Updated
Summary
Attorney General Merrick Garland in a rare interview tells NBC`s Lester Holt what might happen next in the DOJ investigation of the January 6 insurrection. President Trump returns to Washington. Dr. Anthony Fauci discusses White House plans to get the monkeypox outbreak under control. The Justice Department is reportedly investigating Donald Trump`s actions as part of its criminal probe of the 2020 election.
Transcript
ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: You can always find me online @AriMelber on social media or AriMelber.com. And let me know what you thought of anything today, including our discussion about information and the speed of information, AriMelber.com or @AriMelber.
And I will see you tomorrow at 6:00 Eastern.
THE REIDOUT with Jason Johnson, in for Joy, starts now.
JASON JOHNSON, MSNBC HOST: Tonight on THE REIDOUT:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MERRICK GARLAND, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: We will hold accountable anyone who was criminally responsible or attempting to interfere with the transfer — legitimate lawful transfer of power from one administration to the next.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Attorney General Merrick Garland in a rare interview tells NBC`s Lester Holt what might happen next in the DOJ investigation of the January 6 insurrection, speaking of which, the man who caused it all was back in Washington today, and many of the same Republican politicians who are running up that hill still came out to kiss his ring.
Plus, the pain that Alex Jones inflicted on the families of the Sandy Hook massacre victims as he stands trial for defamation.
And Dr. Anthony Fauci will be my guest on White House plans to get the monkeypox outbreak under control, not a sentence I ever thought I would say.
Good evening, everyone, Jason Johnson, in tonight for Joy Reid.
We began THE REIDOUT tonight with signs the Justice Department is widening its investigation into January 6 and the efforts to overturn the election.
In an exclusive interview today with NBC`s Lester Holt, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the department`s investigation is moving at an unprecedented speed. And he refuses to rule out prosecuting the twice- impeached former president for his actions.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LESTER HOLT, NBC ANCHOR: You said in no uncertain terms the other day that no one is above the law.
GARLAND: Yes.
HOLT: That said, the indictment of a former president, a perhaps candidate for president would arguably tear the country apart. Is that your concern? As you make your decision down the road here, do you have to think about things like that?
GARLAND: Look, we pursue justice without fear or favor.
We intend to hold everyone, anyone who was criminally responsible for the events surrounding January 6, for any attempt to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another accountable. That`s what we do. We don`t pay any attention to other issues with respect to that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Garland spoke with NBC News after new signs emerged that the DOJ is expanding its scope, looking beyond the attack on the Capitol and those involved in fake elector schemes, although “The Washington Post” reports that, on that front, that a grand jury sent subpoenas to two Arizona Republicans last month asking for communications relating to any effort, plan or attempt to serve as an elector for the former president.
Meanwhile, NBC News confirmed that Marc Short, chief of staff for former Vice President Mike Pence, appeared before a federal grand jury last week. According to multiple reports, Greg Jacob, Pence`s former legal counsel, has also testified.
Short is the highest-ranking former White House official known, that we know of, to have testified before the grand jury, with Pence at the Capitol during the insurrection and testified before the House Select Committee in January.
Short confirmed his grand jury appearance in an interview with ABC News.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARC SHORT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO FORMER VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: I think that having the Capitol ransacked the way that it was I think did president liability and danger. And I think the Secret Service did a phenomenal job that day.
I think that the bigger risk, and despite the way perhaps it was characterized in the hearings last week, candidly, is that if the mob had gotten closer to the vice president, I do think there would have been a massacre in the Capitol that day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: You think?
Meanwhile, there are new developments tonight relating to the Secret Service and text messages from the day of the insurrection that have been erased.
Two Democratic House committee chairs, Carolyn Maloney of Oversight and Bennie Thompson of Homeland Security, called for the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security to recuse himself from the investigation into the erased texts.
In a letter to Inspector General Joseph Cuffari, they note his — quote — “failure” to promptly notify Congress of crucial information in his investigation, adding that — quote — “These omissions left Congress in the dark about key developments in this investigation and may have cost investigators precious time to capture relevant evidence.”
It`s a lot.
Joining me now is Congressman Eric Swalwell of California and Paul Butler, Georgetown law professor and a former federal prosecutor.
I`m very happy to have you on, both of you on, tonight.
Congressman, I will start with you.
I always think this is important when we talk about Merrick Garland. He doesn`t give a lot of interviews. As a member of Congress, as someone who is involved and concerned, and was sort of a direct target of the insurrection, how comforted were you by Merrick Garland`s interview? Did he say things that bolster your confidence in the DOJ? Do you now feel safer? What was your general response to his interview today?
[19:05:17]
REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): Very comforted.
Good to see you in the chair, Jason.
And hello, Paul.
But, first, let me just say that the concern has been — and perhaps this is why he did the interview — is that, because Donald Trump was a former present, that he may be afforded privileges that no other everyday suspect would receive.
And what we want is for him to not be treated any better than any ordinary citizen and to not be treated, of course, any worse. But the evidence is so overwhelming. It`s a mountain of evidence now that the committee has put forward. All of the arrows point to Donald Trump inflaming, inciting and then aiming that mob right at the Capitol to violently obstruct Congress from doing our job, and to defraud every citizen who voted in the election from having their vote counted.
JOHNSON: And, Congressman, I want to follow up, because I always want to ask this of any members.
It`s been almost a year-and-a-half since the attack. And I know — look, I don`t care if I worked at Kinko`s or the post office or a grocery store. If I had been attacked at my job by an angry mob, I would be terrified of that ever possibly happening again.
When you talk to members of Congress, when you guys are on your group chats, when you`re having discussions, are members of Congress feeling comfortable with this investigation as employees of the state? We understand the legal arguments. But when you go to work every day, when you talk to your colleagues, are people like, yes, OK, we think Merrick Garland got this handled, I would hate to ever see that day again?
Is there that level of comfort amongst your colleagues?
SWALWELL: No, there`s no comfort at all.
In fact, for the first time ever, last week, I had to use a weapon screening technology at a town hall because of the overwhelming amount of threats that have come to our office and my staff.
And the threats parrot the language that Donald Trump and others use. I got out of my car yesterday with an aide, and a gentleman — a gentleman is a polite way of referring to this person — stormed at me and started screaming that the election was stolen and that I was a liar.
I mean, the rhetoric that we`re seeing from America`s elected leaders, people running for office, people who are colleagues of mine in this building just over my shoulder who are holding assault rifles and telling Joe Biden, I dare you to come and take this from me, people who are threatening to kill Speaker Pelosi, people who are making animated videos where they depict themselves killing Joe Biden, candidates for the Senate who are saying they`re going to go hunting, holding firearms, for RINOs, Republicans in names only, this is inspiring the treason-curious in America, where one-third now say they`re ready to take up arms against their government.
This is directly leading to that. And we saw that on January 6. And that`s why the work we have to do has to reflect that this is not looking back at an event that was in the past, but the plotters are at large, and the plotters through upcoming elections are seeking to be in charge.
JOHNSON: And some of them are still very likely in the building.
Paul, I want to — I`m going to play you some sound here. One of the things Merrick Garland said is that the DOJ is sort of laying out a road map. Want to get your thoughts on this on the other side.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GARLAND: The Justice Department has been doing the most wide-ranging investigation in its history. And the committee is doing an enormously wide-ranging investigation as well.
It is inevitable that there will be things that they find before we have found them. And there — it is inevitable that there will be things we find that they haven`t found.
But the Justice Department has, from the beginning, been moving urgently to learn everything we can about this period and to bring to justice everybody who`s criminally responsible for interfering with the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to another, which is the fundamental element of our democracy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: So, Paul, if the January 6 Committee is providing a road map — and I don`t know if Merrick Garland — I don`t know if he needs Waze or Google Maps or something, because the map seems pretty clear.
I mean, Congressman Swalwell just said, we have a very, very clear map here. So what is it going to take for the DOJ to open up the app and follow the map through to the conclusion, or are they still sort of fumbling around in Google here?
What`s it going to take for them to finally take the steps that many of us feel that they should have taken months ago?
PAUL BUTLER, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: Jason, the attorney general`s statements to Lester Holt are a lot of warmth of mwa, mwa, mwa.
Merrick Garland was talking softly, but saying nothing new. That was on purpose, I think. The Justice Department does it makes statements about its investigations until it brings charges.
[19:10:03]
But here`s the tension. Prosecutors are not supposed to let politics influence their cases, but prosecutors keep up with the news. So they know that soon Trump will probably announce he`s running for president. And if an indictment is handed down after, that`s going to give Trump more ammunition to say it`s a political prosecution, with Biden just trying to eliminate a political opponent.
And you`re right. The House panel has provided a road map to prosecuting Trump. There are different considerations in a criminal case than in a congressional investigation, but, at some point, if Merrick Garland means it when he says that nobody is above the law, he needs to prove it by charging Donald Trump.
JOHNSON: Paul, I want to dig into that a little bit, because I think this idea that they don`t want to be influenced by politics, it doesn`t make any sense.
How can you not be influenced by politics when it was a political insurrection, right? Like, if I tell you it`s not me, it`s you, it`s definitely you, right?
(CROSSTALK)
BUTLER: Yes.
JOHNSON: So, yes, how can they not take into consideration a possible change in Congress when this investigation moves forward?
BUTLER: Look, I understand that Garland is an institutionalist, and that he doesn`t want the look of the Justice Department to be political prosecutions, like he`s doing for Biden what Barr refused to do for Trump.
But, at some point, you have to weigh the cost of not prosecuting Trump against the cost of prosecuting him. It will no doubt be divisive, but the expressive value of not prosecuting Trump is that a president can do anything and get away with it, and an ex-president can use as a defense, I`m running for reelection, to not be charged for the grossest, most violent conduct.
JOHNSON: Right.
Speaking of former presidents and former vice presidents, Congressman, I have some sound here from former Vice President Mike Pence sort of talking about the state of the party and where their movement may be. And I want to get your thoughts on the other side of this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE PENCE, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I don`t know that our movement is that divided. I don`t — I don`t know that the president and I differ on issues. But we may differ on focus.
I truly do believe that elections are about the future.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Now, look, I don`t know what could be more divisive than my former boss trying to get people to hang me on the gallows. But, hey, maybe I just haven`t had that kind of work environment.
Congressman, when you hear this sort of thing from Mike Pence, does it — does it discourage you? Does it make you more frustrated, thinking that many, many, many of the Republicans are still going to be in the thrall of the former president and this insurrection, despite the immediate threats and dangers that it put their lives in?
SWALWELL: We need the courage that Adam Kinzinger, Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, and so many others have shown.
But they`re on an island right now. And I recently asked a homeland security official, when America`s leaders denounce violent rhetoric or if they fail to denounce it, does that have an effect on extremist groups? And the official, the expert said, yes, when you denounce it, it quashes it.
When you have failed to denounce it, they feel like they have a permissive lane. And, right now, violent white nationalist extremist groups feel like they have a green light from Donald Trump and most of the MAGA Republican Party.
And, by the way, this party of law and order — I`m the son of a police officer. My brothers are police officers. I worked as a prosecutor. I know law and order. They are not pro-cop. They are pro-coup. And until they denounce Donald Trump, I refuse to say otherwise.
JOHNSON: And, Paul, I want to close with this.
We know that, obviously, if you`re not on the former president`s side, if not on the side of insurrection, you continue to be an enemy one way or another. But now, of course, we have the January 6 Committee coming out and saying, hey, look, the president did not call troops. He had every opportunity to call, sort of national defense, come in and take care.
Is that sort of the kind of additional evidence that says — is there any – – is there any justification for that? Other than Donald Trump saying, I was lazy, is that yet another sort of straw in the hat of this committee that it`s very obvious that he wanted this attack to happen?
BUTLER: We learned from the hearings last week that not only did the president failed to call off his insurrectionist troops, he actively encouraged their criminal conduct, their murderous conduct, even after he knew that they were hunting down Vice President Pence and Speaker Pelosi, with the object of killing them.
He did not discourage that. He encouraged that. That`s got to be the most egregious conduct of a president in the history of the United States. And there`s no way that Merrick Garland can ignore that.
[19:15:03]
JOHNSON: Thank you, Congressman Eric Swalwell and Paul Butler. Thank you so much for starting us off today.
Up next on THE REIDOUT: The last time we saw him in D.C., he was running away like a cartoon villain from the inauguration of the man who actually beat him, because Donald Trump couldn`t accept the fact that the majority of Americans had swiped left yet again.
Today, he has returned as a visitor. And, like an abusive relationship, Republicans still flock back to him, despite him leading an insurrection that would have killed many of them.
The REIDOUT with that discussion continues right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:20:12]
JOHNSON: Donald Trump has returned to the scene of his many crimes for the first time since leaving the White House.
Trump was back in Washington, D.C., speaking at the America First Agenda summit. Upon his return, he was welcomed by some of the very people who were running for their lives through the hallway during the January 6 attack on the Capitol.
Kevin McCarthy, Steve Scalise, Lindsey Graham, and Ted Cruz were among some of the other tethers who were there for his opening act. But while most Republicans in Congress remain in lockstep with the former twice-impeached president, the tide in conservative media outlets appears to be shifting away from Donald Trump on to the next far right star.
The past few days, editorial boards of two Rupert Murdoch-owned conservative papers, “The New York Post” and “Wall Street Journal,” both issued harsh rebukes of Trump for his role in the insurrection. Even Trump`s pals at “FOX & Friends” are questioning his standing as a 2024 front-runner compared to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.
That led the former president to lash out on his own social media site, calling the program — quote — “terrible,” saying they — quote — “botched his poll numbers on purpose.”
Joining me now, Charlie Sykes, editor at large of The Bulwark and an MSNBC contributor, and Fernand Amandi, political analyst and pollster.
I am so excited to talk to both of you guys about this tonight, because I think this is interesting, right? The idea that the right-wing media ecosphere might be moving off of Trump reminds me of that old “Seinfeld” episode where, like, George and Jerry were talking about trying to do the switch.
This is not easy to do, right? This is not something you can pull off.
So, Charlie, is it possible that the Tuckers and the Sean Hannitys and everybody else in the world will actually make a move away from Trump? Or do you think this is just sort of nudging him to stay in order and keep along the lines of what they have wanted in the past? You think this could be a real split?
CHARLIE SYKES, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I don`t see it. I don`t see it quite yet.
When you talk about the conservative media moving off Trump, it`s mainly the print media, and they are Rupert Murdoch newspapers. But if the print media was that important in conservative circles, Donald Trump never would have gotten the nomination in the first place.
It will be interesting to see what FOX prime-time folks do. But keep in mind something`s been unleashed that can`t be easily put back in the bottle, particularly by a party that is as feckless and gutless as this party has been.
And so, as long as you have the talk radio, and you have Newsmax and you have the prime-time of FOX continuing to push the line, the split is only apparent. I mean, the other problem is simply this. Who is going to take out Donald Trump? I mean, there may be a consensus among establishment Republicans that it`s time to move on.
But unless somebody steps up and actually does it and denounces Trump and says, me, not him, and it`s one-on-one, it won`t happen. Otherwise, we will just have a replay of 2015 and 2016. And I have to say you look at Mike Pence, and you see sort of embodied — the embodiment of the disappointment of disappointing Republicans.
I mean, what he did on January 6 should be the defining moment of his entire career, his entire life. Rather than standing up and saying, look, this is me vs. Donald Trump, he wanted to violate the Constitution, I supported the Constitution, he`s walking away from his own moment of courage.
That`s not the kind of political guts that`s going to take down Donald Trump in 2024.
JOHNSON: Look, as long as Mike Pence wants to cosplay Reek from “Game of Thrones,” and take any kind of abuse and still kiss up to the former president, there is no chance that he is going to be somebody of importance.
SYKES: Right. Love the reference.
JOHNSON: But, Fernand, this is what brings to mind — thank you.
(LAUGHTER)
JOHNSON: This is what brings to mind, the current governor of your state.
Now, look, if you`re trying to take control of an organization, because the Republicans are no longer a party, that is in the thrall of an anti- democratic, authoritarian white nationalist, that`s not super easy. It`s not merely inconvenience. That is a tough process.
In Florida, do you think Ron DeSantis has the numbers, both financial and polling-wise, to really make a run at Trump? Or is he just hoping that Donald Trump somehow implodes on his own, and he might be able to slip in?
FERNAND AMANDI, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Oh, Jason, without question, it`s the latter scenario you described.
DeSantis is many things. He`s not a complete and total idiot. He knows that Donald Trump made him, and he also knows that Donald Trump can destroy him. And that`s why the game that DeSantis is playing is the waiting game. He`s probably the person most heartened by the Garland comments, because it`s going to take some sort of an act like that, an indictment of Trump and maybe even a conviction, to actually remove him from the scene completely.
[19:25:00]
Last I checked, the Republican Party he is still a cult. It is the cult of Donald Trump. He is the virus that took over the host. And there is no way to kill the virus without killing the host. They`re married to Trump. They made it. They have to break it. There`s no separating it.
And as long as he has his sights on the nomination in 2024, Jason, I don`t see anyone prying it from Donald Trump`s cold hands.
JOHNSON: Charlie, I want to play some sound from Marc Short talking about not only sort of Trump and the current state of the party, but also one of the shining lights of the Republican Party and whether this also sort of speaks to some internal conflicts we will be seeing in the coming months.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHORT: Well, I don`t know if Mike Pence will run for president in 2024, but I don`t think Matt Gaetz will have an impact on that.
In fact, I`d be surprised if he was still voting. It`s more likely he will be in prison for child sex trafficking by 2024. And I`m actually surprised that Florida law enforcement still allows him to speak to teenage conferences like that. So I`m not too worried what Matt Gaetz thinks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: I tried to get the production team to play the “Ether” beat behind that. We couldn`t get it fast enough.
(LAUGHTER)
JOHNSON: Look, it`s really telling when you have this sort of Republican- on-Republican violence.
I don`t think that the party is no longer a cult, but, Charlie, what do you think it says that they`re no longer sort of closing ranks around somebody like Matt Gaetz, who seemed basically like the Teflon Don for the last year-and-a-half, despite multiple allegations of inappropriate and possibly illegal behavior?
SYKES: You know, I had the same reaction listening to him that he felt — it looked like he was sort of unchained, that he`s willing to say things that they hadn`t been willing to say before.
But keep in mind it`s one thing to criticize somebody like Matt Gaetz. It`s something very different to go after Donald Trump.
And, Jason, I think your analogy of the Republican Party having this abusive — abusive relationship with Donald Trump is very, very apt. They can`t break away from it. And the more he threatens them and insults him, the tighter they cling to him.
So I agree with the analysis that we`re a long way away from seeing the break. Look, if Ron DeSantis does run against Donald Trump, he does know what Trump will do to him. He also knows that Donald Trump is not going to accept defeat in a Republican primary, any more than he does in a general election.
So I don`t want to be — come off as I`m being glib here. But there are a lot of Republicans that basically are looking for something to happen to get them off the hook. Maybe there will be an indictment. Maybe there will be a meteor attack. Maybe there will be a deadly Big Mac, something that will solve the Donald Trump problem for them, because they are unwilling to do this.
So, yes, they`re willing to fight with one another. They`re willing to pull the knives out, because, look, it`s a massive grift and there`s just so much turf, and they`re going to be doing that. But that`s a very, very different sort of thing than taking on the king, the orange god king himself.
And so I share Fernand`s skepticism about that.
JOHNSON: And, of course, when you come for the king, you best not miss, right, because he will come back and bury you financially and bury you rhetorically.
With that in mind, one of the things that we have been hearing about last couple of weeks, there`s rumors that the former twice-impeached president and leader of a terrorist attack MAGA movement, Donald Trump, may be making his announcement some time this fall.
And, Fernand, it`s not so much that I think that has an impact on, say, 2024. We don`t know what`s going to happen that far. But I can imagine that, in places like Wisconsin, where Charlie is, in places like Pennsylvania, possibly in places like Florida, that the former president announcing is going to force some of these Senate candidates to have to declare their loyalty to him again right before the election.
And it seems like, sometimes, Donald Trump is the best friend of the Democrats, because they have somebody to run against. Do you think that potential announcement this fall could harm key Senate races if Democrats are forced — or able to show that these people are more loyal to him than the constituents of the states they are running in?
AMANDI: Oh, I absolutely do.
And you have to remember Jason — and Charlie hinted at it earlier — Donald Trump has no interest in the Republican Party. He could care less if the Republican Party succeeds or fails or blows up in history.
Donald Trump cares about Donald Trump. And the other variable that we have to think about here is, Donald Trump`s calculation about an early announcement for president is that it is what in his mind thinks will prevent that indictment from coming down.
So, when you add that element of an early announcement as a Trump legal strategy to lower the pressure that he knows is coming his way, it becomes all of the more desperate an action and all of the more demanding of total loyalty from anyone in the Republican Party.
And God forbid the Republican that does not show that loyalty and kiss that ring, because Trump will come after them.
SYKES: Right.
AMANDI: And Ron DeSantis, by the way, knows that better than anyone.
SYKES: Yes.
[19:30:00]
JOHNSON: Charlie Sykes and Fernand Amandi, thank you, guys, so much for joining us tonight.
SYKES: Thank you.
JOHNSON: Up next: breaking news tonight from “The Washington Post” that the Justice Department is investigating Donald Trump`s actions as part of its criminal probe of the 2020 election.
More on that when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JOHNSON: We`re following breaking news tonight in the January 6 investigation.
[19:35:00]
“The Washington Post” reports that the Justice Department is looking into the former president`s actions as part of a criminal probe, according to four people familiar.
According to “The Post” — quote — “Prosecutors who are questioning witnesses before a grand jury, including two top aides of Vice President Mike Pence, have asked in recent days about conversations with Trump, his lawyers and others in his inner circle who sought to substitute Trump allies for certified electors from some states Joe Biden won, according to two people familiar with the matter.
“In addition, Justice Department investigators in April received phone records of key officials and aides in the Trump administration, including his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows.”
Paul Butler is back with me.
OK, so we had to call an audible here, Paul. I`m of two minds about this. So you help me out here. Talk to me like I`m 6, because there`s a part of me that saying, so, OK, isn`t this what they were doing all along? And there`s another part of me that is saying, well, wait a minute, if they`re asking for phone records, then maybe we have seen some progress between now and maybe even the A block, when you and I talked before.
So how should we take this new report? Is this something new? Or is this just basically Merrick Garland acknowledging something that we assumed what`s happening all along?
BUTLER: Jason, the stakes just got way higher. Donald Trump may now be the subject of a federal grand jury investigation.
Now, that`s different from being a target. Criminal charges are not imminent, but the grand jury is actively investigating Trump`s criminal conduct. This is historic.
JOHNSON: So, now that they have got grand juries, now that they are investigating him for direct criminal conduct, that — so, as you said, this is lighting the candle, lighting the giant bomb. OK, it`s sizzling.
Does that mean that we could see something in the next 18 months? Does that mean that — I mean, by the time you are able to have this information leaked out, does that mean that you`re rounding the curve? Or does that mean this is likely just beginning?
BUTLER: We have no idea, because the Department of Justice just doesn`t talk about its pace, which appeared until really this week to be extremely slow.
And now it seems much faster pace. Jason, I think the Justice Department is interested in two different kinds of crimes. So, one is the violence and blood that we associate with insurrection day, January 6, and we know that one of these witnesses, Marc Short, warned the Secret Service that Mike Pence was in danger because Donald Trump was going to turn on him.
So think of crimes like sedition and incitement that these new witnesses are being questioned on. But both these witnesses were also at that wacko meeting at the Oval Office, where Trump leaned hard on Pence to stop the vote certification.
And that raises crimes like conspiracy to defraud the United States…
JOHNSON: Right.
BUTLER: … conspiracy experienced to impede congressional investigations.
So I think this is encouraging news for people who want Trump to be brought to justice.
JOHNSON: Joining me now on the phone is Carol Leonnig of “The Washington Post.”
Carol, thank you so much for joining us tonight with this breaking news.
So I have to ask you. You`re going to have the people who are sort of the Merrick Garland supporters, they`re like, aha, we told you all along this is what was happening. You will have the other side to say, hey, this might be a result of pressure from Congress and the January 6 Committee and commentators and everything else like that.
Where would you place this breaking news? Is this a reflection of pressure? Is it DOJ saying, yes, hey, everybody, get off our back, we`re doing this? Or is this a reflection of sort of the ongoing process and we should have trusted Merrick Garland all along?
CAROL LEONNIG, “THE WASHINGTON POST”: You know, I like to deal in facts.
And the facts that we discovered, my great colleagues and I at “The Washington Post,” are as follows, that, starting relatively slowly, the Department of Justice began eying team Trump and eying Trump himself and his actions.
And when I say slowly, remember, January 6 and the efforts to overturn the election results of 2020 began in November of 2020 and continued to January 2021. And the first sign we can discover of the Justice Department really swinging their microscope towards team Trump is at the beginning — in the first months of this year.
What we also know, though, is the January 6 Committee hearings definitely accelerated some things. But it wasn`t the reason that the Justice Department began looking at team Trump. They sought and obtained in late April phone records for many Trump White House officials, going all the way up to former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
[19:40:00]
And so, even in April, before any hearings had begun, here the Justice Department was sifting through key communications to piece together the road map of how Trump`s allies were using the levers of power, manipulating them to fraudulently claim the election was rigged and block what has been a wonderful tradition in our democracy, and that`s the peaceful transfer of power.
JOHNSON: So, Carol, what we had been getting all along sort of publicly was that the DOJ was working their way up, right?
They were going to start with Michael and get their way all the way up to Tony Soprano. Do you think that what we`re finding out today in this breaking news, is it a result of prosecuting the low-level people, the Ali Alexanders, the actual insurrectionists on the ground? Is that what led to this?
Or do you think that this investigation and calling for phone records was already something that was going to occur regardless?
LEONNIG: I think there are a few tracks here. And it`s such a good question that you ask, because this is not your typical Department of Justice investigation, from what my colleagues and I have been able to discern.
It didn`t start with Michael and move up to Mr. Corleone.
(LAUGHTER)
LEONNIG: It — and I make that joke, but that is the typical drug cartel investigation. That is the typical major white-collar conspiracy investigation or corporate and public corruption investigation.
And that doesn`t appear the case here. There`s — the two tracks were, the Department of Justice put all of their energies early on, in the days after January 6, into investigating and prosecuting the rioters that stormed the beaches of Normandy, right, stormed the Capitol.
But it was only later that they began really looking at the conspiracy that many critics of the Department of Justice say they feel happened right in front of their face. And that was President Trump and his allies perpetrating and — a fraudulent agreement, in their view — I stress in their view…
JOHNSON: Right.
LEONNIG: … to push the big lie, to try to block Vice President Pence from certifying the election.
I do not have any doubt that Merrick Garland believes they are rolling uphill, and maybe there is a progression that will get to that stage. But, right now, it`s a much more broader net that is trying to gather everything about team Trump and piece together what potential crimes may have occurred, including the most serious one, seditious conspiracy to obstruct a government proceeding.
And that is the certification of the election, the certification of the victory of Joe Biden.
JOHNSON: Right.
Well, look, I — if they`re rolling it up that hill, hopefully, they will be running it up that hill sometime soon, because this is the kind of breaking news that leads people to believe that a prosecution should be imminent.
Paul Butler and Carol Leonnig, thank you so much for joining us tonight on THE REIDOUT talking about breaking news.
Dr. Anthony Fauci joins me next to talk about efforts to check the spread of monkeypox and how to protect yourself from COVID variants this fall.
We will be right back on THE REIDOUT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:47:59]
JOHNSON: Monkeypox. That`s right. Monkeypox continues to spread, with nearly 3,500 confirmed cases now reported in the United States alone.
The Biden administration is weighing whether to declare the outbreak a public health emergency. According to “The Washington Post,” Biden`s decision could come this week, tied to a planned announcement that about 800,000 additional vaccine doses will be distributed following completion of a review by the Food and Drug Administration.
Today, Matt Ford describe the symptoms of the viral disease, which he contracted in June.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MATT FORD, CONTRACTED MONKEYPOX: I got a call on Friday, June 17, alerting me that I`d been exposed a week before. Shortly after, I had really intense flu-like symptoms pick up, and then I had lesions appear all over my body.
And it`s — at peak, I counted more than 25 all over.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Joining me now is White House chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Thank you so much, Doctor, for joining us this evening.
First off, I just have to ask, because we`re hearing the term monkeypox. We know that it`s spreading. It`s 3,500 people. How is monkeypox spread?
DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, CHIEF MEDICAL ADVISER TO PRESIDENT BIDEN: Yes.
JOHNSON: And do we have concerns that the way it`s spreading now may change and metastasize over time?
FAUCI: Well, it`s spread by close skin-to-skin contact. The lesions are pustules on the skin. Sometimes, you can make them easily visible, you see them. Sometimes, in their early form, you may not notice them or confuse them with other skin lesions.
But it`s really skin-to-skin contact is the major way. Likely, if you have pustules that spill over, for example, onto clothing or other inanimate objects, it can spread.
This is a virus right now that it has inserted itself into the community of men who have sex with men. And about 99 percent of the time cases that have now been reported are within that demographic group.
[19:50:05]
That doesn`t mean that other groups are going to be essentially free of it, because there can be spillover into cases. So that`s why we`re taking it very seriously. First of all, for the community at risk, we want to make sure that they are protected. We want to make sure that they get enough testing, enough vaccination, and there`s a therapy for it.
But it is a problem, Jason, that we take very seriously, because it is spreading at an alarming rate. As you showed the numbers there, now more than 80 countries have had over 18,000 documented cases. And that`s probably an undercount.
JOHNSON: So you`re saying it`s primarily through sort of intimate sexual contact?
Should we as a country, from a public health perspective, should we be moving back to maybe 2020 or at least early 2021 standards, where we go back to social distancing, where we no longer shake hands, we just sort of do elbow bumps?
FAUCI: No.
JOHNSON: You`re saying that`s not necessary?
FAUCI: No. No, no.
I think the idea — don`t confuse that, Jason. Social distancing is when you`re dealing with a virus that is transmitted by the respiratory root. There is no indication at this point that it is transmitted by the respiratory root.
All indications, from the demographic and epidemiological profile, is that it is transmitted by close skin-to-skin bodily contact, which is the reason why, when you listen to the people who have been afflicted with this, and you talk about the circumstances, thus far, almost invariable, they say, well, I had a sexual contact over the weekend with someone I didn`t know very well, and now, all of a sudden, a few days later, I have these lesions appear.
That is a recurring theme. There`s no indication at this point — although you will always keep an open mind as to other modalities of spread, at this point, that doesn`t appear to be anything other than what we`re talking about, close person-to-person, skin-to-skin contact.
JOHNSON: So, Dr. Fauci, we have seen sort of a rise in cases again, the BA.5 area, in places like Los Angeles and Dallas.
And we have also seen a number of prominent public officials, Vice President Harris, President Joe Biden, Manchin, Susan Murkowski, have all been caught — have all caught COVID.
My question for you is, many of them have sort of made a point of saying, hey, look, I got it, I`m taking Paxlovid, I`m happy I`m vaccinated, and I`m working through it.
But at the same time, we have also seen reports that say that this idea of working through COVID may actually strained the body and lengthen the systems. Where do you stand on this idea that people should be working through COVID, regardless of how mild they think their symptoms are?
FAUCI: Well, first of all, you have got — that was a really good question, Jason. Thank you for asking it.
It really depends upon your symptomatology and your energy level. I`m one of those people who were vaccinated, doubly boosted who actually got infected. I had a very, very mild case. I had a little bit of a sore throat. I had one day of a fever that responded very well to Tylenol.
And I had one night where I was having a lot of runny nose and blowing my nose. The next morning — I went on Paxlovid that night. The next morning, I felt very well. I didn`t stress myself. But I did work. In my capacity as the director of a research institute, I did work via virtually on a Zoom.
I rested a little bit more than I usually did. But I essentially fulfilled all of my functions. Now, if I was sick with a high fever and aches and real fatigue, certainly, I would not have tried to push myself.
So what you`re trying to say is, don`t push yourself, but do what you can do in a measured way, being prudent about it. That`s what I was doing. And that`s what the president actually did. I mean, he performed many of the functions because, each day, he was feeling better and better. And he continued to improve.
So there`s nothing wrong with fulfilling your functions, so long as you do it in a protected environment.
JOHNSON: Dr. Anthony Fauci, thank you so much for coming in and talking to us tonight.
FAUCI: My pleasure. Thank you for having me.
JOHNSON: Celebrating the grand opening of the new Jackie Robinson Museum in New York City dedicated to his groundbreaking work both on and off the field.
We`re back in a second to talk about that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:58:54]
JOHNSON: It`s been 75 years since Jackie Robinson changed America. It`s a long time. It`s Trump`s age.
Breaking Major League Baseball`s color barrier. Today, the Jackie Robinson Foundation opened a museum in his honor in New York City. While most of the world knew him for blazing a path for other black ballplayers or, maybe more recently, you saw him depicted by Chadwick Boseman in the movie “42,” it was his work off the field that helped move the country forward.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACKIE ROBINSON, FORMER MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYER: As a black man, I find it quite discouraging to look around and find how little has been done to lift minorities from the depths of poverty and despair.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Before his death in 1972, Robinson helped shift public opinion.
The museum will showcase Robinson`s work to expand equality in advertising, broadcasting and business. Jackie`s son, David Robinson, not to be confused with the basketball player, told NBC`s Harry Smith that his father was very aware of the position he was in.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID ROBINSON, SON OF JACKIE ROBINSON: Baseball was even, for my father, a social development tool. His success was as a social change agent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: Today`s museum opening is another major milestone in that legacy.
And it could not have been done without his widow, Rachel Robinson, who turned 100 years old earlier this month. She was out on hand to cut the ribbon.
And that is tonight`s REIDOUT. Joy is back tomorrow night.
“ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES” starts right now.