Updated
Summary
The Department of Justice reveals new evidence of obstruction of justice in new filing. FBI found classified documents in former President Trump`s desk. The Trump lambs said absolutely nothing today in defense of Donald Trump after the Justice Department delivered their most condemning filing against Donald Trump yet last night. President Biden campaigned for Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania yesterday, and now at least 17 Republican officials who support democracy believe that Democrat Josh Shapiro will make the best governor of Pennsylvania. Trump legal team responds to the latest DOJ filing. DOJ reveals new evidence of obstruction in new filing.
Transcript
LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Yeah. Well, I`m lucky, Alex, because we got one of these late filings. And I have — I have Andrew Weissmann, Neal Katyal, Matt Miller. I`ve got all the lawyers I need to take this thing —
ALEX WAGNER, MSNBC HOST, “ALEX WAGNER TONIGHT”: Yeah, murderers row of legal eagles.
O`DONNELL: Have them take it apart. We`re going to get right to it.
WAGNER: Have a great show.
O`DONNELL: Thank you, Alex. Thank you.
Well, tonight, the Trump lawyers have filed a replied to the Justice Department`s opposition to a judge appointing a so-called special master to examine some of the government records seized by the FBI at Donald Trump`s Florida home. Andrew Weissmann, Neal Katyal, and Matthew Miller will give us their expert analysis of these legal filings.
But the single, most important thing to keep in mind, the single most important thing to know about the Trump lawyers filing tonight is that it does not say one word about something included in the Justice Department`s filing last night, that could get some of the Trump lawyers indicted for obstruction of justice. One of the very important pieces of evidence in the Justice Department`s filing last night is a copy of an under oath affidavit written by one of the Trump`s lawyers, inside — swearing under oath on that day that at that moment they were handing over to the FBI and a federal prosecutor a Trump`s home, all of the government documents that were at Donald Trump`s home at that time. Everything.
Those lawyers said under oath, to the FBI, in this affidavit, that they conducted a search of Donald Trump`s home, after receipt of the subpoena in order to locate any and all documents that are responsive to this subpoena, any and all responsive document, accompanied by this certification. Meaning they accompany this piece of paper.
On June 3rd, the Trump lawyer said to the FBI and federal prosecutors under oath, you know have all of the documents that belong to the government belong in this home. That was a lie. It was very likely tonight that somebody will be convicted of obstruction of justice for that lie, in writing, under oath. Either one or more of Donald Trump`s lawyers, or possibly Donald Trump himself, if the Trump lawyers turn on Donald Trump, and testify that they were simply passing on a lie told to them by Donald Trump.
None of that, none of that is mentioned in the Trump lawyers` filing tonight, which insults the court with the lie, that those lawyers, and Donald Trump fully cooperated with the national archives, and the Justice Department`s attempts to retrieve all of the records owned by the federal government, they were at Donald Trump`s home legally.
As the FBI investigation developed, they realized they had been lied to by the Trump lawyers on June 3rd, and so they went to a federal judge in Florida, and obtained a search warrant to search Donald Trump`s home on August 8th. And what did they find on August 8th? In the hotel, that Donald Trump lives in in Florida, when he is living in Florida.
They found twice as many documents with classification markings on them, then they were given by the Trump lawyers on June 3rd, when the Trump lawyers lied under oath in writing. Twice as many.
In the Justice Department`s filing in the case last night, on page 13, it says that the FBI, in a matter of hours, recovered twice as many documents with classification markings as the diligent search that the former president`s counsel and other representatives had weeks to perform calls into serious question the representations made in the June 3rd certification, and casts doubt on the extent of cooperation in this manner.
[22:05:02]
That is just one of the elements of the obstruction of justice case against Donald Trump and his lawyers, and his staff. The Trump lawyers had nothing to say tonight, about that dramatic and highly incriminating passage in the Justice Department`s filing last night. Not a single word.
The Trump lawyers, on June 3rd, swore under oath that they were on that day, handing everything over to the FBI. When the FBI comes back with a search warrant, they find twice as many classified documents as the Trump lawyers handed over to them.
And where did they find them? In his desk. In his desk.
That`s where the FBI found three classified documents when they executed the search warrant of Trump`s home. In Donald Trump`s desk. In his damn desk. That`s where they were.
For well over 100 years now, going back to at least Sherlock Holmes, we have been treated to an endless array of mystery novels and short stories, and place, and movies, and TV shows. They bring in a detective that struggles mightily to get into the mind of the brilliant criminal, to try to imagine, if I was the brilliant criminal, where would I hide the evidence of my crime? The proof of my crime.
On the morning of August 8th, FBI agents had to imagine — if I was the stupidest men in the world, or maybe just the stupidest man whoever won the electoral college, where would I hide the evidence of a crime? And so, the FBI went straight to Donald Trump`s desk. They found three classified documents, which is exactly three more than Donald Trump was legally allowed to have in his desk.
Those are not the only documents that they found in that room. Here is a photograph that the FBI attached to last night`s motion. This is what they found in, quote, a container in the 45 office. More top secret documents, including documents that indicate the information in them was derived from human sources, which could mean informers or spies, and that some of the information in the documents is signals intelligence, which means that it could include intercepted phone calls.
On page 12, of last night`s filing by the Justice Department, federal prosecutors write, three classified documents that were not located boxes, but we are rather located in the desks in the 45 office were also seized. The 45 office is Donald Trump`s office at the hotel where he lives in Florida.
It says desks in the 45 office, so there is more than one desk there, probably two desks. Donald Trump`s big desk, and maybe an assistant`s desk across the room. Three classified documents, found in more than one desk of Donald Trump`s office.
So, maybe it was only one in Donald Trump`s desk, or two in the assistance desks. Maybe two and one in Donald Trump`s desk, in — in his desk! The only way those documents could be closer to Donald Trump`s is if they were in his pockets. That`s where Donald Trump keeps his Tic-Tacs, so stolen classified documents, they go on the desk, with his passport.
The only thing that the FBI has returned to Donald Trump from the search is his passport, which they scooped up when they were scooping up stolen government records. If the passport was not near or with, or on top of one of the stolen government records, the FBI would`ve taken it. The FBI quickly decided that they were not going to need Donald Trump`s passport in this investigation, and so they returned to him.
Do you know where your passport is right now? You should. You don`t want to have to go looking for when you really need it, because then you`ll never find it, you`ll miss the plane. Always keep your passport in the same place, all the time.
As soon as you get home from a foreign land, put it right back where it was. I, for, one have been doing that for my entire life. So, I can tell you my passport is in my desk in the upper right drawer. That`s where it`s been for my entire adult life.
[22:10:00]
If you find something with my passport, I guarantee you I knew it was there. I know exactly what`s in the drawer with my passport. It`s the most important drawer in the office. It`s the drawer where the most important stuff goes.
In Donald Trump`s office, that means his passport and stolen classified documents. The original Trump story was that all of this material was moved from Washington, D.C., to Florida, on its way to the National Archives, which is in Washington, D.C. But then Donald Trump did not send any of it, none of it, to the National Archives for a year.
The National Archives pleaded, and finally sent some people down there together. In that first shipment of 15 boxes to the National Archives, they soon realized that they were classified documents there, and that they did not get it all. About six months later, they worked up the second delivery when Trump lawyers swore under oath in writing, in June, that that is it, you`ve got it all. If that were true, the story would`ve ended right there. On June 3rd, and we would not know much about it.
But the fact the government documents, including classified documents that remained at Donald Trump`s home after his lawyer swore under oath, that they were not there, moved this story into the criminal arena. And a criminal search warrant was issued. And then the question became, how close to Donald Trump is this going to get?
Donald Trump could`ve said, I had nothing to do with those boxes. He could have said, I didn`t know it was in those boxes. But on August 8th, when the FBI figured out where the mastermind would hide classified documents, they went straight to Donald Trump`s office. And straight into his desk, and when they opened Donald Trump`s desk drawer, Donald Trump`s defense collapsed.
And so, tonight, Donald Trump`s sleep struggle is going to be trying to fall asleep well he wonders if the FBI has been able to find his fingerprints on the classified documents that he was hiding in his desk.
Leading off our discussion tonight, Andrew Weissmann, former FBI general counsel and former chief of the criminal division of the Eastern District of New York. He`s a professor of practice at NYU Law School.
Neal Katyal is with, former acting U.S. solicitor general. They are both MSNBC legal analysts.
And Matt Miller, former chief spokesperson for the Department of Justice and former special adviser to the National Security Council. He is an MSNBC justice and security analyst.
Andrew Weissmann, I just want to hand it to you, since we have a hot new legal filing tonight, for you to pick up on what you see in what the Trump lawyers filed tonight.
ANDREW WEISSMANN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: Sure. To pick up on your opening about the certification, there are three things that are missing in the filing today, and one of them is Christina Bobb. That`s the woman, who by all accounts, signed the fall certification. And she is no longer anywhere near this filing. Presumably, as we have discussed, she is out getting a lawyer for very good reasons.
The second thing missing is something that is seeking a special master to review attorney-client communications that they say are privileged. There is a remarkable dearth of discussion for any specific documents that the former president claims is attorney client privilege. So, it is a little bit odd to be seeking a special master when you can`t identify any of the documents that you say are privileged.
And the third thing that is missing is that, although the former president has tweeted about declassification, which is not a legal defense, and it isn`t implausible factual defense, it is noticeably absent from the filing today, meaning that you can read everything in the initial filings, you can read the reply brief. There is nothing saying that he declassified it.
What is clearly doing is saying that he will leave that to the PR spin, but I don`t want that to be subjected to DOJ reputation, or a court pressing on that issue and making a finding.
[22:15:15]
And that is where, I think the former president has learned from his January 6th experience, which is that it is probably better not to bring those things up in court, because if you`re going to say something false, it`s better to say it in a form where there is no follow-up question, rather than doing it in a court of law, where facts and law actually matter.
O`DONNELL: Neal Katyal, as the government points out in their filing in this case, the concept of a special master is mostly used where there is a search warrant delivered to a law firm or to a lower`s home. In the case of Rudy Giuliani, or Michael Cohen, for example, when he was Donald Trump`s lawyer, and the FBI executed a search warrant on them.
In that case, that they actually cite, Michael Cohen asked for a special master the same day that the search occurred. That was about the possibility of the FBI coming upon documents that involved other clients, cases that had nothing to do with what the FBI was investigating. And that attorney client privilege with those other parties should be protected, and there should be a way to do that. That is the basic world of the special master.
Until now, where they are asking for special masters in an environment where the head never been one before. For documents that had never been the subject of this kind of inspection before. How do you referee this?
NEAL KATYAL, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: It`s pretty easy to referee it, Lawrence, the special master — if you want one, you ask for one right away, the day of the search, as Michael Cohen did. You don`t wait for the government to read everything, and then ask for one later.
You ask for it for documents that are uniquely yours, not somebody else`s. Here, these government documents have been stolen by Trump, their government documents. And said there is no case for a special master.
I think that that is why this filing tonight by Trump`s lawyers, it`s not a legal document. This is a PR filing. I think that in addition to the omissions that Andrew identified. There`s another striking one. They never explained still what Donald Trump was doing with all of these stolen government documents.
This is a filing very high on legal gobbledygook, instead of rebutting the factual account that the government offered yesterday in the filings. This is supposed to be a reply brief, reply to what? Reply to what the Justice Department filed yesterday, and to sum up that Justice Department filing yesterday, the department made it clear that Donald Trump stole these documents, he lied about stealing them, and he`s now invented excuses to cover his actions.
The filing last night by the department was so damning that if this were a normal case, with a normal client, a normal set of lawyers, this would be in plea negotiations right now. But instead, we get this filing tonight, this ridiculous — and Blackstone, Lauren Cook, I think they referred to this as legal gobbledygook, it doesn`t make much sense. Trump`s lawyers should`ve left this filing in their drafts folder.
O`DONNELL: Matt Miller, with your experience in national security, what was it like for you when you first saw that photograph, which we have been showing tonight? Of the evidence that the FBI, just some of the evidence that the FBI picked up with that search warrant, that they attached to their filing last night.
MATT MILLER, MSNBC JUSTICE AND SECURITY ANALYST: It was shocking. So shocking that I`m also getting nervous just talking about these documents. When you look at them, talking about the code words across the top of them, one of the things you learn when you are used to handling classified documents inside of the government is you don`t talk about them, with people that are cleared to have that information. And you don`t share them with anything else.
You certainly don`t remove them in a case of top secret materials, just like these are from a secure government facility, and take them to your personal residence. If you do take your personal residence by some mistake, you return him at the first instance. You don`t lie to the government repeatedly about it, as the former president appears to have done.
When you look at Trump`s filing, Neal and Andrew are right, the most damning things are the inability to rebut against any of the factual assertions that the government made in its brief last night. I would say, the way that they are dismissive of the security review that the director of national intelligence is doing, because of the potential harm by these documents being exposed to people not cleared to see them is really offensive.
[22:20:08]
It`s one thing for Trump to take apart the legal arguments the Justice Department has made, but there is real potential harm in this documents being exposed to people who shouldn`t see them, especially if those people are foreign actors, foreign nationals.
And the brief filed on the behalf of a former president who was charged with protecting national security is completely dismissive of that concern.
O`DONNELL: Andrew Weissmann, we`re going to have to squeeze in a break right now. But when we come back, I want to put you back in your office as a prosecutor, in the Justice Department. You are not on site with the search warrant team, but the search warrant is executed.
You`re wondering, as anybody would be, how close is this going to get to Donald Trump? And as the material develops, you come across the point — and however that comes across your desk, where you see in his desk, that`s where three classified documents are. What goes through a prosecutor`s mind when they see these documents, basically in Donald Trump`s hands like that?
We`re going to squeeze in a commercial break. Andrew Weissmann is going to tell us the prosecutor reaction to that, when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:25:29]
O`DONNELL: Still with us for the coverage of the legal filings tonight, before the arguments in court are tomorrow, Andrew Weissmann, Neal Katyal, Matt Miller.
Andrew, I want to put you back in the prosecutors office, you`re waiting to hear what the yield is from this search warrant, how close it is going to get to the principal. You come across the document, or however you are informed, that yes, there were three classified documents in his desk.
What does that do to your analysis of what you have?
WEISSMANN: So, over the break, I`ve been practicing my prosecutorial summation. I have to say, most prosecutors I know generally do that as you hear about evidence. You start here thinking about how this would play in summation, and defense lawyers think about holes they can poke in it.
So, there are two key things that they`re looking at. You want to look at the evidence that Donald Trump knew that those were his documents, and that he knew that these documents that did not belong to him where at Mar-a- Lago. So, knowing that they are not his, there is tons of proof, and tons of recording that the White House lawyers were tending him that they were not his, and that they still might be back and forth with the archives, and is in fact returning 15 boxes and the certification that they are all — good that`s everything. So, there`s lots of proof on that piece.
The second piece is that you have to show that he knew that there still were documents that were responsive to the subpoena, that were still there, and he was illegally possessing them. You can look at all sorts of things. You can look at the duration, the amount of time that he kept them, 18 months. You can look at the nature of the documents.
We`re not talking with things you might forget like a slip of paper, or the menu at a state dinner. These are top secret documents, and there is reporting that he even discussed certain documents, such as the information about the president of France, with third parties. That is something that you don`t want to boast about, and keep it confidential.
But to your point, one of the key things to know that they are his, not just the unlikelihood that everyone in Mar-a-Lago kept this from him, that the lawyers were doing all of this, and told — decided not to talk to their clients about this document. That this all somehow sort of miraculously appeared spontaneously.
That is so impossible. But then, when you have the lawyers representing that everything is in a storage bin, and in fact know that the department had very good information, and got a warrant that allowed them to look in his office. They knew where to look. That means that they have evidence that we don`t know specifically.
But that puts it, as you said, it might have well have been in his coat pocket. If you`re looking for evidence that he knew it was there, it`s in his freaking office. I mean, just to be serious for a moment, this is not complicated.
You know, this is not — I worked on the Enron case. That`s a complicated case. That has to do with mark to market accounting. This is someone who took highly classified documents, and secreted them in his hotel/residence, and lied repeatedly about it.
He may wish very well end up with his own lawyers being witnesses against him, just like Paul Manafort did. So, this is not a complicated case. There are still things that need to be done, but the basic building blocks are, as Neal said, if it were anyone else, this case would be over.
O`DONNELL: And, Matt Miller, we know that Donald Trump frequently has guests in that room. We have seen photographs of people in that room where he was also hiding classified documents. And by the way, there`s a whole other box that was found in the room. The three and the desk are just separate from the others that are all in the box in the same room. He has visitors there.
One of his lawyer said tonight, just moments ago on television, that, yes, Donald Trump frequently has guests in that room, where the FBI found a box of classified documents, and three of them in Donald Trump`s desk.
[22:29:44]
MILLER: Yes. And I think that is why the FBI moved with such haste to go and actually seized these documents.
There are two things they had to do here. One is, of course, investigate this case and get ready to potentially prosecute the president, or anyone else who was involved in mishandling the classified information or obstructing the department`s investigation into it.
But equally important was to get those documents back, so the people roaming around Mar-a-Lago, again, if any of them were foreign nationals who we know frequent Mar-a-Lago or the type of grifters that Donald Trump has always attracted into his orbit, who might see a chance to take a classified document, or take a photograph of a classified document, and sell that document to a foreign country.
The Department of Justice had an obligation to get those documents back as soon as possible to button up the potential danger of them falling into the wrong hands. And it`s why it`s so important that the judge in this case reject the former president`s motion because this review that`s ongoing by the Director of National Intelligence that I referred to before the commercial break.
If former President Trump is successful, and those documents are returned to him or they`re given to a special master, that review has to stop because the Director of National Intelligence can`t continue to do the work that she needs to do to look at what harm might have been done by the exposure of these documents, and what they need to do to mitigate any risks that are ongoing.
O`DONNELL: And Matt, just quickly, that could involve moving some human assets who are out there, or alerting them or getting them out of the country that they are in to safety.
MILLER: It could involve moving assets. It could involve changing the way we perform signals intelligence. It could involve potentially weapons systems or nuclear secrets that may have been exposed, and how we change the way that we secure them. It could involve any number of things.
One of the things that we luckily don`t know, because these are secrets that we on the outside don`t have. But it`s very important that the government be able to do that review, and move expeditiously to address any risk.
O`DONNELL: So Neal Katyal, that`s one of the pressures that`s going to be on the judge tomorrow when this is argued in court by the lawyers. I`m going to ask you to set that stage for us and what you expect tomorrow.
But I also want to add this point. Donald Trump`s lawyers are doing things in these legal filings that are really, it`s like, they are taking dictation from Donald Trump. You know, they say he is a possible candidate for president. All these irrelevant things that they say.
In tonight`s filing, they said this in writing. “Left unchecked, the Department of Justice will impugn (ph), leak and publicize selective aspects of their investigation.”
So they, in writing, accused the Justice Department of misconduct and future misconduct that — this is just something that you do not see in these pleadings for many reasons, including that it is not true. But — and it is very rare for a judge to even allow this kind of talk in the courtroom.
What are you expecting from these Trump guys who call themselves lawyers tomorrow?
NEAL KATYAL, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: Well first, I just can`t (INAUDIBLE) resisting a law professor for a moment. I mean that filing is so ungrammatical, it says that the Justice Department is going to impugn its own investigation? I think they dropped a few words in there by mistake.
And I expect the judge tomorrow to ask tough questions of both sides, you know. But this is going to be a pretty dry legal proceeding in the end. It revolves around complicated concepts like legal standing and injunctive relief and the limits on it and the like.
But at the bottom of this is, I think, Matt`s fundamental point to all this, which is, if a special master was appointed by this judge, it could do grave harm to national security. So, if the judge did make that decision, I expect the solicitor general to authorize an appeal within minutes.
You know, that was my old job and it is an easy call. And to take it all the way up to the United States Supreme Court, if need be. There is zero need for a special master that could impose serious harm.
O`DONNELL: Andrew Weissmann, Neal Katyal, Matthew Miller — thank you all very much for joining our discussion tonight. Really appreciate it.
KATYAL: Thank you.
O`DONNELL: Thank you. And coming up, the proof of how bad the evidence is against Donald Trump, now that that photograph has been out there. All of Donald Trump`s usual defenders including Lindsey Graham were absolutely silent today. No more Lindsey Graham talk about riots in the street for Donald Trump. Just abject silence from Lindsey Graham. That is next.
[22:34:45]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O`DONNELL: You can tell how convincing the Justice Department`s filing in court last night is by the silence that it produced today. It was a day of the silence of the lambs, the Trump lambs said absolutely nothing today in defense of Donald Trump after the Justice Department delivered their most condemning filing against Donald Trump yet last night.
[22:39:47]
O`DONNELL: Total silence all day long from the whole group of them. Not a word from the craziest among them. Silence from Marjorie Taylor Greene. Silence from Kevin McCarthy who, in fact, knows just how bad Donald Trump really is. Did not try to say a word about Donald Trump`s defense today.
The Justice Department did what previously had been the impossible. They shut up Lindsey Graham. They shut up Marco Rubio. They shut up Marjorie Taylor Greene.
It was a very bad day for Donald Trump today, whose life seems steadily on course for much worse days and much more silence from his lambs as the evidence continues to mount against him.
Joining us now is Claire McCaskill, former Democratic senator of Missouri, and Eddie Glaude, chair of the African-American Studies Department at Princeton University and host of the podcast history is us. They are both MSNBC political analysts.
And Claire, I know you`ve been thinking about this. I do not presume to frame a question to you. I just want to say, go. What is on your mind?
CLAIRE MCCASKILL, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Ok, first of all, last night you were amazing. You said everything that needed to be said about Lindsey Graham. And it was done with facts and the right amount of passion. So, kudos to you for your show last night.
I think the other thing that is going, on Lawrence, is worth mentioning here, is that these candidates are running in tough elections are taking Trump off their Web site. In Nevada, the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate scrubbed the endorsement of Donald Trump off his Web site. The candidate in North Carolina did the same thing, changed his Web site to remove Trump.
There is something happening here. It should have happened a long time ago. But it got real today in terms of political damage that the liar that hangs up Mar-a-Lago has caused his political party.
O`DONNELL: Professor Glaude, the silence today doesn`t surprise me but it is certainly worth noting. I mean if you sat around all day trying to think about what could you say about what is in that photograph and what is in that filing, you couldn`t come up with something. So, finally the Justice Department got them to be silent.
EDDIE GLAUDE, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. First of all, I think Claire is absolutely right, but you know, I`m from the Gulf Coast, Lawrence, and whenever there is silence in this way, it is always a kind of harbinger of the storm to come.
Remember Donald Trump is backed in a corner. And so the idea, the specter, of stoking political violence, looms large. So we need to read the silence for what it is. I think Claire is right. But we also need to understand that he is getting increasingly desperate and what that means from our political system.
O`DONNELL: Senator, as we go forward, what are you expecting, knowing what you do about the way these investigations are assembled? What kind of time table are you sensing in this federal investigation.
MCCASKILL: Well, I hope it goes quickly. But I will tell you what I am really encouraged by. It seems to me that when Donald Trump`s “lawyers”, in quotes, filed the lawsuit for the special master, they opened the door and the Department of Justice broke it down with their filing.
And for the first time, DOJ is explaining to the American people what the narrative of these facts are. And that is incredibly important. It could`ve just been a cold, legal filing, we`re just covering the bases, but they told the story. And now the story is out there. And it`s going to be told over and over again.
So it has really, finally, gotten through to them that they have to explain to the American people how serious this is and how much evidence they have.
O`DONNELL: Professor Eddie Glaude, there`s an old rule in politics that when the other side is destroying themselves, you know, you just stay quiet.
That is not what Joe Biden has chosen to do tomorrow night. He is going to go to Pennsylvania, he is going to deliver a primetime address which is, in effect, about the state of this union, more so than most state of the union addresses actually are. What are you expecting tomorrow night?
GLAUDE: Well, I expect him to make the clear argument that our democracy is at stake. But there is only one choice to be made. Either you are for democracy or you are against it. There is no in between. You cannot play the middle ground.
And I think he has to aggressively prosecute that case. He has to tell the American people, show them the evidence, that this is what the Republican Party has become. I think that is really important in this moment. We`re seeing what the Jan 6th Committee has done in terms of narrating the problem. We see what DOJ is doing in terms of narrating the case. Now the president must make the case to the nation tomorrow night.
[22:44:45]
O`DONNELL: Senator McCaskill, what are you expecting to hear from Joe Biden? I have to say, I was slightly surprised that he actually reached out at Lindsey Graham the last time he spoke in Pennsylvania. And quoted what Lindsey Graham said about expecting riots in the streets to support Donald Trump. Do you expect anything like that from Joe Biden tomorrow night?
MCCASKILL: You know, I think that he is going at unity from a different perspective now, Lawrence. I think what he`s going to be doing is inviting Independents and inviting moderate Republicans to join him and the Democratic Party in trying to preserve democracy. Trying to get back to a time where we are not defending people who are beating up police officers trying to break into the Capitol, and stop a free and fair election.
I think he is going to invite them in, and he is also not going to spend a lot of time talking about, let`s all get along in Congress. I think that he`s going to try to set this up, that the American people have a choice between extreme, or people that are really looking after America and Americans.
O`DONNELL: Former senator Claire McCaskill and Professor Eddie Glaude, thank you both very much for joining our discussion tonight.
Thank you.
MCCASKILL: You bet.
GLAUDE: Thank you.
O`DONNELL: Josh Shapiro is running in the single most important governor`s campaign in the country because the Donald Trump endorsed Republican candidate who was at the Capitol on January 6th, will do everything in his power and beyond his legal power to give Pennsylvanians` electoral votes to the Republican candidate in the next election.
Josh Shapiro, the only Pennsylvania candidate for governor who supports American democracy will join us next.
[22:46:25]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Josh Shapiro is a champion for the rule of law as your attorney general. And he is going to make one hell of a governor. I really mean it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: That was President Biden campaigning for Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania yesterday, and now at least 17 Republican officials who support democracy believe that Democrat Josh Shapiro will make a — the best governor of Pennsylvania.
Seven former Republican officials, including the former secretary of homeland security under George W. Bush, Michael Chertoff announced they will support Josh Shapiro for governor of Pennsylvania.
This announcement comes one month after ten other Republicans, including former Representative Charlie Dent, endorsed Josh Shapiro. In a statement, Michael Chertoff said, quote, “Right now, we all have a responsibility to support candidates of whichever party who will stand up and defend our democracy. Although I am a long-standing Republican, I am deeply troubled by Doug Mastriano`s embrace of dangerous extremism. Josh Shapiro, on the other hand, is a staunch defender of our democratic institutions and will lead Pennsylvania with honor and integrity.
And joining us now is Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro. He is the Democratic nominee for governor of Pennsylvania. Thank you very much for joining us again tonight.
I have told you before that this is only the single most important governor`s race in the country, which I know you feel. But the stakes are as high as they get. The stakes are as high as they were when Ben Franklin and everyone was meeting in Pennsylvania to decide the shape of this country.
If you are not elected it is entirely possible that the next presidential election in Pennsylvania will be illegitimate. That Doug Mastriano would meddle with it, and hand the electoral votes to the Republican candidate.
Is that an issue that Pennsylvania voters have grasped or is this campaign being run on the usual collection of local issues that these campaigns are run on.
JOSH SHAPIRO (D-PA), ATTORNEY GENERAL: I think Pennsylvanians feel it, and I think Pennsylvanians recognize that we have a unique responsibility to defend our democracy. Our democracy that was born here in Pennsylvania in the city of Philadelphia 246 years ago.
And if you look at the chapters of our democracy, Lawrence, and there have been many. The stories have taken a couple of steps forward and then they`d be getting knocked back a step. But each chapter ends with us making forward progress with forward momentum.
We are in the midst of a chapter right now, a chapter where we just m got knocked back, where the Supreme Court of the United States has taken away a right from women across this country. Taken away a right for the first time, the Supreme Court did. And we are in the midst of a time where our politics have gotten more frayed, more divided. Yet it`s chapter in our American democracy has been written by people who rise up — ordinary Americans — and demand more, demand change, and they demand forward progress.
This next chapter in our American democracy, in many ways is going to depend upon the outcome of this governor`s race here in Pennsylvania. Whether we are going to allow our democracy to be compromised by someone like my opponent, this dangerous, chaotic extremist who has already said that he would use his power as governor to decertify voting machines in Pennsylvania to pick the winner.
If he thwarts the will of the people here in Pennsylvania, that compromises the will of the people all across the United States of America in 2024.
[22:54:58]
SHAPIRO: So yes, Lawrence, we feel a certain humbleness in this campaign. And I think the good people of Pennsylvania feel a certain responsibility to be able to protect our democracy, and write this next chapter as one where we again make forward progress.
O`DONNELL: Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro thank you very much for joining us tonight. We really appreciate it.
SHAPIRO: Thank you, Lawrence.
O`DONNELL: Thank you. Tonight`s LAST WORD is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O`DONNELL: Pennsylvania`s Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman is the Democratic candidate for Pennsylvania`s senate seat. In the latest polling John Fetterman is ahead of the Trump endorsed Republican senate candidate Mehmet Oz by four points.
[22:59:52]
O`DONNELL: Tonight, on “THE 11TH HOUR”, Stephanie Ruhle will have an exclusive interview with Pennsylvania senate candidate John Fetterman.
That is tonight`s LAST WORD.
“THE 11TH HOUR WITH STEPHANIE RUHLE” starts now.