Well, you know, the best I can decode it is something sweetened the pot for Manchin.
MELBER: OK.
STEELE: And that piece has not been revealed because it is at least 120 degrees away from where he was about a few days ago, about a week ago.
MELBER: OK.
STEELE: Now we`re at a 180 position where he`s saying, yes, OK, we can do that because inflation was the thing. We haven`t gotten the inflation numbers for July because July isn`t over. All right. So that was the bar that we had to cross the last time, a week ago. Now we seemingly have crossed it without any mention of it in this latest round. So, clearly something sweetened the pot.
What I think sweetened the pot goes back to the broader question of the numbers showing that there is some level on the ground where Democrats can hold the house. And let`s get some — let`s start ranking up some wins here, people, which the chairman in me goes, duh, should be doing that all along.
[18:30:00]
So, let`s get some wins on the board and go into September, with some wind in our sails to help our candidates out. And I suspect that has become a more convincing argument. We`ll say what that sweetener was, but it would not surprise me if that was at least some of the sugar pellets that were on the table that mentioned could see that — you know, obstructionism not the way you`re going to win this November.
MELBER: Governor?
DEAN: I agree with that. And the other — caution, I would say is first Joe`s been known to change his mind in inopportune moments. And second of all, whereas Kyrsten Sinema, who has also been a major problem for the Democrats in the Senate. She is, you know, if she wants to win reelection, she`s going to have to do some mighty big changing, so maybe she will.
But I agree there`s something a deal was made. We don`t know what it is yet. But we`re almost certainly going to find out. This is Washington where everybody can`t resist talking to reporters when they should be.
MELBER: Well, and Michael reminds us, Manchin`s public statement was, yes, oh, he couldn`t do this because the inflation well, that hasn`t changed at all. So, it is interesting. What else is in this, but you both seem to see it as a potential breakthrough. The Democrats, Biden folks may have found something. I got 40 seconds left. So lightning round. What`s the hardest part of running a political party? Howard?
DEAN: I didn`t have any trouble at all. I just ignored all the people from Washington.
MELBER: Michael?
STEELE: I didn`t have any trouble either. I got 65 House seats and 700, 800 state legislative races by ignoring the people in Washington.
MELBER: You know, a keen-eyed viewer might notice that these politicos really focus on the positive, they have a quick answer for what they did right. Nothing wrong, nothing tough. Never let them see you sweat even in – – even in the global warming heat, gentlemen.
STEELE: Even when you`re sweating buckets. Never let them see you sweat.
DEAN: Now the game — the whole game is at the local level and outside Washington until the Democrats figure that out. We`re just not going to win a lot of stuff.
MELBER: Very interesting as well. Now I`m out of time that you both agree on that point. That`s sort of a structural organizing point. And Howard, of course, had the 50-state strategy, which —
STEELE: So, did I. Modeled after Howard.
DEAN: You copied mine. Thank you, Michael.
MELBER: All right. So different parties, but something in common. We`ll take that. Would you guys be willing to do this segment again?
STEELE: Yes.
DEAN: Sure.
MELBER: All right. I`ll meet you here in a couple of weeks. It`s around 6:00, 6:00 Eastern. Howard, Michael, thank you both. Let me tell everyone, we do have something special coming up. Someone who`s mixed it up with so many leaders. You know her. She`s interviewed the Obama and everyone else. Comedian Samantha Bee on THE BEAT tonight.
But first, we`re joined by a former Secret Service agent on this whole scandal. What we can learn from it and why that damning audio matters. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:37:37]
MELBER: Turning to some of the most shocking material that came out of that final prime time and climactic January 6th hearing. The role and the pressure on the Secret Service including what they face that day. There is this investigation now of a criminal nature about why evidence has gone missing even though they were asked to preserve messages.
Insurrection committee has told MSNBC that now the Secret Service has dumped hundreds of thousands of documents on the committee, although they were requested over a year ago. But that`s a type of cooperation. Meanwhile, we had what was always a normally would stay secret radio communications among these agents, and federal officials that came out.
It speaks to the bravery, the role that we don`t usually ever see. And the human fear as they were both trying to do their duty, keeping their protectee alive in absolutely unprecedented circumstances, while facing what they apparently viewed at the time as a lethal threat posed by insurrectionists, who again, were called to Washington that day, by their other protectee, then President Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They`ve gained access to the second floor. And I`ve got public about five feet from me down here below. There`s six officers between us and the people that are five to 10 feet away from me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is smoke unknown. What kind of smoke it is.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Clear, we`re coming out now.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The members of the V.P. detail at this time were starting to fear for their own lives. There were calls to say goodbye to family members, so on and so forth. It was getting — for whatever the reason was on the ground, the V.P. detail thought that this was about to get very ugly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MELBER: We`re joined now by former Secret Service special agent Evy Poumpouras. Thanks for being here.
EVY POUMPOURAS, FORMER SECRET SERVICE SPECIAL AGENT: Thank you for having me.
MELBER: Before we get to the investigation, let`s just take a moment about what we saw in those recordings, the bravery, the harrowing situation. How common is it that agents would according to that chatter, be concerned that they were about to face a lethal event? Do you think that they appraised that correctly? How close did this get in your view, given your experience?
POUMPOURAS: That is very close. They actually had him in hold and holds the place to keep them secure. But if your hold is within feet of where we`re looking at the threat of whatever that threat is, insurrectionist or any type of attack. That`s a problem. That`s very uncomfortable. So, even as it`s playing over and I`m watching it.
[18:40:00]
I`m thinking not good because security really, true security, it`s layers and layers of proactive elements. So, at this point, this is — you`re right — you`re right at ground zero. You`re right at that last element of protection, where it`s you physically between the problem. So, this is much too close for comfort. And those agents who can hear it in the voices, they know that.
MELBER: Right, and they know better than anybody how this works. There are sort of laypersons, casual listeners who say, well, they`re armed some of the people in the hallway. According to what we have weren`t necessarily armed with — with weapons, although there were many weapons in the vicinity, right?
So, if somebody says, well, they could have shot it out and gotten out of there. They clearly didn`t think that. They were worried that it would somehow escalate. Can you walk us through what that might look like operationally?
POUMPOURAS: So, here`s the thing, and I liked that you bring that up. You`re thinking, OK, they`re armed. So, what are you going to do? These are also civilians. Yes, the rioters (INAUDIBLE) civilians. So, you`re sitting there doing the math in your head. Can I shoot? Do I want to shoot? And then also, yes, how many shots are you going to get off? There`s a handful of you versus how many people are we dealing with.
MELBER: So, they — you think they were making a what we would call a reasonable factual assessment, that even if God forbid, they have to start, as you said, shooting civilians if they have hundreds of people coming down that hallway, that doesn`t end well for the service.
POUMPOURAS: It doesn`t end well. It`s never going to end well because it`s — you have to justify every single round you release. And then the question is, why were you there? Why did you put yourself in that scenario and not evacuate earlier?
Why did you wait to such last minute? Because also, Ari, what happens is, it`s not just what the other person is doing, it`s also looking at the agent`s decision-making process beforehand and saying, could you avoided this whole mess?
MELBER: Last question, 30 seconds. Have you ever come into contact with a situation where a threat this serious, was summoned by another protectee in this case, then President Trump?
POUMPOURAS: No. No. Very highly unlikely. Very — not uncommon — not a common thing to see. Not in this type of scenario.
MELBER: Understood. Appreciate you sharing us — with us your experience.
POUMPOURAS: Thank you, Ari.
MELBER: Absolutely. Up next, a special guest on how we are making change. We`re going to talk politics and hope in the time of many crises. Stay with me.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:47:00]
MELBER: Do you ever feel like everything`s falling apart? I don`t just mean like the human condition, but how things have been going lately in America and politics and news and then that feeling that maybe you do care, but you kind of want to just tune out when it gets to be too much. That`s honestly some of the energy that Jon Stewart tapped with The Daily Show back in the Bush years.
Deploying that pretty intelligent, cultural balancing act between caring, which people used to say sometimes isn`t cool. Around here, we think it`s important and plenty cool to care. Between that and roasting, and finding humor, and even intractable problems, kind of anti-cynical comedy, which built such a following that his teammates went on to big roles.
You can even sometimes forget how these figures today like Colbert, and John Oliver started on The Daily Show. As did Samantha Bee, the beloved Emmy-winning host of Full Frontal with Samantha Bee who is on THE BEAT right now in an interview, we are airing for the first time.
Where we talk politics, human rights, comedy, and how her spirited approach can really shape and change minds while she has claimed like Stewart, that`s not even her goal.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MELBER: Do you really believe you don`t have any capacity to shape minds because when you shape minds through culture, eventually that can have other forms of impact, social change, or how people vote?
SAMANTHA BEE, HOST AND CREATOR, FULL FRONTAL WITH SAMANTHA BEE: Well, OK. Listen, I don`t think that any of us to do this work — I think it would be impossible to wake up in the morning, and look in the mirror and say, we`re going to have another important day where we just do so much important stuff. Joke-making is the heart of the thing that we do.
And we get to talk about other things in other ways because we`re not beholden. We`re not beholden to the same system. So, we do get to say things a little differently, we get to distill the news differently. OK, which is — has a function, it has a real vital function, I think of it as providing catharsis to people. That`s how I see it. And —
MELBER: Can I press you on that?
BEE: You can, I mean, you can.
MELBER: Informing people who already have a view also is part of social change, and potentially mobilizing those people by showing them information, especially if it relates to facts. Is also part of that. So, it sort of seems like maybe to be practical and modest, which is cool. You might be copping out on the fact that you`re mobilizing influential leader, yes or no?
BEE: It`s — I don`t think it`s a cop-out. I just think that I couldn`t as a — as myself. I have to keep a very small. I just have to. In order to do the — in order to do the work that I do. In order to do it, I actually have to keep it like — I have to keep the kernel of that really small and tidy for myself.
[18:50:00]
I`m just sort of an informative funny voice over here that maybe lets you distill the news a different way. If I had that level of like self- importance, I would no longer be funny or a proper human being.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MELBER: Be making that point about self-importance and how it can corrode her work and her soul. She`s found fans with that style over seven Emmy- winning seasons. We taped this new “MAVERICKS” interview before TBS announced this week that the show`s seventh season is its last, and Bee had done a lot of improv comedy when she got into this field.
And she does something that echoes what happens in our regular non-funny news, live unpredictable interviews with people. People you may have just met. So, we also discussed that, and naturally, we discussed the art of the awkward silence.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BEE: It`s very challenging to learn how to interview someone. It`s like a whole different — developing a whole skill set where I previously had no skill. It took me —
MELBER: Is it hard though, if you hold a long pause, people will say all kinds of stuff.
BEE: They will but you have to learn to not feel that pause because you feel uncomfortable. Can take a decade or two. So —
MELBER: Do you feel uncomfortable?
BEE: I don`t feel uncomfortable at all. I can sit here and do this all day.
MELBER: Well, professionally I`m glad we found each other.
BEE: I was — I was so good.
MELBER: This is our entree into you doing that work. As we say in the business, Sam. Let`s take a look.
BEE Let`s.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEE: Would you say that you`re homophobic?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, I`m not homophobic. I`m not afraid of them. I`m homonausic.
BEE: Homonausic.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m just sick of them.
BEE: Is tonight the night that they exploit nine-11 or is tonight inspired empty promises for the future?
Have you had your picture taken with a black person yet?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I don`t think so. But I wouldn`t mind doing it.
BEE: That`s something you`d be willing to try?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I certainly.
BEE: There`s plenty of them.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I know.
BEE: You have any of them in Montana?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We don`t. You know, you don`t have any —
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Reverse happens as well but your homosexuals go out and find a strange to beat up.
BEE: Really?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
BEE: Are you sure about that? I almost lost my company that sells Foot Duvets and Tommy Bahama Pillow Shams.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well now that we —
BEE: I could have made a bundle and didn`t.
JON STEWART, HOST, COMEDY CENTRAL: Why do people agree to talk to us?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEE: Oh my gosh. Just took me down memory lane.
MELBER: Why do people going to talk to you when you — when you`re doing it that way?
BEE: Ah. You know, because ultimately people really want to be on T.V. And that is why. You know what, they really do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MELBER: I hear that. We covered a lot in the conversation, politics, some of the media`s shortcomings. Women`s rights, which is an issue she`s led on for a long time. Let me show you a few more highlights from our “MAVERICKS” interview.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BEE: The people who go on T.V. and tell jokes are the weirdest, most introverted people in real life usually. So that`s me. Everyone who was there was like which crazy hatcher they were.
MELBER: The Daily Show is not a hat base show.
BEE: It is not a hat base show.
MELBER: It`s true.
BEE: It took me a couple of years to like, figure out who I was. I`m just going to do this. I`m going to stand on the stage for like, no money. I`m just going to make people laugh. The audience erupted.
MELBER: Was that more meaningful to you than laughter?
BEE: This is like Oprah.
MELBER: Canada or America?
BEE: Don`t you dare.
MELBER: We will tell the story of the collapse of civilization style and panache.
BEE: Well, we did it.
MELBER: OK.
BEE: And society collapsed. And so here we are.
MELBER: Here we are.
BEE: And we`re still doing with panache.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MELBER: There it is. I think that`s fact-check true. Plenty of panache. That was, of course, the Samantha Bee quote, I was reading. And this is part of our new “MAVERICKS” season, this interview debuting tonight. These are conversations with all kinds of cultural leaders and icons. You can see the entire interview now at msnbc.com/mavericks or scan that code, just like your restaurant.
On the bottom of your screen and it`ll take you to msnbc.com/mavericks. Also, you can search Sam Bee-Melber on YouTube and it will pop up right there. The full unedited interview, these were just excerpts. You can also find our recent “MAVERICK” interviews with Dave Grohl and Phoebe Bridgers and many more. We encourage you to check it out because we work hard on it. And again, thanks to Sam Bee for being here. We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:59:10]
MELBER: And one more thing before we go, Republican candidate, Dr. Oz has faced some criticism about where he`s really from or lives as he runs in P.A. but has a house in New Jersey. And Stevie V.Z. as he calls himself has some words.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEVEN VAN ZANDT, MUSICIAN: Yo! Dr. Oz! Stevie V.Z. here. What are you doing in Pennsylvania? Everybody knows you live in New Jersey and you`re just using your in-law`s address over there. And you do not want to mess around with John Fetterman. Trust me. You`re a little out of your league. Nobody wants to see you get embarrassed. So come on back to Jersey where you belong. And we`ll have some fun —
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MELBER: Now where does he belong? You can answer our question tonight. Where does Dr. Oz really live? Hit me @AriMelber, you can always connect with me at arimelber.com. That`s the best ways to connect with me personally. But you can also go @AriMelber and answer our question, where does Dr. Oz live? A little bit of fun to end the hour. That does it for us. “THE REIDOUT WITH JOY REID” is up next.