♪♪ now we heard from a lot of you about those beat one glasses in our time with chef carbonn and michael steel. go to msnbc.com/beat5. if you want to get one and if you post online and at the show

on instagram or facebook and show us your picture with you with the wine or coffee glass and we might show some of those on air. that does it for us. "the reidout" starts now. ♪♪ tonight on "the reidout" -- >> what idaho is doing so waiting for women to wait and deteriorate and suffer the life-long health consequences with no possible upside for the fetus. it's tragedy upon tragedy. >> transfer is the possibly standard of care in idaho. but it can't be the right standard of care to force somebody on to a helicopter. >> the supreme court hears two monumental cases this week. today, on whether federal law requires emergency abortion care in states with strict bans. the other one, tomorrow, will determine if donald trump faces any consequences at all for his alleged crimes. ♪♪ and that's where we begin tonight.

legal accountability for one man, donald trump. from two different courts. trump certainly believes that the rules do not apply to him. it's a essential part of who he is as a person. but in one court, the new york state supreme court, we are waiting on a decision from judge juan marshawn on whether donald trump will face consequences for ten alleged violations of his gag order in his hush money election interference trial. trump seems to be going out of his way to prove a point that prosecutor christopher conroy argued on tuesday. he knows what he's not allowed to do and he does it any way. it turns out in an interview just minutes before that hearing on the gag order started, trump committed what appears to be another viels of the gag order, going after his former fixer, michael cohen a key witness during an interview with a local philadelphia station. >> michael cohen is a convicted liar. and he's got no credibility

whatsoever. he was a lawyer. and you rely on your lawyers. but michael cohen was a convicted liar. >> now it should be noted, yes, by his own admission michael cohen pleaded guilty to lying to congress and lying to a bank. so trump is not making that part up. but it's important to remember why he committed those crimes and who he did them for. he did it to protect donald trump. cohen lied to congress about business deals trump pursued in russia while he was running for president because trump wanted him to conceal those business deals so his russia baggage wouldn't look so obvious. and cohen lied to a bank to take out a home equity line of credit to pay to silence a woman alleging a sexual relationship with donald trump. namely stormy daniels. trump weirdly keeps leaving out those details when he calls his former personal attorney and fixer a criminal. in clear violation, by the way, of a gag order. tomorrow there will be another

chance to hold donald trump accountable in an unprecedented case with farther reaching implications, not just for him but for our democracy. the u.s. supreme court will hear arguments in donald trump versus the united states about whether he can claim sweeping presidential immunity over his criminal election interference charges from special counsel jack smith. but even for the conservative majority hears one word of arguments, it is important to recognize the gift that they have already handed to trump, namely time and plenty of it. with a month's long delay. they refused jack smith's request to fast track this case in december before a single republican primary vote had been cast. sending it instead to the d.c. circuit court. the court also could have just affirmed the decision by the d.c. circuit court which found that a president surprise surprise does not, in fact, have absolute immunity from prosecution. after trump's lawyers made that argument that they could reprise

tomorrow. >> could a president who ordered seal team 6 to assassinate a political rival who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution? >> if he were impeached and convicted first. >> so your answer is no? >> my answer is qualified yes. >> instead, this 6-3 right wipg majority court, three of whom nominated by donald trump and another whose wife actively encouraged trump's efforts to overturn the election and attended the rally that proceeded the attack on the capitol, they will decide whether or not trump is above the law, even he is already the presumptive republican presidential nominee. friends of the show, legal experts, melissa murray and andrew weissmann write in the new york times that the court has already botched the immunity case. noting the court's decision to review the immunity case actually undermines core democratic values. joining me now is the aforementioned andrew weissmann,

msnbc legal analyst and co-host of the prosecuting donald trump podcast and timothy hayfy. i forgot my copy of my book. i bring the trump indictments book everywhere i go. i take it around like trump takes his fake bible. say more. your op-ed was important so say more. >> sure. you know, we really focussed on time. on the thing that you were talking about. because the main issue here is you could understand the supreme court if it wanted to say, you know what, we, as a supreme court, have never actually ruled on something as crazy as president saying they're absolutely criminally immaun from prosecution. >> yeah. >> we never addressed that. we only addressed that in a civil context. i could understand that they want may want to weigh in on that. there's no way there will be immunity in this case even if you think there's some small area that the president should be criminally immune.

i'm not sure there should be, but it's certainly not this case where there's private action for private gain. it's just not an official duty. and so, what's the real harm here is that the supreme court could have taken it as you noted in december. they could have -- if they were going to take it a couple months ago, instead of december, they could have said we're going to fast track it and we would have heard arguments already. instead, there has been a stay in the d.c. federal case since december. that case was originally scheduled for trial march 4th. you know where we are now, we could easily be waiting for a jury verdict right now. >> that's right. >> and so what i'm hoping is that at the arguments tomorrow, that the justices focus on speed. what legitimate argument does donald trump have that this shouldn't be decided immediately. the court could say left's lift the stay tomorrow. we'll hear from you, but you don't have five votes for presidential immunity in this

case. the stay is lifted. the case can go forward. we'll issue an opinion in time. >> sure. >> that's something they have done. it's something other courts have done. and that would, i think, in some way absolve them from what they have done so far. but i have to say the tea leaf reading not good. >> not good. timothy hayfy, reprise for us. it's been so long since january, 2021. trump's role as an investigator of january 6th in what happened. >> he was the leader of a multi-part intentional conspiracy to disrupt the joint session and interfere with the peaceful transfer of power. the story, joy, that we told over the course of the select committee's hearings and in the final report very similar to the evidence that has been amassed by and will be presented by the special counsel. he is far and away the proximate cause of the riot, as the committee found and as the special counsel will have the

burden to prove in the trial. >> right. and tim, if you were -- i'll ask both of you. if donald trump were not president of the united states, given the fact that people are spending 20 plus years in prison for what happened on january 6th, i'll start with you, tim, would he have been a defendant in a case were he not the president, like long before now? >> absolutely. look, the justice department started with the blue collar cases, the people that were at the capitol and they eventually got around to the white collar defendants, like the chief among them the former president. but absolutely, joy. regardless of his status as the president of the united states, his conduct as the select committee recommended and as the special counsel has now indicted, absolutely merits criminal prosecution. >> and by the way, let me just remind someone who else was involved in this, ginni thomas, andrew, hear is some of her texts on november 6th after trump lost the election. do not concede.

it takes time for the army who is gathering for his back. november 10, help this great president stand firm, mark. that's mark meadows, his chief of staff she's texting. you are the leader. with him who is standing for america's constitutional governance at the precipes, the majority knows biden and the left is attempting the greatest heist in all caps, first letter cap,over our history. november 19th, sounds like sidney, sidney powell and her team are getting evidence of fraud. make a plan. release the kraken and save us from the left. two of the people in these texts are already indicted in the state of georgia. the idea that the husband of that woman, she spent 29 messages like that, to mark meadows alone -- >> donald trump as you were starting out has attacked judge marshawn for being conflicted and shouldn't be sitting on this case. said the same thing with respect to fani willis the d.a. in

georgia. these are people he has no problem attacking them as being cob conflicted. clarence thomas' wife was at the ellipse at the key event before the january 6th attack. she was texting, as you noted, back and forth with the chief of staff, mark meadows. the idea that he is going to -- doesn't have the decency to -- when you think about the -- how the public has been perceived the supreme court -- >> yeah. >> the harm to the supreme court from his sitting on this case, to say that there would be no appearance of impropriety, that you wouldn't have that and that no reasonable person could think that when your own wife was goating on, doing exactly what happened, seems incredible to me. >> i think you said the right phrase there, doesn't have the decency. i will just leave it there while i just go back to some breaking news actually.

we have breaking news from arizona involving the fake elector plot. let's get right to nbc news correspondent vaughn hillyard with the details. vaughn, what have you got? >> reporter: hey, joy. this is literally just in the last 60 seconds. arizona attorney general chris maze is announcing the indictment of the 11 electors out of arizona from the 2020 election. this has been part of a year-long investigation for chris maze, of course, there was a republican attorney general in the aftermath of the 2020 election who never investigated the fake elector scheme on his part upon taking office she committed to this investigation and over the better part of the last year she has gone through this. issuing subpoenas and having individuals testify before this grand jury. just here in the last hour in arizona, chris maze with the approval of the state grand jury is now indicted 11 fake electors out of arizona. i should note, as we're giping to make our way through this indictment, there are other individuals who are also included in this indictment. but they have not been served at

this time. the indictment has those names redacted. the 11 individuals who have been indicted, who we have the names of, include the likes of kelly war, who folks will recall was the arizona gop chairwoman at the time as well as her husband, as well as rnc committee man out of arizona, tyler boyer, who also serves as the chief operating officer of turning point usa, that trump aligned organization. you also have two current arizona state legislators included in this indictment around -- in the aftermath of the 2020 election, joy, the -- in some states, right, there is more secretive effort to keep the fake elector scheme under wraps, right, in the state of georgia in a secret meeting behind closed doors. in arizona it was a little different. more than a month after the 2020 election results, as donald trump was applying a pressure campaign on the likes of maricopa county board of supervisors as well as former house speaker rusty bowers,

folks may recall that at the arizona gop headquarters, kelly ward, the gop chairwoman of the state party at the time actually convened a group of individuals, including the 11 electors, one of whom she was, to actually have on video them going and signing the certificate. at that point in time, the certificate was sent to the national archives in congress. so, again, joy, literally as you and i are discussing here, we're just beginning to make our way through this indictment. but now we have individuals who are electors in georgia and michigan and now in arizona as well who have been formally indicted on state charges stemming from this alleged scheme to send to washington, d.c. ultimately a different slate of electors to be counted on january 6th of 2021. >> don't go anywhere, vaughn. andrew weissmann, first your reaction. i also want to get tim heaphy's reaction. >> sure. i'm fascinated by the fact that vaughn is reporting there's

redacted names. and i wonder if vaughn could speak to -- it sounds like they were able to serve people who were local who might be arizona people. from that, would it be fair to infer that there maybe people who, you know, because the scheme as alleged elsewhere in various indictments is that people at the trump campaign were orchestrating this. in other words, this didn't come from the bottom up. this was coming from d.c. down. is there -- from that, could you infer that at least some of the redacted names may be people who are in the trump campaign? >> right. andrew, i'm looking at the same screen i have my camera on here, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven names are redacted. so there were the 11 electors, fake electors out of arizona and seven additional names that are redacted here. when we are looking at multiple

counts, nine different counts, count one conspiracy, count two fraudulent schemes, count three, fraudulent schemes and practices, and counts four through nine are forgery. we also in all 11 of those individuals were all indicted on all nine of those counts. the seven redacted names we do not have the counts on as well. so, i'm going to have to scan through this just so folks know what we're scanning through here, we're looking at from arizona attorney general chris maze a 58-page indictment that was signed here by the foreperson just here in the last hour. so, to better answer everybody's questions here, i'm going to work my way through this here in realtime if i may, guys. >> yeah. let me let you work through it. take you off camera and let you work through it and keep reading an get timothy heaphy, what do you make of all this? >> sounds very consistent with the michigan case, with a

portion of the georgia case as andrew said. this was a top down scheme. it was the rnc and members of the trump campaign who were encouraging electors in these contested states to submit certificates purporting to be official, that's where the crime comes in, certifying falsely that president trump had won those states. the signature on those documents and the attempt to have them considered by congress is what makes them fraudulent. they are fake elector certificates. the redacted names could very well be officials of the trump campaign, mike roman comes to mind. he's indicted in georgia and was one of the people who was on the phone organizing this activity with individuals in michigan, in arizona, and in georgia. so, my guess is it's the individuals in arizona who have been named and some additional folks in washington or elsewhere that were part of the broader scheme to get all seven of these

contested states to submit these fake elector certificates. all of that of course sets up some predicate for dispute, something for the vice president potentially to accept at the joint session. a basis on which members of congress could object. it was all part of a broader scheme led by the former president. that's what's at stake in these criminal cases in washington and georgia. >> andrew, i'm not a math person but 11 electors indicted plus nine redacted, says 20 to me. a lot of people talked about how broad the georgia indictment was, but that indictment included fake electors, people who were part of that scheme. it also included not just people from the trump campaign, but very ostentatiously people from the trump white house including his chief of staff. if you're looking at an indictment this broad and got names redacted, shouldn't that say feds to us as well? people who are federal officials maybe, maybe? >> yeah. the thing i just sort of think is if they unredacted the arizona people, i'm just sort of

logically it would suggest those people may be outside of the state and given the scheme was really orchestrated as we keep on saying top down, i'm going to be interested in whether -- who the top people are that are getting indicted. remember, but for donald trump, if he becomes president again, he may have immunity. these state charges, people should remember, they stick. there is no federal pardon power for these charges. so, when we find out the full pan plate, the pressure on them is great because they can't be sitting there thinking, i don't have to worry because donald trump becomes president he'll pardon me. they'll hold the back just to be clear. >> let me go back to vaughn really quickly because we do have this list of redacted names. is there some way to eliminate the possibility that as is the case in georgia, trump's name is on that list? >> it's a very good question,

joy. we have no reporting that suggested that donald trump had received a subpoena or even a request to appear before this grand jury. so, the extent to chris maze service is still frankly not clear. i think that when we're looking at kris maze here, again, i got to come back to the fact that she didn't come in to office until -- in 2023 here. essentially she had a two-year delayed start in being able to pick up this investigation. and when she came into office, a race she won by just about 270 votes, she made the commitment she said she needed to send a clear message that trying to overturn democratic elections in the state of arizona to those who attempt to do that, that a clear message will be sent that they will not be able to do that into the future. and that she found it imperative to go forward with this investigation despite others suggesting, three and a half years have passed at this point.

we the american public became familiar with rusty bowers own story. rusty bowers was the speaker of the arizona legislature at the time when he says and testified to this that he got phone calls from the likes of donald trump and allies urging him to send this alternate slate of electors on behalf of the legislature, right? so these guys on december 14th, that arizona gop headquarters were all there on video signing their names, all 11 of them, on this certificate that was sent to congress. but they were also in realtime trying to more formally use the legislature to send and make that the formal certificate sent by the state of arizona, not the biden slate of electors. rusty bowers said, sorry, we're not going with that game plan. we as the arizona state legislature are sending the biden slate of electors. doug ducey, the governor, was then the next individual who is a part of that pressure campaign and folks will recall when he later that month in december was literally signing the

certificate that biden had won the state of arizona, his phone rang and it was donald trump that was calling him. and he turned it other and left it on mute. so this in the state of arizona was the length to the means in which these individuals, the chairwoman of the state party as well as the rnc committee man, tyler boyer, went. and now we know it's an extension of this. of course, kari lake was -- i should be clear was not a part of this indictment here, but they are -- this is for all intents and purposes the republican party of the state of arizona. >> absolutely. >> now in a critical moment for the state of arizona and the republican party, just six months out from a general election, they have this indictment on their hands. it's just a complicating scene and one that i think that we're only beginning to wholly understand the details of, joy. >> absolutely stunning. kelli ward, asked and answered part of my question was now asked -- i can come to you on this, andrew.

donald trump is apparently named as an unindicted coconspirator in this indictment. tell us what that means. >> so, that would mean he's not indicted, but you know, we saw that in the d.c. federal case where donald trump is indicted but there were many unindicted coconspirators who had different roles and that a number of us, including the media, figured out more or less who they were. it was clear rudy giuliani was one. >> who is who. >> exactly. now the reason they're not named is there's -- euphemism, put up or shut up. meaning, if you're a federal prosecutor or state prosecutor, grand jury is bringing charges, then you name the person. if they're not bringing charges, you do not name the person. michael cohen pleaded guilty, there was unindicted coconspirator, who is that? >> donald trump. >> from a prosecutor's point of view, if someone is committing a crime as michael cohen did for

donald trump's benefit, not for his own, he wasn't sleeping with stormy daniels, no one alleged he was, he did this thing any way to pay her off or in this case there's no reason to create fake electors for yourself. you know, there's no reason for kelli ward, yes, she wants a republican president, if he's the beneficiary, how can he be unindicted coconspirator and not indicted. >> so the answer to that certainly if you're a prosecutor, you want to get to the top. >> yes. >> there's no question. i've done organized crime cases where your goal is get to the boss if the proof will get you there. when i worked on the enron case, you want to build your case up to see if you can get to the ceo. if he or she is involved. that's what you do. usually the reason is you don't have -- you think you just don't have enough proof. it doesn't mean that the person is not involved. you obviously think if you can say they're an unindicted coconspirator, that means you think you have proof at least at what's called preponderance,

more likely than not. we had two judges say one said it's a preponderance and not said there's clear and convincing evidence. >> sure. >> so it's not -- there's proof but remember, for a criminal case, proof beyond a reasonable doubt. so it's clear -- if they brought this case and they're not yet at that level. >> yeah. >> doesn't mean they're not going to get there, by the way. >> just not there now. >> exactly. but you know what, people can cooperate. there's no question that as vaughn said, there are people with direct evidence. >> yeah. >> because donald trump at some point was like, i'm getting on the phone. >> yeah. >> so he's got -- he has exposure. >> an indictment clarifies the mind. if you weren't thinking about cooperating before, indictment is a clarifying experience. >> yes, it does. >> tim heap hy is unindicted coconspirator -- redacted defendant, sorry. redacted defendant. i'm updating even as we speak. one of the redacted defendants is called the mayor. so i think we can make a sort of

logical assumption that the mayor is probably rudy giuliani. i'll get your reaction to that apparent update that one of the redacted defendants is called the mayor. >> makes perfect sense that giuliani would be one of the defendants in this case because he was arguably the quarterback of the legal strategy that had multiple parts, including the fake electors. he was on the phone with people in various states encouraging them to submit these fake electors. he is putting pressure on republican state officials and ultimately members of congress. he is the sort of designated primary legal advocate for this scheme. president trump himself, it's important to keep in mind, we developed a lot of evidence of his personal role in discussions of and encouragement of the submission of these fake elector certificates. we had evidence of a call with ronna mcdaniel to some republican officials in michigan

encouraging them to submit these certificates. obviously you have the georgia matter where that infamous phone call with secretary raffensperger. in arizona i know he had a lot of calls with rusty bowers about calling a special session. it may be that there isn't a phone call or evidence of the president directly encouraging the submission of fake electors in arizona. i just don't recall whether or not there's direct evidence of solicitation of those fake electors. there is broadly but is there in arizona? there certainly is with rudy giuliani and other lawyers, joy, my guess is some of those other redacted names could be john eastman -- >> tim heaphy, it's as if you're reading my mind. i have a "washington post" story in front of me. you're very wise. i want to note that nbc news has not confirmed this information. this is the reporting from "the washington post." i want to make that caveat right now. this is not nbc news reporting. i am now going to read the great birdie my stage manager handed me his phone. i'll read from his phone.

arizona grand jury on wednesday indicted seven attorneys and aides affiliated with donald trump's 2020 presidential campaign as well as 11 republicans on felony charges related to their alleged efforts to subvert joe biden's 2020 victory in the state, according to an announcement by the state attorney general. those indicted include, former trump white house chief of staff mark meadows, attorneys rudy giuliani, jenna ellis, john eastman and christina bobb, a name we have not heard in these indictments before. top campaign adviser boris epstein and former campaign aide mike roman. all are accused of allegedly aiding an unsuccessful strategy to award the state's electoral votes to trump instead of biden after the 2020 election. your reaction to that, andrew weissmann? >> my reaction is -- i mean, first, you know, wow. that is quite the --

>> it's big. >> this is like rounding up the usual suspects. >> and throwing in christina bobb. >> christina bobb. >> boar sis epstein. what name is not there. obviously we have talked about donald trump and that issue. chesebro, he's cooperating. really cooperating. because it doesn't make sense that he would not be indicted. >> he's already indicted in georgia. so if you think about it, from his point of view, you might as well cooperate at this point. >> and the issue there it was unclear whether he was really fully cooperating. when he pled, it was sort of like i'm sorry i got caught kind of plea. >> yeah. but so was jenna ellis. she complained that donald trump snot helping her out financially, paying her legal bills. if she's on that list, that she's not giving full cooperation? >> that distinction makes it sound like she was not willing

to be fully on board and cooperating. >> if i'm jack smith right now and see this i'm doing what right now other than pulling my hair out that the supreme court is holding up my case. >> yeah. for him, look, he has a very, very strong case otherwise he wouldn't have brought it. he needs to get a trial date. the supreme court is standing between him and accountability. but this is all very good news because this is additional pressure on these people to cooperate. and it cannot be taken away if he becomes president. if chesebro -- there's a reason he has not been indictmented. has to be that he's cooperating. and so that is another potential witness for you in the federal case if it ever goes. >> tim heaphy, if you're fani willis right now and you have a sprawling indictment of your own and now you have this sprawling indictment in the state of arizona, you're doing what today? >> you're following it closely. you're in touch with counsel to the defendants who are in both

cases. you're in touch arguably with the attorney general in arizona because the overlap between these cases is cig nif kants. joy, in any conspiracy, there are sort of leaders and followers. conspiracy is like a business. make an analogy to a corner store. right? everybody from the owner of the store to the clerk who takes your money, they're all working together to achieve some outcome. similarly here, there are leaders and followers. somebody like jenna ellis did not orchestrate the strategy. he's executing it. she arguably has less culpability but really important information about the people that are sort of defining for her why this is important, what benefit it might have. so what often happens in the conspiracy, is that the followers turn on, have a strong incentive to provide evidence against the leaders, the ones who are the architects. and here, that's the former president. that's rudy giuliani, that's john eastman. they conceived of the overall strategy and some of those

others like mike romans another example, they executed the strategy that was devised by somebody else. >> andrew weissmann, i have to thank you my friend. we kept you much longer than you original agreed to. you're gracious to be my anchor buddy with us. having a really great former prosecutor sitting right here is so great to have. thank you very much, my friend. i appreciate you. we are keeping tim and vaughn. they aren't going anywhere. we have so much more on this. i'm going to give bernie back his phone while we take this very quick commercial break. we'll be right back. break. we'll be right back.

clogged gutters can cause big problems fast. until now. call 833-leaffilter today for your free gutter inspection. i've had terrible flooding problems on my porch.

now i understand why. right now leaffilter is offering a free inspection, on your schedule. leaffilter is a permanent gutter solution, so you never have to worry about costly damage from clogged gutters again. call us today and schedule your free inspection. to schedule your free inspection, call 833.leaf.filter today or visit leaffilter.com.

♪♪ back now with the breaking news, the indictments in the arizona fake elector scheme. we're back with vaughn hillyard and tim heaphy. joining me now is joyce vance. i'll go to you first for your reaction, joyce. >> well, i think it's not surprising that we've seen this indictment. what's surprising in some regards is some of the expansion here, the inclusion of boris epstein. and kenneth chesebro may be finally cooperating but is not indicted but discussed in the indictment. this suggests that prosecutors in arizona have amassed the evidence that they need to go a

step further. it is horrible news for donald trump the middle of his criminal trial in manhattan. >> indeed. >> he is an unindicted coconspirator in this case. >> very quickly. there was a lot of criticism of fani willis rico case. this is an even more sprawling case, as you said, with even more people we hadn't heard before, christina bobb, boris epstein. to me it's a vindication in my mind, at least, of what she did in georgia. >> well, i think it suggests that fani willis was the immaculate career prosecutor we know her to be. tim will tell you this, too. when you're a prosecutor, there's no arbitrary limit on the number of people that you indictment in a case. you indictment the people who you have evidence against, core participants when you have a conspiracy setting like this and you don't arbitrarily say, well,

i've only got room for 12 people or only got room for 13 people. your job as a prosecutor is to hold people accountable for criminal conduct and that appears to be what's happening in arizona tonight. >> tim heaphy, give us contours of this new set of names. you have boris epstein. we know he san adviser to donald trump. we have christina bobb one of donald trump's lawyers. interesting to me -- i mean, john eastman, one of the architects of kenneth chesebro of the idea of using fake electors. the fact that he's still in it, in another one of these is interesting to me, mark roman. talk about this newly-expanded cast of characters and what they did from your role as an investigator. >> yeah. the two new names, joy, are christina bobb and boris epstein. they have not been previously charged. but they were part of the team. they were part of the legal team. christina bobb, lawyer and sometimes television commentator, boris epstein, i

believe a lawyer, involved in perp perpetuating the fake elector scheme. epstein is very, very close to the former president. one of those people even to this day continues to be part of the legal apparatus that is trying to assist the former president. so he has maintained a very close relationship with former president trump. christina bobb, i don't know is still in the orbit but for a period of time they were two of the voices. going back to what i said before about leaders and followers. neither of them were the architects of the strategy. john eastman and ken chesebro and then rudy giuliani as the quarterback, they are sort of the leaders of the conspiracy in terms of directing the actions of others. so bob, roman is not a lawyer, just a republican national committee staffer that was essentially facilitating the submission of the certificates.

they have strong incentive because they are less culpable to provide information about others further up the consperitorial level of culpability. >> indeed. one of the state actor is a sitting state senator, anthony kern. he did do a press conference on monday denouncing attorney maze and saying she was trying to use law fare to keep him from running for office this year in 2024. little more about him. what do you know about him? >> right. anthony kern has become a well-known name inside of arizona. largely because of not only his staunch defense of donald trump but the lengths which he has gone to defend him including going to the capitol on january 6th. he was not formally charged as part of his attendance there that day. but anthony kern, somebody, we go back to 2021, this was a sustained effort. folks remember the cyber ninjas. it was the state legislature ultimately subpoenaed the

ballots and they hired an outside firm along with volunteers. and one of those volunteers in one of the leading actors to have that forensic audit, that's what they called it, was anthony kern on the front lines of that. he was a frequent -- one of the volunteers, state legislatures, on the front lines there. if i may, joy, when we're talking about christina bobb, just a month ago, in fact, christina bobb was formally brought on. she was with the trump campaign here, 2024 campaign, formally brought on as the rnc as counsel position for their election integrity efforts here. so for this upcoming election. so she is still very much a player, much like boris epstein continues to work out of palm beach with donald trump, helping with his legal team. essentially working with all of his different counsel for all of his different cases and works to kind of come up with a common -- you know, with the former president strategy. and joy, also we were working through just this indictment

real fast, was able to make it to the point here where we were talking about john eastman. there was some revelation here that was named from maze indictment if i could just read it here. >> please. >> in which he outlines on -- talking about john eastman, whose name is redacted but we believe this was january eastman pushed then arizona speaker of the house rusty bowers to de-certify arizona's presidential electors telling him to, quote, just do it and let the court sort it out. bowers declined to do so. then on january 4th, eastman met at the white house with unindicted coconspirator number one, former president donald trump and mike pence and others to delay the election of the lawfully chosen. the point you're making clearly kenneth chesebro or john eastman themselves, there are individuals who are opening and working with attorney general

chris maze leading up to this indictment here today. >> wow. that is interesting information. thank you for that update. joyce, your reaction to that and just on the fact that eastman is now multiple times indictmented in this scheme, his law license has been challenged. this is ruined his life. this has been sort of his white whale since the year 2000 election. this idea that states could just overturn the will of the people and put whatever president they preferred in. this is a belief system he had for a really long time. give me your reaction to this new indictment and what we just heard from vaughn about the details. >> yeah. i mean, this i think illustrates the principle of play stupid games, win stupid prizes. this was an effort by john eastman, all accounts a formidable constitutional scholar to subvert the process to achieve a result that he wanted. not the result that voters wanted. not the will of the people.

but the leadership that john eastman thought the country should have. and so he took his knowledge about the constitution and the law and came one a slippery plan that he, as vaughn was just reading, thought he could advance far enough to take time and delay to let the court sort it out. and, of course, we all know how that came to sort of the fullness of the plan on january 6th, when the hope was something, some desperate last-minute hail mary strategy, could be used to prevent congress from certifying the electoral college vote for joe biden. so this really is, i think, in many ways we're finally seeing although it has taken years investigators and prosecutors have untangled the scheme. and they're seeing how folks at the time said we're only pursuing processes that are legal. we have doubts about the election and about fraud. they really didn't have those doubts. there was no evidence of fraud. many, many courts at this point

in time had rejected trump's lawsuits, trying to demonstrate fraud. and what this was was just a desperate grasp at holding on to power. that i think is what this indictment illustrates. and this is the point in time where often you will see people turn on each other in an effort to save themselves. >> yeah. >> as you pointed out, john eastman, lost his livelihood, lost his license, lost his career, lost respect. there's only one way for someone like that to come back. it's the john dean story, it's cooperating and moving forward. we don't know if that's true for him. but the appearance is that kenneth chesebro is cooperating. >> i will repeat what i said to our friend andrew weissmann earlier, an indictment certainly clarifies the mind. if there's any thought of cooperating for any of these 20 people in the state of arizona, now is the time. first one in the door gets the best deal. vaughn hillyard, timothy heaphy, joyce vance. double thanks to vaughn for getting and scrambling in front

of the camera and going through that indictment so quickly and giving us that breaking news. thank you very much, my friend. i appreciate all of you. and we will be right back. anwed will be right back. a lot of time thinking about dirt. at three in the morning. any time of the day. what people don't know is that not all dirt is the same. you need dirt with the right kind of nutrients. look at this new organic soil from miracle-gro. everybody should have it. it worked great for us. this is as good as gold in any garden. if people only knew that it really is about the dirt. you're a dirt nerd. huge dirt nerd. i'm proud of it! [ryan laughs]

an alternative to pills, voltaren is a clinically proven arthritis pain relief gel, which penetrates deep to target the source of pain with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicine directly at the source. voltaren, the joy of movement.

when others divide. we unite. with real solutions to help our kids. like community schools. neighborhood hubs that provide everything from mental health services to food pantries. academic tutoring to prom dresses. healthcare to after care. community schools can wrap so much around public schools. ...and through meaningful partnerships with families, they become centers of their communities. real solutions for kids and communities at aft.org business. they become centers of their communities. it's not a nine-to-five proposition. it's all day and into the night. it's all the things that keep this world turning. the go-tos that keep us going. the places we cheer. and check in. they all choose the advanced network solutions and round the clock partnership from comcast business. see why comcast business powers more small businesses than anyone else.

get started for $49.99 a month plus ask how to get up to an $800 prepaid card. don't wait- call today. imagine for a moment, that you are 16 weeks pregnant, you are excited. this is a blessing. now imagine planning the baby's life. the first smile, laugh, word. except one morning you wake up and all of a sudden you feel a gush of fluid. your wattages broke and you have a premature rupture of membranes. the doctors at the e.r. refuse to treat you because in normal times, the recommended standard of care would be to and department the. now, and our new dark ages, they send you home and wait for you to come to the brink of death, and maybe then they consider helping you. this is not a hypothetical situation.

it's a real woman in florida. she could be anywhere. this is medical care in a post.america. this is what donald trump and justice alito, cavanagh, barrett -- did the women in this country on purpose. because of their decision to overturn will be with -- roe v. wade, dr. david -- doctors are in impossible situations. -- biden administration had tried to find a way to help them. in july, 2022 -- on president biden's orders, told states with taccone and abortion bans they had a responsibility -- to provide pregnant women with stabilizing health emergency care, even if it includes abortion, or face losing federal funds. that directive but federal law in direct conflict with the laws in 14 states that now been abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with very limited exceptions.

earlier today, the supreme court heard arguments on one who has the final say, the red states, or the government. -- the only members on the board as the chief of constitutional litigation and policy for idaho's attorney general's office why abortion is not healthcare and why women should be left to die. >> the federal mandate is to provide stabilizing care for emergency conditions, regardless of any other directive that the state has or the hospital has that would prevent the care from being provided. that's the work of the statute. >> idaho is saying and left the doctor can say in good faith that the death is likely, as opposed to serious illness, they can perform the abortion. >> i guess the question here is, do you concede that with respect to certain medical

conditions, and abortion is the standard of care? >> no. >> the conservative male justices, especially justice alito seemed irritated with the ladies line of questioning, and seem to care less about the danger idaho's abortion that poses the women's lives, then what bringing this case does to the state authority. it is not clear the way the state will go. although they did allow the idaho abortion ban to go into effect without federal repercussions in january. if the conservative majority uphold the vision, it will further deepen the devastation and consequences that pregnant women are already experiencing. looked idaho, they lost 22% of practicing obstetricians since the abortion ban took effect. according to a report by the idaho physician well-being action collaborative. did more than half of their high risk obstetricians have left the state entirely. why wouldn't they?

the hospital listing a third or half as many ob/gyn's applying for jobs. you want to practice medicine in the state that could send you to prison for taking care of your patients? i think not. join me now is kylie cooper, a maternal fetal medicine physician. she worked in idaho but moved out of state after the abortion ban was enacted. thank you for being here, dr. cooper. tell us why you moved out of the state. >> i moved to the state to take a job as a maternal fetal medicine position, and to serve the people of idaho and caring for -- pregnancies. after the abortion ban went into effect, it affected my ability to prop this medicine in the way that i was trained. evidence-based -- care. so, initially after the ban went into effect, i was hopeful that lawmakers would listen to physicians and healthcare

providers in terms of the harms this would cause. but unfortunately, that did not seem to be the case. in thinking about my own future in idaho, having cared for complicated pregnancies and people experiencing emergent use, -- emergencies, the idea of having to withhold treatment or delay treatment with someone is having a life-threatening or serious pregnancy complication, because it was now deemed illegal, which is more than i could bear. ultimately, i made the very difficult decision to leave the state of idaho. >> you are far from alone, a lot of doctors are leaving the state for these reasons. i want you to hear to samuel alito and his indignation, talking about your state. here he is. >> so we have this phrase, emergency medical condition,

and that provision. and then under --, the term emergency medical condition is defined to include a condition that placed the health of the woman's unborn child in serious jeopardy. so, in that situation, the hospital must stabilize the threat to the unborn child. and it seems that the plan -- plain meaning is that the hospital must try to eliminate any immediate threat to the child. performing an abortion is antithetical to that duty. -- >> you go so far as to say that the statute is clear in your favor. i don't know how you can say that in light of the provisions i have just read to you. >> i know how i feel about listening to him or 10 he knows more than a doctor about treating a patient. how do you feel listening to him talk like that, as if he knows better how to treat a fetal emergency than you do? >> it is disheartening. certainly, as a maternity fetal

medicine physician, it is my job and goal to have the best outcomes for my patients. and their babies. the sad reality is pregnancy complications occur every day. and in some circumstances, they occur early in the pregnancies, where no matter where -- what we do, we cannot save the fetus. continuing the pregnancy in the setting of civic applications places the patient at risk, not just their life, but of losing their uterus, losing their ability to have more children in the future, having damage to the kidneys, their livers, having bleeding in the brain, a stroke, a seizure. there are situations where, sadly, the pregnancy has to end for them to survive it. >> i want to know for our viewers, arizona has overturned their 1840s era abortion ban, a

law that was passed in the 19th century. they have overturned it in the house, it will have to go to senate. -- i cannot believe 28 people voted to keep the old law. given the fact that many of these laws, dr. cooper, were passed before women even had the right to vote, with slavery was still legal, do you believe women are safe in states with these particularly total abortion bans? are women safe, medically? >> i think we as healthcare providers -- we want to do everything in our power to protect our patients. and the idea that we may not be able to do that is very demoralizing. but i worry that in states with these abortion bans, we just cannot provide the level of care that we should be able to. and that our patients deserve

to receive. so i do worry, this is going to cause a lot of harm to people. >> i think you are saying, no, women are not safe. women are not safe in the state where someone with your medical knowledge is not there anymore. with a cannot be treated by someone with your knowledge, and where ob/gyn's are leaving. are women safe in a state with a just cannot get ob/gyn care? >> absolutely, this is creating these maternity care deserts. idaho, we are already there. it is worsening. especially in more rural states, there is a safety net of subspecialist. different providers. and when you start moving pieces of that safety net, things start to fall apart. absolutely, this is dangerous. >> dr. kylie cooper, thank you so much. this is tonight's the reidout.