Morning Joe - Morning Joe 4/28/23

Episode Date: April 28, 2023

Trump lawyers question E. Jean Carroll's rape claims

Lindsey Graham, the progressive from South Carolina. No, he's a progressive, but he's got some good things to do, okay? I'm sorry I'm so upset, but please help President Trump. If you can afford five or ten bucks, if you can't afford a dollar fine, just pray. The progressive from South Carolina. But you need to help this man, Donald J. Trump. They're trying to drain him dry. He's a progressive. And if you've got any money to give, give it. But. They're trying to drain him dry. He's a progressive.

And if you've got any money to give, give it. But he's got some good things, too. Go tonight, give the president some money to fight this bull. Lindsey Graham, the progressive from South Carolina. You know, Elise. Oh, boy. It's like my southern mom said, Elise Jordan, no good deed goes unpunished. I mean, if you're a dog trainer and you can make a dog heal back quickly, you're a successful dog trainer.

You're a genius. Well, he'll be back, by the way. Lindsey will be back. You scream at him and he just is even more loyal. Willie, I would love to show you the front of the paper of record. Can you believe this? This is the paper of record for Morning Joe. I just really quickly, like, what is this?

Front page. Come on. Just put that down. I guess it's Sports Illustrated time, Rev. We need to cover that up. I don't forgive them. What they do. What's going on?

What they do. Oh, you know, you can. It's just that time of year for the New York Post. Moving right along. So we're in New York City. And well, you know, I'm a simple country lawyer. I'm a caveman lawyer, some people have said as well. But even I don't understand this. A mediocre caveman lawyer.

You're going to really ride with that mediocre Boston Red Sox thing for a while, aren't you? Every single day. Every day of my life. I see a new sweatshirt coming, Joe. The stunningly superficial one's getting old. We need your mediocre. I think that's a good one. I like that. So her father calls me stunningly superficial. She calls me a mountain of mediocrity. I'm just trying to figure out, like, who should I be more insulted by? We need merch. We need merch. We do need merch.

We do need merch. So, again, I'm just a simple country lawyer, but I would think that an attorney in New York City would not be screaming at a woman who is saying his client raped her and and time and time again as eugene carroll was telling the jury this this just horrific story about how she was raped um joe tacapino was was berating her yelling at her uh the The judge repeatedly had to call him off. It was it's not this this rape, this this trial involving a possible rape not going well for Donald Trump.

Well, yeah, the accounts from inside the courtroom from people who were there yesterday is that Joe Takapina, a familiar figure to a lot of people because he's been representing Donald Trump in the other case in Manhattan, was effectively harassing E. Jean Carroll on the stand as she told the story of what she says happened to her in the 1990s in that dressing room with Donald Trump. And the judge finally stopping to admonish Takapina and say, hey, you'll have time to make a closing argument. Now is not the time for that sort of him chiming in and interrupting E.G. Carroll throughout in a way that the judge thought was argumentative. So by most accounts, it was pretty ugly in that courtroom yesterday.

Danny, you were neither a country lawyer nor are you mediocre like me. So perhaps you can you can just verify for our friends at home, not good to yell at somebody who could have been a rape victim on the stand. I've cross-examined victims like this. It is really, really difficult, and you have to be very careful. It's one thing to cross-examine a cooperating witness, someone who is a criminal testifying against another criminal. Then you can lay on the fireworks. But when you're cross-examining a victim of sexual assault,

you have to be extra careful. You still have to explore things like their ability to perceive, their memory, whether or not they're motivated by something else. Right. And of course, in this case, and it's not a fun thing to talk about. But you have to explore why she took so long to report this. And we know now that that victims of sexual assault often never report because of fear of reprisal. And she said, I mean, it's pretty easy. At least she was scared. Sure. I mean, what is the percentage of women who are victims of sexual assault, sexual abuse, rape that will not respond because they don't want to go up on the stand and be abused by the rapist's attorney. There's so little incentive for women to put themselves

through that and to go on the stand. There are so many questionable questions of judgment surrounding Donald Trump's choice to attack his accuser in this throughout this process. But just number one, Danny, why doesn't he have a female lawyer? That would be a good strategy. You're absolutely right. He's not even showing up. Well, yes. And in a civil case, you don't have to. But, you know, my theory here is that Trump is essentially conceding this battle because he knows that he already had a deposition. That's when you sit down, you're under oath and you give a wide ranging, essentially an interview, but you're locked into your testimony. And the way Trump's team probably sees it far better to take my deposition if I'm not there. Show the jury the video, even cherry pick the good parts for the plaintiff.

That is far preferable than me taking the stand in open court and letting a plaintiff's attorney take shots at me. And so if that means he loses the civil case, fine. He probably thinks he's losing a battle, but in his mind, winning a political war. But Willie, you know what? He can't cherry pick. He can't cherry pick the Access Hollywood take, which basically reveals what his attitude has long been toward women.

And of course, I think that's one of the reasons he didn't want to be in there, because he was going to have to confront his own words. He was going to have to confront his own actions. And again, right now, think about it. We talk about all these other cases that are going on right now. This may be a civil case, but this is a case involving Donald Trump raping somebody, raping somebody. We talk about payoffs to porn stars. This is a case where he has been accused by E.G. and Carol of rape. He's not even showing up.

His lawyer screaming at the possible rape victim. And it's not going well. It's not going well. And that Access Hollywood tape, by the way, is admissible. It can be used in this trial, therefore likely will be used in this trial by Eugene Carroll's lawyers. Yeah. The tone, Danny, and I'm curious what you think of how this settles out, because it is a civil case and the standard is different. The tone from Joe Tacopini yesterday was why didn't you scream? If this was so bad, why didn't you scream out?

She said, I was terrified. I didn't know what to do. You know, all the things that rape victims are often harassed about, we heard in that courtroom yesterday. But what is the bar here for a civil judgment, unlike a criminal trial? It's preponderance of the evidence. It's probably the only burden of proof that can be expressed mathematically. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard. It's our criminal standard.

It is, you know, as lawyers like me will argue in closing, it's such a high standard. It doesn't mean beyond all doubt. It just means if you hesitate the way you might when you're looking at possibly buying a house or something like that. But preponderance of the evidence could be basically 51 percent because it's more likely than not. Or it's more accurately 50.0001 percent, whatever tips the needle one way or another. So it's a much lesser burden, much easier to make out. That's why so many civil cases settle, because defendants know they're facing a very difficult burden. And they'd rather manage that risk and end up paying money they know that they can quantify today rather than

just some runaway jury's verdict later on in the future. And then they have to spend more money appealing it. So the burden here is much lighter. But, you know, I have to say the tone maybe could have been changed. But a defense attorney in a case like this, whether it's criminal or civil, because this really is it mirrors a criminal case. He has to explore the credibility of the victim on cross-examination. He has to do it. Now, the way you do it, you have to be nuanced. You have to be polite. You have to be respectful of the witness. So that's the key. And if you don't, the jury's going to see that and they're not going to like it. So it is a needle you have to thread. And I got to tell you, it is hard to thread that needle.

I've done it myself. I don't know if I've done it successfully, but it is hard. And Rev, you know, Joe Takapena, you know, the attorney very well. He didn't thread any needle yesterday. He just kind of kicked open the barn door and went in. You know, I was surprised at how aggressive he was. And as particularly given his client, who he knows has a tape out there saying you just grab. Right. I mean, if you want to indict yourself, just play the tape. And and he's laughing about that he's admitting and he's instructing somebody how to do this this is how you do it this was not joe's best day let's put

it no no joe tacopina that is mika also some news with mike pence he ended up testifying after all of the twists and the turns and the fading couches and the protesting too much. He testified. He always knew he was going to have to testify. Exactly. It was before a federal grand jury investigating the January 6th insurrection. This is according to a source familiar with the matter. This is the grand jury that was convened by special counsel Jack Smith, investigating former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss and stay in power. Two black SUVs entered the courthouse

garage around 9 a.m. yesterday, an entrance that would allow witnesses to head up to the grand jury rooms without being seen by the public. The SUVs left the courthouse about 4.30 p.m. NBC News has learned special counsel Jack Smith's team is particularly interested in Trump's efforts to try to block the certification of the election. And Joe, I guess, you know, that naivete in me would say, why wouldn't he want to testify about something so important? I mean, if if if you follow Mike Pence, there might be a lot of things that you think are a little bit, you know, why did he serve for Trump for so long? What what was his motivation at the same time? If it was his commitment to the country, right? Isn't his commitment to the country also to testify about

this? Well, listen, he had to know his lawyers had to tell him from the very beginning because we could have told him from the very beginning. You're going to have to testify. You look at every one of these issues. The Supreme Court has all been brushing aside assertions of privilege from the very beginning. They're not going to stand in the way of any investigation regarding January the 6th. They again, 63, 64 times these federal judges, even even federal judges who were appointed by the Federalist Society, didn't buy into any of the lies regarding the widespread election fraud. They're just not playing. So Pence knew this, but he could look like the reluctant witness for Republican primary voters. It's what he did, but he knew he's going to have to go there. And so, David, you're the one with all the great DOJ sources. Come on, spill it right here. What are they doing? Where are they

going? I know a lot of people are like Claire McCaskey says, justice delayed is justice denied. I understand this January 6th case is the most complicated. Doesn't seem like that obstruction cases is so complicated on the documents. Talk about the DOJ's pacing of their investigations. I think it's picked up a lot under Jack Smith. The last the most important January 6th witness in terms of, you know, Trump's mindset, his intent is Mike Pence. They had all these conversations. Did Trump knowingly pressure him to overturn the results of the election? You know, should he did he know or should he have known that this was illegal? So this is I think was a big step forward. I'm glad Pence did this. I think he deserves credit for what he did on January 6th.

Yeah. You know, there's talk of, you know, and then the obstruction case is also a very clear case. So I think you could see Jack Smith, you know, doing something, making a decision this summer, maybe. But I think he has going to be busy summer. It's going to be a very busy summer. But he's been very aggressive on all these fronts, both January 6th and the classified documents. Yeah. And Danny, I'm curious your take not only on this, but also on all of the cases. It is a potpourri for us to pick from. I will tell you what I've seen in polling, and it makes sense, actually, is, I mean, we all get the obstruction. He did something that Biden and Pence didn't do. There's something about that Georgia case that really wrinkles voters. You look at polls and they go, yeah, we hear the phone call where he's talking to one of his supporters and he's saying,

rig this election. Just get me enough votes to overturn it. That's coming this summer. The documents case most likely coming this summer. I'm sure January 6th may be after all of that because it is such a complex case. But how do you see all of these things lining up? Understanding we're going to be in full election mode by late August, early September. We've entered the twilight zone because we may be thinking about what courts will prioritize their criminal prosecution of a former president over the next year. And how will these courts decide whether or not to have trial before or after the election? I mean, it's really not always just up to the courts. Courts will work with litigants. So

the real question becomes, what do the litigants want? What does Trump want? What does the government want if they indict him? And going back to Georgia, you're right. I mean, I always thought that Georgia presented a real threat. And that's because I never imagined that New York County, the Manhattan D.A. was any threat. I mean, that's just my opinion. I didn't think that was that was not a case that was high on my list of potential. By the way, let's circle back to that, because we asked the question at the time, why did he bring that? Like if he was going bring if alvin bragg was going to bring that i expected more because he had said no a year before he comes back later i'm thinking well 847 million uh counts of of of felonies there has to be something there right there was nothing not nothing that he didn't have a year before when he decided not to go forward have you you figured that out yet? Exactly right. And all the counts were related to hush money

payments, which I think are hugely problematic because this was a I guess you'd call it a task force of really brilliant people, including Mark Pomerantz, who wrote a tell all book about it, which gave me really for me was like a groundbreaking event, because for the first time, a defense attorney like me got to look at the inner workings of a task force of really brilliant prosecutors. What did you find? What did I find? Yeah. What did you find in reading it? In reading it, I found that these well, according to Mark Pomerantz, that the he confirmed something that I always thought was true, that prosecutors, whether state or federal,

are subtly or psychologically reluctant to indict a former president. Well, I mean, that makes a lot of sense. So why did he indict a former president a year later when he didn't have any new evidence? Well, that's what I don't get that part. That's the part we don't get. And I understand that prosecutors look, prosecutors are judged very much on their wins and losses. And going after the most difficult defendant of all time is a scary prospect. I don't blame them. Maybe that explains the waffling back and forth. But ultimately, I mean, if Bragg, according to Pomerantz, was in the no camp, what brought him back to the yes camp?

And if he did, if they were investigating all these other things like New York's equivalent of the RICO statute, tax violations, inflating your value for loans and deflating it when it came to paying taxes, why were none of those in there? Why are we only dealing with hush money payments? And if the answer is, as prosecutors, we only like layups. We only like sure things. We only like things we know we can prove. I don't know that that's a good enough answer for me, because if you spend that much time investigating him and you think that he did something wrong, then you should indict. That's kind of the thesis of Pomerantz's book. Don't shy away from a difficult prosecution. Right. And instead, we have all these multiple counts. And till the very end, Joe, I held out hope that there would be something in addition to the hush money payments,

because I've always thought they were problematic as a process. Yeah. And Willie, again, there's so many strong cases against Donald Trump, the obstruction case. I'm sorry. It's easy for me to say from the cheap seats, it looks like a slam dunk. The obstruction case looks like a slam dunk. Georgia man, the fact pattern horrible for Donald Trump. Absolutely horrible. They got tapes. It's not good. That's not going to end well. So, again, you just kind of wonder why Alvin Bragg, if he didn't have anything else, didn't just step back and let these strong cases move forward. I mean, just think for a second, as you sit and listen to this conversation, you're watching at home what we're talking about. This is

a former president of the United States. Right. just in the first 20 minutes of this show listed four or five now with the civil rape trial, different cases that this guy is in the middle of. I'm in the middle of as he runs for president, Joe rape trial, a civil rape trial, hush payments to porn stars rigging an election in Georgia that they got caught on tape and lying to the D.O.J. Make America great again. I think not. Or taking documents to your beach club in Florida. We can add that to the list as well. So, Jonathan Lemire, you wrote the book on this, The Big Lies. We get back to Mike Pence's testimony to that grand jury yesterday. It's worth reminding everyone what he knows, what he might be able and willing to share with the grand jury in this case. He did, as Joe said, offer that token pressure, refusing the subpoena.

Donald Trump fought against the subpoena. The courts again and again said, no, you have to show up. And Mike Pence knew that, but went through those paces to show he was at least pushing back a little bit, I guess. But what do you think he shared yesterday? What did he go through in those days around January 6th and leading up to January 20th? Yeah, first of all, I think that's the right analysis of the political calculation in the year 2023. The Pence trying to play it both ways. No one's really quite sure what his lane is in a GOP primary, but he needed to be seen as fighting back against a Biden Justice Department in an

investigation against Donald Trump. So that's that even though it was sort of inevitable that we would get to this point and he would have to testify. Mike Pence was, of course, at the center of the scheme to overturn the election, that Trump and his allies, and it's worth reflecting back on this, and I do cover this extensively in my book, in those days after the election when it seemed very clear that their initial legal challenges weren't gonna go anywhere,

his team concocted scheme after scheme in terms of how they could overturn the election, and a lot of them centered on, after a few weeks, this idea of substituting fake electors, having the states put other electors forth before Congress, and therefore having those thrown out and have the House of Representatives potentially then throw, with Mike Pence helping, throw the race to Donald Trump. And Mike Pence was pressured.

He was pressured by Trump. He was pressured by others in Trump's orbit. We know that he, Pence, consulted former Vice President Dan Quayle as to what to do. Dan Quayle remains an unlikely hero of the republic here. And Pence... Can you mark that down for a second? Hold on. Hold on.

Yeah, doesn't happen often. Savior of republic, Dan Quayle. Mark that down in your book. Yes. Got it. I'm telling you, I'm not being facetious here. And this is the thing, and I'm so glad you said, David, that Mike Pence deserves credit for it. He stayed in the Capitol.

He refused to leave. He oversaw the certification of the vote. Winston Churchill had one good year. He saved Western civilization. Mike Pence had a good day. He helped save American democracy. Thanks, Willie. Thanks, Willie.

To Dan Quayle. A good goal for two, I hear. Ironically, I had that. I was thinking about Dan Quayle during this conversation. I had the exchange from Bob Woodward and Bob Costa's book pulled up, Jonathan Lemire. I'll be brief. But over and over, Pence asked if there was anything he could do.

Quayle told him, quote, Mike, you have no flexibility on this. None, zero, forget it, put it away. And then he goes on to say that Mike Pence said, but wait, you don't know the position I'm in. Dan Quayle said, I do know the position you're in. I also know what the law is. You listen to the parliamentarian. That's all you do. You have no power, end quote from Dan Quayle said i do know the position you're in i also know what the law is you listen to the parliamentarian that's all you do you have no power end quote from wow well boom that's great

and well was right and but what pence is has and what pence can offer it perhaps to jack smith and his investigators he was the only person in the room for some of these conversations, particularly in those last days. We know on January 5th, Trump and Pence had a one-on-one conversation. Pence can testify as to what was said, what efforts that Donald Trump on the eve of the insurrection,

what he said to Pence in that last-ditch effort. We also know there was one follow-up phone call the next morning. So that is why Pence can detail everything that we sort of know already from other members of this play, other people in Trump's orbit. But Pence and Pence alone can speak to those conversations and to Trump's mindset in just the hours before the insurrection. Yeah, you know, Rev, in Scarborough country days,

we had a bumper sticker that we sold. And it said, my other car is an SUV. And it's double parked in Scarborough Country. Here, Morning Joe, we've got two bumper stickers for you. One, Dan Quayle was right. I heard somebody say that. Yes. And two, Joe Scarborough is both stunningly superficial and miraculously mediocre.

That's a good one. You can put that one. We're making the hoodie already, Joe. It's going to be a great hoodie. Front and back. Stunningly superficial on the back. Miraculously mediocre on the front. Yes.

We'll sell them in front of 30 Rock. Don't bump us, T. But I think that what is critical about what we just talked about is that the quail conversation also meant that Pence was put on notice. This is the law. And what Trump is asking him to do is to say, well, we were guessing when he was told by a former vice president, there's nothing to guess here. There's no flexibility. So Pence had to choose not only between Trump and

the law, but himself, because you have a witness in Dan Quayle. I told him this was the law. That's crazy. By the way, Mika, I was on my world tour of mediocrity. I may have missed this, but did you ever apologize to Danny for getting rust, getting the rust set thing right? Let me get in position here. Did you ever apologize? Because you roughed Danny up pretty badly when he said that these charges should never have been brought. Yeah, I did say that. Good morning, Mika. I did say that. And hi. Hi. Can we just have a one-on-one with them? Can we do a split with them really quickly?

Mika? No, no. That's so awkward. Danny doesn't want that. He's sitting here. We'd all like to hear anything to say to Danny this morning before we go. I'm sorry, Danny. Mika, I'm wrong almost all the time.

This one, it's that broken clock analogy. I happen to be right about rust. In Mika's defense, if Alec Baldwin and his wife had not opened their big mouths in the aftermath, they probably would have avoided getting it all caught up again. I wonder about that. Probably true. Listen, I can't tell you, any criminal defense attorney will tell you that a client has ruined their case by opening their

mouth either before or after they're arrested. It's happened to me. It's happened to everybody. And Danny, go ahead, Joe. I was just going to say to Elise, we should name him an honorary southerner. You heard that false modesty. That's what we do. OK, because I'm always right. I mean, never right. I'm all right. Twice. That's what we do in the South'm always right i mean never right i'm all right twice that's what we do in the south it's false modesty is taken to an art form but danny no uh yeah an honorary southerner mika bless danny's heart thank you he was right and uh and i was stuck on the whole gun safety issue because i had been taught all my life about gun handling and how you just never point a gun. So at someone. But, yep, Danny, you know the law. That's why we have you on. Danny Savella, thank you so much. Thank you for being on this morning.

It's it's so fascinating when I went to Poland and we and we spoke with a survivor of the Holocaust. That's now I know this would be hard for some people on the Trump right to imagine that capital has now been sort of recharged as the people's house. this survivor of the Holocaust, survivor of Auschwitz, saying when we looked the United States Capitol on January 6th and we saw how you fought back not just that day, but day after day after day. He said, I knew exactly what you Americans were doing and you weren't just fighting for yourself. You weren't just fighting for your freedom. You were fighting for all of our freedoms. And he looked at us and he said, I know what I'm talking about. I know how tyrannies began. And that's how tyrannies began. Hard to look at that Capitol without thinking about not just the sacrifice of the people on that day, but the professionals who are actually enforcing the rule of law day in and day out across America, who are lied about, who were abused, who some, the former president of

the United States tries to get their names out there, FBI agents' names out there, and people on other networks try to get FBI agents' names out there to put their lives at risk and their families' life at risk. Well, their patriotic work, it's being noticed. And it's being noticed not just in America, but from people who love freedom across the globe. Speaking of loving freedom, speaking of fighting for Western democracy, fighting for free elections

and fighting for freedom of the press, because this is something also that Marian talked about when we were over in Poland on the 80th anniversary of the Warsaw ghetto uprising. He talked about freedom of the press. He talked about how critical a free press was to pushing back against the constant lies, which brings us to Evan Gershkovich in jail on bogus charges by a regime that actually expects one day to be admitted back into the

world community. What can you tell us? Where is this right now? So yesterday, first of all, your background, obviously, you've been through this. Held myself long ago with the Taliban. Evan Gershkovich, an incredibly brave, wonderful 31 year old reporter. So yesterday, the U.S. put sanctions on the FSB, the Russian intelligence agency for holding Evan. Paul Whelan and other Americans have been held for nearly five years. And they also put sanctions on Iran's intelligence agencies. There's three Americans currently held in Iran. My friend Jason Rezaian, you know, another journalist.

And it is about silencing the press. It's about democracy. It's about freedom of information. This is a struggle against. Talk about what Evan was doing, what he was working on. He was showing the impact of these sanctions on the Russian economy he was doing nothing wrong I've met countless friends of him there he's an amazing guy I was so proud of how he stood in court there and looked so so strong it was great to see

Brittany Greiner playing basketball again smiling yesterday but also saying how she's thinking of him so 53 Americans held abroad now, most of them by authoritarian regimes around the world. These sanctions are a step to try to deter that, to say there's a cost to do this. But this is going to be a long struggle. But this is part of the fight for democracy. A fight for freedom, Rev, a fight for the free press, a fight that too many people in this country don't appreciate. Too many don't appreciate it. And I'm glad he mentioned Britney, because two weeks ago, Britney Griner came to the National Action Network's convention in New York. First time she's really come out. And you cannot imagine

the trauma and what Evan must be going through, because you get get sense around Britney that she just doesn't even want to talk about what it is to be like in a Russian prison for doing nothing. She'll only appeal to our audience was we have to keep fighting for those that are left in Russia. And she mentioned Evan. She says, don't just fight for me because I'm black. Fight for Evan. And I and I could sense she knows what he's going through without saying it. And people need to really deal with it. And journalists all over the world ought to be standing up for Evan. Now, fight for Evan. And don't forget Paul. Dozens of Russian journalists being held also local journalists all around the world. That's who he really wants to silence. Yeah. All right.

So so, Jonathan Lemire, what's the White House's plan on Evan? Well, this is a weekend where they're going to shine a bright spotlight on it. It is the White House Correspondents Dinner tomorrow night, which will be nationally televised. Evan's family will be guests of the White House Correspondents Association there. The president will meet with them. The president is going to, in his speech tomorrow, there'll be some humorous remarks off the top, as always. But then he's going to make a very serious pitch about the importance of the freedom of the press, the importance of the First Amendment,

and going to call again for Evan to be sent home. And there is some hope here that there could be some starts of talks down the road, but the Russians are throwing up obstacle after obstacle. And in fact, Sergei Lavrov throwing a fit this week about some Russian journalists who didn't get a visa to travel with him to New York to cover his appearance at the United Nations

and now is barring a consular visit with Evan in Moscow with U.S. officials there, the ambassador there. So there is at this moment, no signs of progress, but the White House is gonna try to use this weekend to again shine a spotlight on on how unfortunate, unfair and illegal the situation is. All right. We're going to be following this story and we're also following the battle for access to abortion. The Nebraska legislature is unlikely to pass a six week abortion ban. Lawmakers fell just short of one vote needed to break a filibuster, so the bill probably won't move forward this legislative session. The measure would have

banned abortions once a heartbeat is detected. Republican Governor Jim Pillen is in favor of it and called yesterday's vote unacceptable. This is the second straight year Nebraska lawmakers have failed to pass further abortion restrictions. The procedure is currently allowed up to 20 weeks of pregnancy. Meanwhile, South Carolina state senators have again rejected a bill that would have banned nearly all abortions in the state. Six Republicans voted against the legislation yesterday. It would have banned the procedure at conception with exceptions for rape or incest through the first trimester, fetal abnormalities in the fetus, or if a woman's life is in danger. Republican female senators took

the floor to voice their opposition, saying that while they are pro-life, they feel this bill goes too far. Some of the preaching has sounded, and I just have to point this out, some of it has sounded condescending, demeaning, cold, and judgmentalal no matter the intent there are millions of women millions of women in this state who feel like they've been personally addressed in this legislation there are millions of women who feel like they have not been heard and that's why i'm standing up here this long but i don't want any woman to have abortions. And to have another senator sit there and tell me that I'm not pro-life because I don't say no woman can ever have an abortion, that is crazy.

I don't want any women to have abortion. But most certainly, they should be allowed to have some access to what the senator from Anderson has already admitted is health care. It's about real people with real lives who face real challenges that require them to make real decisions that are best for them and their families. Reproductive rights are human rights. Abortion is currently legal in the state through 22 weeks of pregnancy. This is now the third time since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade

that a near total abortion ban has failed in the South Carolina Senate. They keep trying. But, Joe, you know, Republicans are missing their nose in front of their face because these are realities that will come to a home or a family near them where a woman has a problem and cannot get the health care she needs. We just showed on our show yesterday a woman from Texas who nearly died and she had to wait until a hospital board decided whether she was sick enough to get a termination. So she nearly died and her life was on the line. The baby was not going to make it. And she's waiting and she's septic. And she's waiting for a hospital board to decide whether or not she can receive health care. It's it's shocking.

It's astounding. It's one of the Republican legislators said women said in South Carolina, it's out of The Handmaid's Tale. You have men telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies, even when they are close to dying. And I will say, aside from all these personal tragedies, and these old men telling young women what they can do with their bodies. As I said this past week, a 67 year old bachelor with no children from South Carolina screaming about abortion and and and and banning abortion. This is surreal. And it turns a political truth on its head. We heard Tip O'Neill famously saying that all politics is local.

I get that as a politician. I get that. But this is a case where all politics is national. You have an extreme ban passed in nebraska it wasn't but if an extreme ban is passed then that congressional district in omaha that gives up one electoral vote every year either every four years either to a republican or a democrat you watch that's going bright blue women in texas people in texas say well, we can do whatever the hell we want to do here on abortion. We can make women second, third, fourth class citizens. Even when women who are pro-life are saying this makes no sense, this extreme. A woman who almost dies in Texas,

that's a story that's read by women and men who give a damn in the Philly suburbs and the Atlanta suburbs and Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania and these horrible stories in Florida. And by the way, everybody thinks Florida is gone forever. Take a deep breath. Keep getting more extreme Republicans on guns. Keep getting more extreme on abortion. I got news for you. People from the Northeast and the Midwest, they ain't coming to Florida for total abortion bans and for watching women die in bathrooms

because a board hasn't decided whether they can they can operate on a woman and save her life i'm telling you at least these these these state legislators are looking at their small districts and what they don't understand is they are creating horror stories that are being read across the nation. I said this after Easter. My pro-life family, I don't want to know what percentage of them voted for Trump. They reminded me. Do you see women turning septic? Right.

Because they aren't able to have the health care that would enable them to save their lives. It's absurd. But they all had that story But they all had those stories. And they all say, this is madness. We're pro-life. But you can't do this to women. That's why if you want to keep women's health free in this country, it has to be referred to as women's health.

This is about access to health care. It is about keeping the government out of health care. When you have to convene a board to decide on a medical procedure that's life-saving, that is exactly the opposite of what the founders would have wanted. It's exactly the opposite of what conservatives should want if they don't want the government

involved in every facet of their life. Elise, and I've told people this since I saw your focus group. You had the Trump people in Georgia. You had that one guy. There wasn't a conspiracy theory. This guy wasn't all in for a one after another, after another. But then you asked him about abortion. Are you pro-life?

And he said, and it was just one of those moments. I remember Halperin and Heilman had a focus group in 2016 where they asked this woman who was blue collar, had tattoos, looked like, just looked like she was the opposite. It was New Hampshire, the opposite of what a Trump voter would be, what we thought a Trump voter would look like. And she said, he's one of us. And at that moment, we all looked at each other and said, OK, this guy has got something. This guy's got something going. When I saw your focus group and this Trump guy who was in on all the conspiracies, you asked him about abortion.

He goes, why should I have an opinion on abortion? It's not for me. I'm a man. I have no say in this. It's kind of like the curtain tore in half and you could actually see into the mind of the American voter. And that's what we've seen in Kentucky since. It's what we've seen in Kansas. So in Wisconsin, what we're going to see across America. And that's where most Republican voters are. They are not extreme on this issue the way that extremists have hijacked the party, just as they have with gun rights, too. They Republicans want to have a strong Second Amendment.

They don't necessarily support high volume magazines. If you look at the polling, if you talk to Republican voters about what measures they actually support, there's plenty about the gun laws right now that they think, yeah, we could have better background checks. But you look at how it's been hijacked, the extremism on the right with guns in particular, and then with abortion, you see how what's happening on the left, it would be like if Medicare for all and if I ban the police, stop, you know, defund the police, if that actually had some success. It's just these polls have completely taken over the conversation and are dominating in a way that is not reflective

of where American voters are. Yeah. And Joe, as you know, there are many, many Republicans who understand this. They understand that these laws are bad for women, number one, but number two, bad politically. One of the women, a Republican state senator we just heard from there, turned to the Senate majority leader in South Carolina, a man who's pushing this ban and said, you are taking us off a cliff on the issue of abortion. She addressed the women's issue side of it, the medical side of it, but then started talking about the politics. You are driving us off a cliff. And you know who agrees with her? Donald Trump. Remember after the midterm elections when he posted and said we lost? Now, a lot of this was him taking the heat off of himself. But he did say we lost because of the abortion issue. He understands that. He criticized Ron DeSantis for signing that six week abortion ban. There are people who get

this. The question is, will they stand up and push back on it? And at least in South Carolina and Nebraska yesterday, they did. Republicans did. Right. Well, after Roe was overturned, Donald Trump was freaking out. We heard reports from people around Donald Trump said this is going to be a nightmare in the suburbs. This is going to be a nightmare among more educated voters. And and I mean, he was absolutely right. You know, while he did appoint the three justices, Joe, that right overturned Roe versus Wade. So he's having a both ways there. But yeah, nobody ever suggested Donald Trump was consistent on anything. But you look, David, you think about this and just to show how much Republicans are out of

step, these especially these extreme Republicans, these MAGA Republicans, as Joe Biden would say. If we had and Bill Clinton references when I was talking to him in Belfast last week, if every state had a referendum on abortion, if every state had a referendum on universal background checks, if every state had a referendum on red flag laws, if every state had a referendum on restricting, not right-banding, but restricting the sale of military-style weapons. 45, 40, I'm serious, 46, 47 of those 50 states would pass a majority of those referendums requiring universal background checks, requiring requiring red flag laws, requiring restrictions on military style weapons, making sure that women have access to health care.

It wouldn't be close. And this is the Republican Party's problem. They got these state legislators and governors going to the extreme, extreme, extreme right. And they're going to end up continuing to destroy the National Party. I have two daughters, the classic dad thing. I've had a 13-year-old and an 8-year-old. They are doing active, you know, shooter drills in their school. This is how they've grown up. Will they have the right to choose?

And what's so amazing, again, this is South Carolina and Nebraska, that you had two Republican women standing up in the state Senate as Republicans and fighting back. It is all politics is local. They're worried about, you know, losing their local election because that's how extreme this has become. And it's just it's just dangerous for the whole country when you have the extremes driving the agenda this way. I agree with you. Guns, you know, women's health care. They're way out over their skis. It's going to hurt them. No doubt about it. And I think even in the faith community and I'm talking to people that are certainly probed life when it

comes to their own choices. They're saying this is going too far and we can't get caught out there like this when we legislate our religious beliefs. And I think that they are really, really far right on this, really missing where the tone of the public is. We talked about it yesterday, Rev. We are we are living in Jerry Falwell's America right now in the church, the evangelical church. Nobody wants to hear this. Everybody freaks out that I grew up with when I remind them of this. The Southern Baptist Church was pro-choice until Jerry Falwell. That's right.

Until Paul Weyrich. That's right. Until Richard Vigory. That's right. Until they decided, as Elton John would say, don't shoot me, I'm only the piano player. Until they decided, how do we run against a Southern Baptist who's running for re-election? How do we get evangelicals not to vote for Jimmy Carter in 1980? What do we do?

Jerry Falwell, Richard Vigery, Paul Weirich said, we will make abortion a religious issue. And you could even look at what Richard Land said. Said until 1979 or 1980, Southern Baptists focused on humans that were breathing. That's right. Focused on humans that were breathing. But then Jerry Falwell and these two direct mail guys that wanted to elect Ronald Reagan said, wait a second, abortion is now an issue for conservatives, for Republicans, for evangelicals.

Don't vote for Jimmy Carter. Vote for Ronald Reagan. That's exactly what happened. It had nothing to do with the issue. It was about politics and how to beat Jimmy Carter. Well, and these people, these people that'll go, well, Elyse, and now you hear it. Well, you're not right on abortion. So you're not a Christian. I'm like, oh, so you're saying that my grandmom, my grandmom who raised her kids in the Great

Depression and who lived for Jesus 24-7 wasn't a Christian? Like, I'm just curious how we went from the birth of Jesus to the year the Eagles broke up and abortion wasn't the preeminent issue. Think about this. Think about this. Evangelicals were pro-choice when the Beatles broke up. Evangelicals were pro-choice when the Eagles broke up. And now suddenly you talk to people and they tell you, this is how you define whether you're a Christian or not. Who decided that? Oh, I actually know who decided that. Jerry Falwell and direct mail people who wanted to beat a Southern Baptist Democrat. And not everyone really went along with it, though.

Deep at the core. I was in the Southern Baptist Church in the era where it was all pro-life and it became a single issue voter. They were successful in making this single single issue here that's what that's the church that i will never forget being in church one sunday and i was a kid this was in the 80s and they put up on the screen at the end some pictures of partial birth abortion my dad took my hand, got me out. Yeah, it was extreme again. Well, the thing is, the thing is, again. I've said this time and again, Mika, if you are pro-life, I certainly understand why I've got so many friends who are pro-life. I also have friends who are pro-life, who who also believe women should make their choices on their health care.

So, you know, I'm not I'm not going after people who say, well, I'm a Christian and because I'm a Christian, I'm just saying they somehow with Christian nationalism, abortion has become the central tenet, the central tenet of evangelical, the evangelical faith. And that didn't happen until 1980. You know, and when I bring this up before people go, oh, well, wait, the Catholic Church in the second century. Yeah, but I keep saying Jesus didn't talk about in the gospel. Well, if you look when they, Jeremiah, he said, before you even, Jesus didn't talk about it in the gospel. Well, the Catholic church said Jesus didn't talk about it in the gospels. So again, you can read the gospels and say, well, you know from this this that the other but it's kind of hard when you're for absolutely every war when you want absolutely everybody to be executed when you don't want to provide any any support to babies once they're born you're pro-life

from conception to the moment of birth i don't i don't think that's what jesus meant when he said let the little children come. But I also think we need to stress that most Americans aren't for abortion up until the time of conception. So I think you're absolutely right in what you're saying. But I think that when so many pro-choice activists and they're well-intentioned, but when they're saying abortion, safe, legal until every phase of pregnancy, most Americans don't agree with that either. That's too extreme for most Americans. They are not there. If you look at the polls and nobody will like this, if you look at where the consensus is, it's about 15, 16, 17 weeks. Just

is again. Look again, that's just the reality. People, pro-choice people who, you know, whatever. But most Americans say 15, 16, 17 weeks with exceptions. And if you are looking at the evangelical faith or the Catholic faith, you know, central tenants are forgiveness and kindness and love. And these positions are brutal. They're brutal and cruel. They have women dying on hospital beds because they can't get the health care they need. So it just it's mind blowing that they can hold on to this so tightly as they lose their voters. David Road, thank you very much. David will be joining the NBC News family next week as senior executive editor covering national security.

So we congratulate you and we welcome you. Thank you very much.