- 4 hours ago
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:00Hi, Nicole. Thanks so much. Welcome to The Beat. I'm Ari Melber, and we are following
00:04actual investigative developments in how Congress is dealing with the Epstein files. There's
00:10a billionaire, and if you don't know his name, you certainly know his business background.
00:14Les Wexner will be grilled tomorrow. This is part of what has become a bipartisan rebuke
00:20to Donald Trump over and over on the Epstein files. He said no new files. Congress made
00:26him release them. That's the story we've been following. He said, let it go. It's an old
00:29story. Congress said, no, there's more to do, and so it stays in the news because of
00:33these actual investigative developments. Now, Wexner had a long and very big kind of business
00:41relationship with Epstein. The question is what kind of business, but tens of millions
00:45of dollars were exchanged. This deposition will occur in Ohio. That's part of an accommodation
00:51of the witness who is 88 years old. Now, when I mention business, what these two men did
00:57in business is part of what's under investigation. So on the one hand, we could tell you that
01:01Wexner was a successful businessman, a billionaire, and that he was also a benefactor of Epstein,
01:06that he helped him financially. And maybe that's all there was to it. We want to be careful
01:10and follow the facts. But lawmakers, investigators, and independent journalists have raised the
01:16question of just why so much of Wexner's money ended up in Epstein's pockets. At one point,
01:23Epstein was managing Wexner's finances. Then they did sever ties. And that was in 2007 as more heat
01:30came on Epstein. What we're learning from the files, though, is that Wexner is in there over
01:35a thousand times. Emails, lawsuits that seem to involve potentially both of them. And the DOJ has
01:41even modified some of the redactions to the 2019 FBI file that showed they were looking at whether
01:47Wexner had exposure related to the crimes they were investigating Epstein for. Now, we want you to
01:52understand what Wexner has said, and this is prior to even the new files release. He maintains
01:56that they had a kind of professional relationship and that ultimately he became disenchanted with
02:02what he viewed as Epstein's failures or misconduct with regard to finances. Now, Wexner will be only
02:08the second person to speak before Congress since the files were released. You can see a lot of the
02:12pressure on many of these individuals we've been tracking, while Trump Commerce Secretary Lutnik,
02:17caught lying to minimize his visit to Epstein Island, remains in the cabinet. So there is a
02:22kind of a clash between accountability for some and not others. Congress has some efforts to
02:30investigate, and we've seen that in a, at times, bipartisan way. While there's also been an effort
02:36to distract or look at certain individuals, for example, the calls to investigate powerful men,
02:43some of whom might be implicated in this, are a long ways from going after Hillary Clinton. Here's
02:49what she's saying.
02:52What we're seeing, I think it's fair to say, is a continuing cover-up by the Trump administration.
02:58There's something about this administration's attitude toward this, which I think really leads
03:06us to conclude they have something to hide. They are slow-walking it. They are redacting the names
03:11of men who are in it. They are stonewalling legitimate requests from members of Congress.
03:17That has nothing to do with us. Something is going on. They know it. I know it.
03:24That's Hillary Clinton, who, of course, as I mentioned, has been targeted by some of the
03:28Republicans. Although, when you go looking for rich, powerful men who may have gotten away with
03:32something, she wouldn't really be on the list, not based on the files or the information we have.
03:38Now, Republican Thomas Massey, who has been really seen as a good-faith bipartisan collaborator here,
03:45working with Democrats to get to the bottom of this, says, on any given day,
03:48I need one or two of my own co-conspirators to get something done. Once we get past Republican
03:52primaries, I think you're going to see defections. That's his reference to the fact that Trump still
03:58has, of course, more sway in primary season, but there is a lot more that they can do if they
04:03get
04:03the votes. Now, what's happening out there? What has happened in places where we've seen that the
04:10files show prosecutors and investigators might have been pressured out of doing a full investigation
04:16or fallen down on the job and the things we've shown you on our timeline? Well, this is interesting.
04:20The state of New Mexico now has a new probe into Epstein's ranch there. Survivors have said they
04:26were abused. That ranch has been known for a long time. What we're seeing is how information,
04:31investigation, and public pressure can lead to investigations that otherwise were not going to
04:36happen. Columbia has now sanctioned two individuals that they think helped Epstein's girlfriend
04:41gain admission there, again, through how his largesse may have distorted things long,
04:46far away from his own accused sex crimes, but just the sort of way he wielded influence.
04:51Two prominent business people facing consequences over their ties to Epstein.
04:55We reported, for example, on the Wasserman issue, his ties to Maxwell, not to any alleged crimes per
05:01se, have led to him having to sell off his entire talent agency. Others across the spectrum facing
05:07subpoenas or these pressure points we've shown you. The New York Times asked, why didn't anyone
05:12say something? And that what we're learning, again, from this unusual transparency effort shows how a group
05:19can collude with dark secrets if they serve their interests. The price of admission to Epstein's world
05:25was, the Times says, silence. And so when you look at this entire issue, it has really gone
05:33topsy-turvy. It started as something that was so under-investigated, with so little accountability,
05:39that that became part of the scandal. And the question over years, would he really get away
05:43with it forever? And then, of course, he was ultimately, Mr. Epstein was indicted. He died in
05:49prison, awaiting trial. Maxwell, later indicted and convicted. So you had some baseline accountability,
05:56though very delayed. And the idea was, well, leave it there. And Donald Trump repeatedly said,
06:02leave it there. It's old news. Nothing more to see here. But he was overruled by some of his own
06:09supporters who, for whatever their reasons, wanted to get to the bottom of this and agitated,
06:13put pressure on Congress, which then, late but finally, came up with this bipartisan effort to
06:19get the files out. And one of the questions, remember, it's very easy to stand in judgment and
06:23look at things in hindsight, what they call, of course, Monday morning quarterbacking. But
06:30what you see now is that there was important information in the files. Doesn't mean it's going to
06:36lead to a bunch of indictments or convictions. We have a process that we have to follow in this
06:41country under the rule of law, even if some wish it otherwise. But what I showed you in the
06:45accountability, that having learned information about some of these individuals, other people in
06:49the public marketplace of accountability said, no, I don't want to be in business with them. Or no,
06:54that's not OK. Or no, short of indictment, which is a government process, the public said,
07:00we are reacting. And that's in the early days. As I've told you, we and other outlets have been
07:05going through these files. It takes time to do it right. There are millions of revelations.
07:09We are seeing a move for accountability. And this isn't a screenplay. This isn't a movie.
07:15If it were a movie, you'd say it's a little rich that there's accountability everywhere. But
07:22in the White House of the president who claimed in his most recent election that he wanted to get to
07:27the bottom of this and finding that the bottom or the involvement of this includes people in his
07:33own cabinet, he won't lift a finger to even publicly say they shouldn't have consorted with
07:40Epstein, let alone fire them, which is a far, far lower level than whether you're ever going to have
07:47the wider calls for accountability as mentioned. So there is something happening. And the information
07:53is having real world consequences. It's just everywhere, but in Trump's administration.
08:00We're going to get into exactly these issues with civil rights lawyer Nancy Erica Smith when we
08:04return in about 90 seconds.
08:10The names of billionaires, the names of folks that could be co-conspirators, that helped fund
08:15Jeffrey Epstein, that could have actually been involved in the terror and rape, as we know,
08:20abuse of women and children. Some of those names continue to be redacted and protected.
08:25Lawmakers speaking out as they prepare to put one of Epstein's, at least associates, clients
08:32under oath. I'm joined by Nancy Erica Smith, a civil rights attorney who's represented numerous
08:37victims of sexual harassment and assault. Welcome back. When you look at this and the Congress going
08:44forward, this is the continued work that Trump didn't want for his own reasons, but he was very
08:50public in saying that. And this sort of reflects a late effort to get more information, whatever the
08:57relationship may be with Wexner. Your thoughts on this work, however tardy.
09:03Well, I think that Thomas Massey is a hero here and he's paying for it. He's described the threats
09:08he's receiving. He calls this the Epstein administration, which certainly seems true.
09:14Not only has Representative Raskin told us that Trump was mentioned, there were a million hits
09:20in the three and a half million documents that have been released, but the DOJ has violated the Epstein
09:27Transparency Act. So who knows what's in the other two and a half million documents? And the redactions
09:33have not been cleaned out. So it just seems that Epstein ran an international ring of trafficking
09:40young girls, information, influence, and connections with the highest levels. And we see indictments in
09:47other countries and a prince is stripped of his princedom or whatever. So why aren't we moving forward?
09:56And why is it so difficult to get Congress to act? Well, thank goodness for Thomas Massey, but we don't
10:03have a department of justice. We can't even call it a department of justice anymore. When Todd Blanche,
10:09Trump's former lawyer, was asked, will you investigate the tips that have not been followed
10:14up on in the files? He said, no, there's going to be no investigations because they're unfounded.
10:20Well, how do you know they're unfounded if you don't investigate them? It's absurd. And meanwhile,
10:25we see this pampering Ghislaine Maxwell after Todd Blanche meets with her. And yes, let's dig into
10:34this new part with Wexner because one question is, oh, did Epstein just get away because he was rich
10:41and powerful, could hire the best lawyers? As you know, there are individuals who've hired pricey
10:45lawyers and not gotten away with as much as Jeffrey Epstein. So another investigative question,
10:50and I want to be very precise about this, not proven. Pam Bondi said they didn't see any leads
10:55to go after potential blackmail, which could be of powerful people or even people inside the
11:00government. And now we have the files and they might paint a different picture and Congress is
11:06going to make its own judgment. So I want to read from, again, what we're only learning because it's
11:10come out without presupposing the whole story. But illicit trysts is how the New York Times headlined
11:18their coverage of this part of the files and what they call, quote, leverage with the wealthy,
11:25quoting what we now have learned, where you have Epstein telling Wexner, who's going under oath
11:30tomorrow, you and I had gang stuff for over 15 years. I owe a great debt to you, as frankly
11:37you owe
11:37to me. And Epstein says he has no intention of divulging any confidence of ours. I'm curious how you,
11:46as someone who's dealt in these fields, interpret that. Would investigators want to look at that as
11:52just a statement where secrets are safe? Or sometimes people say those things as a veiled
11:59threat. Is that worth looking into when he's under oath tomorrow? I definitely think that is a veiled
12:05threat, not so veiled threat, actually, of blackmail. And there are other emails like that where I'll
12:13always keep your secrets. There are other emails in the three and a half million that have been
12:17released. So yes, to me, it looks like blackmail should be investigated. And we also have Trump
12:24on the birthday card saying, may every day be a wonderful secret. What secret? What has to be
12:30kept secret here? So not investigating what's going on means we don't have a DOJ. Thank goodness we have
12:37Congress waking up a little bit. I don't have a whole lot of confidence in Mike Johnson's Congress,
12:45House of Representatives right now. But maybe if you look at the polls, people are not real happy
12:52with the Trump administration right now. And this is a concern to people. And he created this concern
12:57by talking about the Epstein files all the time as if it was part of the ridiculous conspiracy of a
13:04Democratic pedophile ring run out of a pizza place in Washington, D.C. He created this in his own
13:11base. And now he has to say, I've been exonerated, which is what he said yesterday, which is completely
13:17false, just absolutely false. Yeah. So they have a problem. They created. Yeah, exactly. I validated it.
13:26And again, tomorrow we're going to see what Congress gets out of this, but certainly leads that were
13:33not followed. Nancy, Erica Smith, thank you as always for joining us. Thank you. Absolutely.
13:39We have Al Sharpton coming up later. Donald Trump, big government censorship, what he and apparently
13:46his CBS's parent company didn't want you to see. We were told in no uncertain terms by our network's
13:53lawyers who called us directly that we could not have him on the broadcast. And because my network
14:00clearly doesn't want us to talk about this, let's talk about this. Democrats are pushing harder and
14:11wielding more potential powers, including a partial government shutdown to try to hold Trump
14:16accountable. And that's before the midterms, which if they win, there are already clues as to what
14:22they're going to do in governance. Subpoenas are coming if they win. That's according to a bipartisan
14:28firm that studied this, discussing a tsunami of congressional oversight, including not just Trump,
14:34but how corporate America may have broken rules or even betrayed their consumers and shareholders all to
14:40cave to Trump. A strategy where Democrats say, why send a subpoena to a cabinet agency that might
14:44produce arguments in three years when one to a company produces them in three weeks? Donald Trump
14:50has brought corporate America deep into his type of agenda. We will see how they react to being
14:56scrutinized that way. I am joined on a special day today. It is, again, Che Day right here on the
15:03beat.
15:04Che Comanduri, a political strategist, veteran of several campaigns, including Obama's.
15:09Did you know it was Che Day, Che? You usually have a clue.
15:13I did not know it was Che Day, but I am pleased to see Che Day back in force.
15:19Back in force. It's the same great channel we like to believe. We work just as hard. We are now
15:25MS
15:25Now, and we still have not only Che, but Che's cartoon visage. And not every guest gets a bespoke
15:34cartoon. You know that, Che. Absolutely. And it's great that MS Now is choosing to adopt me and my
15:42cartoon. Yes, and your cartoon. So that's fun. This is more about the serious politics at play,
15:50and you see this kind of excitement among some, perhaps concern among others, about Democrats
15:55wielding those powers. How do you look at that going towards the midterms and the fact that Dems,
15:59who are so often portrayed, sometimes fairly, maybe sometimes over the top, as, oh, they don't
16:04fight as hard as Republicans. They are using these powers on DHS. Our colleague Rachel Maddow has been
16:10reporting on other citizen efforts, basically treating this like the emergency that they always
16:17say it is on the campaign trail. Yeah, I think that this is going to be a stark departure from
16:22the
16:22way Democrats have handled Trump in the past. If you think about what happened under Joe Biden,
16:28you know, there was a real belief that Trump was an aberration. You know, there are endless number
16:34of Maureen Dowd columns about how Hillary had run a bad campaign. That was something a lot of
16:38Democrats believed. Joe Biden himself thought that just passing legislation would show to people that
16:45democracy worked. You could have a nonpartisan, apolitical figure like Merrick Garland as AG,
16:52and that would be something reassuring to people. All of those bets were completely wrong.
16:58What Democrats now realize is Trump and the Trump movement is a real movement. It is a real force
17:04in America. It is an authoritarian movement that is now on offer to American voters, and that requires
17:15a response that is commensurate to the threat to democracy. Democrats have often been associated with
17:22preserving the traditions and norms. Traditionally, you don't start at the most escalated version of
17:30oversight. But the Trump folks now across two terms have said, we're not going to comply with
17:34subpoenas. We're going to resist. They had people who were even willing to go to jail rather than show
17:39up and do an interview where you don't have to answer the questions even. You could take the fifth,
17:42et cetera. And so I'm curious how you think that could change as well, because there is obviously a
17:47case for impeaching multiple cabinet officials when you look at the blatant admitted targeting of
17:53political opponents, which is unconstitutional. The allegations around grift and crypto.
17:58I asked Ty Cobb about this, who represented the Trump White House, and he said in Bondi's case,
18:04of course, there's a substantive case to impeach her if they win the midterms.
18:10Certainly with regard to Bondi, she obviously unfit for office. The multitude of cases that we've had
18:16now certainly provides a wealth of evidence that could be used to impeach Pam Bondi.
18:23Kristi Noem, who's supervising the execution of American citizens and lying about them. All of
18:31those people should be impeached for sure. One, substantively, should Democrats do that? I mean,
18:38if Bondi is fit for office and they just sleep on that, I don't know what message that sends. And
18:44then
18:44two, as the political strategist you are, is that something they should actually be running on
18:50or just get to it substantively if they win? Yeah, look, substantively, there is certainly a case
18:57to impeach Pam Bondi. That's 100%. I, you know, I personally, I think that should happen. I, you know,
19:04Pam Bondi probably should be disbarred. A lot of the people underneath her, you know, there will be
19:08legal discussions about whether they should be disbarred for what they have done. Kristi Noem,
19:12Pete Hegg said for the signal chat, etc. There is a substantive strong case for the impeachment of
19:19any number of officials in Trump, Trump's orbit. However, I will say politically, there is something
19:26I remember from 05-06, which is there was a move among Democrats to impeach Donald Rumsfeld for the
19:35failures of the Iraq war. Several Democrats said, you know, we should impeach Donald Rumsfeld for the
19:41Iraq war. Politically, it went nowhere. The reason was that the American people held George W. Bush
19:48responsible for the Iraq war. They did not hold Donald Rumsfeld responsible. They didn't even know
19:54who Donald Rumsfeld was. In their minds, George W. Bush was in charge. He was the person who should
20:00be held accountable for the failures of the Iraq war. And I think that's the same case here. Donald
20:06Trump is in charge. And yes, gloves should be off coming in terms of Donald Trump. But the American
20:11people and Democrats have to face, you know, aim their target directly at him. That is what's most
20:19politically viable. Yeah, it's interesting nuance. And though, those of us who follow the news closely
20:24have all these cabinet members names, you know, top of mind, Bondi, there's Lutnik. It's like shorthand.
20:30As someone who's done campaigns, you're reminding everyone that when you talk about the voters,
20:34particularly the ones that might be on the margins, not just the hardcore, you might have to come at
20:39them with a message that resonates, not, hey, let me tell you about someone you've never heard of.
20:44And then substantively, again, Ty Cobb telling us as a Trump White House veteran that legally there is
20:50the impeachable case there because she's got open probes in that they admit are abuse of power. They admit
20:56they're going after their opponents, not following the evidence. So pretty striking. Jay, thank you.
21:00I'm going to tell folks Stephen Colbert says they tried to censor him. We're going to show you that
21:05interview next.
21:10Turning to a clash over free speech in this week's primary race for Texas Senate, where candidates,
21:16of course, do all kinds of media. And yet the Trump administration was caught trying to block
21:20one Democratic candidate, James Tallarico, from appearing on Stephen Colbert's show.
21:25Trump's FCC was pressuring CBS, which notably is now owned by the MAGA allied Ellison family,
21:34to censor the interview from airing it all. Early voting in that Texas primary began just today.
21:40This full race will transpire on March 3rd. Now, let me just tell you straight up what's happening
21:46here. Across its 90 years, with oversight from both parties, the FCC didn't meddle in late night comedy
21:55or the attendant political interviews. Now Trump is getting the FCC to try, given his apparent fixation
22:02with the shows on late night that still criticize him. He lost that bid to get Jimmy Kimmel canceled,
22:08something that we saw was terribly unpopular to the point that Disney was losing subscriptions and
22:13money over it. Now he appears to have achieved a version of this censorship of one interview,
22:19a clear bid to try to control what Americans see going into a campaign season, at least in that area,
22:27that state. Now, let me remind you, independent outlets do not cave to this kind of government
22:32censorship, including conservative independent outlets. Whenever you think of Rupert Murdoch and
22:38his Wall Street Journal, that paper is fighting, not settling, a similarly far-fetched effort by
22:45Donald Trump to use, in this case, the courts, civil powers instead of the FCC, to go after reporting,
22:51which the journal says was accurate about Trump. New York Times also fighting those efforts,
22:56as do independent TV outlets. But on this one, the Trump administration didn't go after the New York
23:02Times or an outlet that might be independent. He very clearly, through the FCC, picked an allied media
23:10empire that could be expected to play ball. CBS lawyers allegedly tried to tell Colbert that the
23:16interview had to be censored and that any discussion about that censorship must also be censored.
23:24This is a brand new story. So how do we know this? Mr. Colbert, who is leaving at the end
23:31of his
23:31contract, publicly refused, leading to this unusual presentation on his show.
23:38We were told in no uncertain terms by our network's lawyers, who called us directly,
23:44that we could not have him on the broadcast. And because my network clearly doesn't want us to
23:49talk about this, let's talk about this. And this doesn't just affect interviews. The rules forbid
23:56any candidate appearance, including by voice or picture. That's right. I am absolutely not allowed
24:02to show a photo of Texas State Representative James Tallarico. Because that's not him.
24:16That's a stock photo we found when we Googled, not James Tallarico.
24:20Of course, that he was thinking about dropping the exception for talk shows because he said some of
24:25them were motivated by partisan purposes. Well, sir, you're chairman of the FCC. So FCCU.
24:36Colbert mixing his humor with what is obviously a serious rebuke of corporate capitulation at his own
24:43network with his own bosses. He noted, of course, the buck stops with the president who's now trying to
24:49wield or abuse his power to blatantly censor and attack Americans free speech.
24:57Let's just call this what it is. Donald Trump's administration wants to silence anyone who says
25:02anything bad about Trump on TV because all Trump does is watch TV. OK.
25:09Now, if the Trump administration got its way, this new censorship might have even stayed secret.
25:15Colbert says he defied those corporate lawyers, muzzling him, discussing what happened, even though
25:22they obviously did prevent, he says, the interview from airing on CBS.
25:28Many other efforts might continue to stay secret, however, because more companies are being sold to
25:34Trump allies and reshaped. And Mr. Colbert has decided to risk a lot for this line of work and comedy
25:44and
25:44free speech. Not everyone in entertainment and culture may do that. Now, he did get the interview
25:51published online. I'm actually going to show you our viewers, a highlight of that in a moment.
25:57We are not backing down from any implied or other effort to censor this kind of stuff. We also operate
26:03on cable. The FCC claims it has more leverage on network. But as I mentioned, most networks and Rupert Murdoch
26:10himself don't usually bow this quickly, this secretively to this effort to censor you hearing
26:17from candidates and public officials. As for the interview, we'll watch it together with our guest,
26:22MSNOW analyst, Juanita Tolliver, also host of Archival, a history podcast. Welcome back. We'll show
26:28that highlight as promised in a second. But your view of this and how Colbert decided to blow the whistle,
26:36not everyone does. Like that was the perfect behavior, Ari. Look, Colbert rang the alarm loudly
26:45and publicly, and he did not capitulate proactively. That is essential here. Because what that means is
26:53not only did he still do the interview and post it on YouTube, but he still dedicated a full eight
26:59or nine minutes of his show to talking about the very person that they did not want. And in between
27:05his jokes, he said, this is very serious. Deadpan to camera. I think that that is a behavior that I
27:12hope regular people apply to their daily lives. I mean, we've seen it in Minnesota with the people
27:17coming out and protesting in their communities against the ramp up of ice. We've seen it with
27:22the journalists targeted by the federal government, one even live streaming as agents were banging on
27:28her door. I think it's important that people understand this is a model that they can follow
27:32and absolutely should follow, Ari. Right. And you look at this and any one of these can be sort of
27:39fly specked, right? There are people who might say, oh, well, they think late night does too much politics
27:45anywhere. There might be other people who say, oh, Mr. Lemon, we've covered his coverage. Well, they didn't
27:51like that he was in the church. But you take it all together and you see you have an administration
27:56that
27:56will very clearly try to secretly, so you won't hear about it, and publicly if they get caught,
28:03abuse the government to decide what's on TV, to decide whether you hear other views and indict
28:09journalists, now two and counting, along with a lot of the other targets they've shown. And so
28:14with that in mind, they are not censoring the video from getting out on the internet. Colbert came up with
28:21that as a step. And there's, you know, reasons why he's within the CBS structure. And he says they
28:26blocked him. They say, well, no, they just had an alternative equal time plan. But here's some of
28:31that interview that the Trump administration wanted to stop. Do you mean to cause trouble?
28:39I think that Donald Trump is worried that we're about to flip Texas. Corporate media executives
28:48are selling out the First Amendment to curry favor with corrupt politicians. And a threat to any of our
28:57First Amendment rights is a threat to all of our First Amendment rights.
29:02On the one hand, it looks like just two people having a conversation that might have gotten less
29:07attention if they didn't try to censor it by the government. On the other hand, what do you see
29:12of this sort of this meta moment we're in, where the discussion warning against that censorship is
29:19itself already, we know now, censored from the main platform where that show airs, which is CBS TV?
29:26It shows the threat of someone like Stephen Colbert, Ari, someone who is willing to buff the system as
29:33the Trump administration probes for fractures within the pillars of democracy, including within media and
29:39the press. Look, this is something I've said over and over again. They've been on the long-term recon
29:44mission since Trump's first term, where he threatened FCC action or taking licenses from networks to air
29:50back in his first term. And now they're escalating. And this FCC chair is not going to stop. I think
29:56this is just the latest example of that escalation, because he was called before a Senate hearing
30:02committee last December, Ari, where he did not back down and did not show any willingness to change
30:08course when questioned about his threats to media outlets and corporations. Now, it was so bad that
30:14even Senator Ted Cruz in that hearing said, you know, the government cannot coerce a private entity
30:21for what it broadcasts and what it airs. And when Ted Cruz is against you, it shows just how far
30:27you're
30:27going. And I think that's the other thing about this is the public also has an opportunity to weigh in.
30:33You know, I scrolled through the comments below that video, Ari, and the best one that I saw that jumped
30:38out at me was like, not going to lie. I want to skip this. I want to skip this if
30:43the FCC and CBS
30:44didn't try to ban it. It's the strong head effect. They're drawing more attention against what they
30:50actually wanted out there. And I think this is another opportunity where the people can stand up,
30:54because what we know is this administration will back down if the pushback gets loud enough and
31:00consistent enough from the public. Well, you make such an important point. And the law moves
31:05slowly. If this was contested, you'd be in weeks. The primary might be over about whether or not the
31:12FCC can threaten. The people sometimes move more quickly and trying to squash free speech in America
31:19all the way back to our founding has never been popular. It's not popular on the right. It's not
31:24popular on the left. It's what the Trump agenda is. There's a reason they lied about it. They ran on
31:29saying, oh, he and Musk were going to have more free speech. That was not the case. Yeah. So even
31:35they know what they're doing is unpopular. That's why they were lying about it. Now you see whether
31:38people wake up to this. And as you say, if in the YouTube comments people are like, this is boring,
31:43but I'm riding with it, that's one sign. Juanita, good to see you. Good to see you, Ari.
31:49And as this race gets underway, we have our own programming announcement. These candidates are
31:54appearing across different shows. The Democratic candidate, Jasmine Crockett, on at 9 p.m. tonight with
31:59Jen. And the individual at the center of this new censorship clash, her primary opponent,
32:04James Tallarico, on the last word with Lawrence O'Donnell at 10 p.m. Eastern. Talk about equal
32:09time. You can catch both of them if you're a Texas resident or voter watching. And as well,
32:15the Republican senator, always welcome to come on the beat along with both of those candidates.
32:19And I'll tell you, it'll be interesting to see what else Mr. Tallarico has to say,
32:24given that the administration wants him, maybe both Democrats, silenced if they could get their way.
32:29I'm going to fit in a break. When we come back, Reverend Al Sharpton is here.
33:04Reverend Jesse Jackson passed away this morning at the age of 84 after a life on the front lines of
33:10the
33:10civil rights movement, organizing and marching with Martin Luther King. He was with Dr. King when he
33:17was tragically assassinated in Memphis in 1968. Jackson made his effort to live a life and a career
33:25building out on that legacy and work, trying to modernize it and expand it in efforts to diversify
33:31American business and then running for the highest office in the land at a time when
33:36many viewed that as quixotic. His 1984 campaign for president was a line in the sand.
33:45Live beyond the pain of reality with the dream of a bright tomorrow. Use hope and imagination
33:56as weapons of survival and progress. Use love to motivate you and obligate you to serve the human
34:06family. Young America dream. Jackson went from finishing third among Democrats that year to
34:15second the next cycle, besting big Democratic names like Gore and Biden. Those two campaigns helped
34:22register more than a million new voters and many say changed how Democrats viewed their coalition and
34:29what was possible. He used the platform to motivate people for change.
34:36Wherever you are tonight, you can make it. Hold your head high. Stick your chest out. You can make it.
34:47It gets dark sometimes, but the morning comes. We must never surrender. America will get better and better.
34:56Keep hope alive. Keep hope alive. Keep hope alive. On tomorrow night and beyond.
35:05Keep hope alive. Keep hope alive. That hope was a theme when Barack Obama picked up the baton and became
35:12ultimately the first black president. The two men did have a complicated history.
35:17Jackson was seen clearly moved, overcome with emotion by Obama's victory and what it meant for both the
35:25civil rights struggle and progress in America. Former President Obama paying tribute today,
35:31sharing gratitude for Jesse's lifetime of service, he said. We stood on his shoulders.
35:39I'm joined now by our colleague, Reverend Al Sharpton, who is one of Jackson's closest friends and
35:43confidants, host of Politics Nation here on MSNOW, president of National Action Network.
35:47We can show as well the photos of you two over the years, and I know you were in touch
35:51with him and his
35:52family up until his passing. Your thoughts tonight? Well, I think we've lost a giant who really in
36:00three ways. One, he continued the King movement by preserving the Civil Rights Act of 64 that had to
36:09be preserved. It was challenged in the Reagan years and the Voting Rights Act. So he had a direct impact
36:15on
36:16social policy and our legal standing. Secondly, he democratized, I'd like to say, the Democratic Party by
36:23changing the process of proportional representation of delegates before him and what he was able to do
36:31in negotiating after getting all those votes. If you won the primary, you took all of the delegates in the
36:38state. He said, no, you should get your delegates and it'd be proportional. The number two person keeps their
36:44delegates, which is what led to Clinton and Obama being able to not have to win every primary in
36:51order to be the nominee. And lastly, he inspired a generation behind him, people like me. I was 13
36:59years younger than him. He was 12 years younger than King. He trained us and inspired us to keep social
37:05justice, nonviolent movements going. So a lot of what we did from Trayvon to George Floyd to now, we learned
37:12from him because he did this what learning from Reverend Dr. King and Selma and on. And I think
37:20that it was in some ways counter culture because there were some that didn't want to have nonviolent
37:27marching, particularly in the north, and didn't want to deal with those kinds of strategies. He taught
37:32us that. And those of us that learned that or a lot of what we were able to do with
37:38his help, he was always
37:39there till he couldn't be there anymore. He was always there. You talk about his very direct,
37:46knowledgeable way of looking at reforming the Democratic Party. So often diversity in America
37:53is pitched in this zero sum thing. So the attacks by Trump on DEI or bad money at the Super
38:00Bowl,
38:01a recent example, are the idea that adding diversity takes something away. And that line, as you know,
38:07has been sold to a class of working white voters. Right. But what you're telling us is that Jesse
38:15Jackson was showing actually by diversifying itself, the Democratic Party got something it
38:20hadn't had since FDR, which is a two term president who happened to be black. How does this tradition of
38:26showing the benefit not just that it's right or good, but it's actually good for the rest of America
38:33to beat back this racism once and for all? He would do it in the political realm, you're right,
38:39with Obama. But in the corporate realm, he used to take me training some of us, James Meeks,
38:46Lamel McWhorst, some of us, how to do this. We'd go in the corporate boardrooms and watch him say,
38:51your margin of profit increases when you have people that can market your product and relate
38:58to the cities or the townships that you're in. So he showed where it benefited them.
39:05And it was the moral thing to do. The fact of the matter is affirmative action was always there
39:11when you have nepotism in these companies and people are hiring somebody's cousin or somebody's
39:16nephew. He's saying, well, we can give you qualified people that increase your margin or we can bring your
39:24margin down. And we don't want to do that. So we can either boycott, bring your margins down,
39:29or we can work together and build your companies up and build our community up because we're bringing
39:34in income to people in our communities. And finally, with the minute or so we have left,
39:38did you get a sense in his final years whether he was viewing this as a tough time,
39:44a dark time, an optimistic time? I think that he viewed it as that cycles,
39:48he would always say to me, the cycles of history are up and down. You're going to make one step
39:52forward. They're going to push back. Don't get worried about the pushback or the push forward.
39:58Just hang in there till you reach your goal. And I think that's why he always said, keep hope alive.
40:03Yeah. Keep hope alive and something that you and others and his life represents, which is,
40:08boy, you think you have it hard as we sometimes do on any given day. And we're going through real
40:13stuff right now. No question, but look at what people were up against in the past and take some
40:18inspiration from that. And so I know they want anyway, and they want, uh, and I know you've been
40:22in touch with the family. So thanks to you for joining us today and our condolences to everyone.
40:26Thank you. Thank you. We will be right back.
Comments