slavery is over in texas, that spread elsewhere. if there were a just world we americans would have begun celebrating juneteenth in 1865 or 1866. it's taken until 2021 for juneteenth to become a federal holiday and that should make us pause and ask the question why. well, many people in the south and elsewhere, you were talking about near unanimous vote for this holiday. can you imagine a vote juneteenth in 1950 or 1900? would have been very far from unanimous. america has come far enough that a majority of americans understand the evil of slavery and how central the evil was to the history but taken must have too long. the best thing to hope is that juneteenth gives an opportunity to teach our children and
you are saying, 1865. slavery is over in texas, that spread elsewhere. if they were a just world, brian, we americans would have begun celebrating juneteenth in 1865, or 1866. it's taken until 2021 for juneteenth to become a federal holiday, and that should make us pause a little bit, and ask the question why? many people in the south and elsewhere, you are talking about a near unanimous vote for this federal holiday. imagine if there had been a vote for juneteenth as a federal holiday, let's say in 1950, or 1900? would have been very far from unanimous. it shows that america has come far enough that an overwhelming majority of americans understand the evil of slavery, and how central the evil of slavery was to our history but it's taken much too long. the best thing we can hope is that juneteenth is going to
promised by the 14th and 15th amendment. amos ackerman, the first attorney general president grant appointed to lead the new justice department, zealously fought to protect black voting rights, directing u.s. attorneys that it was their, quote, special duty to initiate proceedings against all violators of the ku klux klan act. in the next few years, doj lawyers successfully prosecuted hundreds of ku klux klan leaders and others. those efforts helped to secure a brief period of meaningful black voting rights in some parts of the former confederacy. but the federal commitment to protecting black voting rights waned as construction due to a close. in 1866, the supreme court severely cut the department's
0 it's great to see you. i'm geoff bennett, and as we come on the air, there is a lot happening on this summer friday. this hour we will see president biden and the first lady at the g7 summit in the u.k. they're about to have a gathering of world leaders and they'll be joined by british royals. we'll have it for you live if it happens. back here at home, there is bombshell news on the trump doj, saying they seized the records of high democratic lawmakers and their families members all hunting down leaks about trump and his contacts with russia. >> obviously deeply suspicious of what the justice department was doing. more than that, this looks like a patent abuse of the department, yet another example of the president politicizing, using the department of justice as a cudgel to go after his enemies. >> more that in a moment, but any moment attorney general merrick garland is expected to announce new actions by the doj to protect voting rights in this country. as legislatures attempt to restrict the vote with donald trump's lie about the stolen election. it must go through congress, but with little or no gop support and opposition from democrats, that's looking increasingly unlikely. so what will the attorney general do? we'll bring you those comments from garland as soon as they begin. we start this hour with reporter shannon pettypiece, garrett haake. we also have the brennan center for justice at the university school of law, that's wendy wiser, and carol anderson. she's also the author of "one person, no vote: how voter suppression is destroying our democracy." shannon, we'll start with you. what are we expecting to hear from the attorney general, and his policy address today, should this be read as a tacit acknowledgment that this legislation likely isn't going to pass through congress? >> what we know from the justice department is he's going to announce some concrete steps that the justice department said they can take that they said would secure the fundamental voting rights of all americans. now, what the justice department can do from the executive branch versus what can be done through the legislative branch, that is something for lawyers and general counsels in the executive branch to figure out amongst themselves. i'm sure they have been spending a locality of time on that in anticipation of this. but even before we kind of got a sense that this for the people act, this voting rights act in the senate wasn't going to go anywhere with joe manchin saying he did not plan to support it, we're already getting some signs from the white house and from president biden that they were looking at what they could do on their own without congress to address what president biden has called an assault on democracy regarding some of these bills being passed at state legislatures in georgia and in texas, for example. biden has not held back at all in saying he is going to use every tool that he has available, and potentially we will see the fruition today of what some of those tools are that this administration has. i also think, geoff, it's important to note this comes during president biden's foreign trip, his first foreign trip. i can't tell you if this was timed in any way for that. obviously the justice department operates independently for the most part. but this announcement will be coming as president biden is meeting with these g7 world leaders, as they are literally having dinner and a reception together. that is very important for this administration, as they have said, to show that the u.s. can lead in areas of humanitarian rights, freedom of speech and voting rights. it's certainly significant to see this occurring at that same moment, geoff. >> let's talk about the for the people act on capitol hill. it doesn't have a path forward in the senate. the john lewis voting rights authorization, i think the path forward for that is tenuous at best. we talk so often about these pieces of legislation in the context of what democrats are going to do and what joe manchin has an appetite for, but let's talk about republicans. mitch mcconnell supported the last review of the voting rights act. is this all about republicans not seeing a path forward in future elections unless they make it harder for folks to vote? >> reporter: mcconnell now says this version is not necessary and not something he would support. the push on the right for changing how we vote started a long time ago, and it started primarily with voter i.d. laws which were popping up in different states over the last 15 years or so. i was a local news reporter in kansas city when chris kobak was the secretary of state there and kansas put into place controversial voter i.d. law. but this has really taken off under the trump presidency and particularly the trump post-presidency, the idea that elections could somehow be stolen. they weren't. that mail-in ballots would be fraudulent. they weren't. things put in place because of the pandemic to make voting easier and more accessible should now be rolled back because the pandemic is being rolled back has really caught on on the right, and i think you're seeing republican-led states try to outdo each other with who can come out with the most stringent republicans, and you have representatives who represent those states in many cases who don't want to step on the messages that their own state legislators are putting out there, because that's where the trump base in this country are in state legislatures and governors' mansions, and that's what pushes elections in congress even further to the rye, because they're seeing these folks come up behind them. >> garrett, that's such good context. i appreciate that. wendy, let's talk about the for the people act. it makes it easier to register to vote, it makes it easier to vote by mail, it restores the voting rights act. there is a code of ethics for supreme court justices, there is a requirement that presidential candidates release their tax returns. do you think this bill is too comprehensive for its own good? that's even what some democrats say who have been doing some hand wringing about whether or not they support s-1. >> the for the people act's breadth is actual its strength. we are facing a real crisis, a crisis of voting rights, redistricting crisis, a crisis of big money flooding our politics and a recently growing ethics crisis, and these have been left to fester and linger and get dramatically worse in recent years because congress has not yet stepped in. these are solutions most of which have been adopted in the states successfully before and that have been working and that have been parts of congressional legislation for some time, and now there is finally an opportunity to put the solutions in place for the whole country, to create a baseline set of voting rules that every american can rely on, a federal floor, and to deal with things like extreme gerrymandering and dark money that have reached crisis proportions. >> so, carol anderson, professor anderson, republicans, as you well know, say these voting restrictions are needed because of so-called fraud, fraud that we should say does not exist, did not exist in that last election. can you provide some historical context in which those accusations have been made over generations, not just about fraud but a whole host of things in order to suppress the vote. >> absolutely. so beginning in 1890, in the mississippi plan of 1890 which created this comprehensive disenfranchisement package, it was predicated on a lie that we needed to have voter integrity. blacks were not doing massive voting fraud, but this was a plan to eliminate african-americans from the ballot box. they were very clear about that when they spoke amongst themselves. you had the lie of massive rampant voting fraud happening again, really, in the 2000 election. we remember that one, that was the one in florida and the one in st. louis, that presidential election, where up comes the lie that african-americans were trying to steal the election, and so we needed to have voter i.d. embedded into federal law in the help america vote act as a way to stop this massive rampant voter fraud. but the st. louis post dispatch did a study and all of the republican claims about massive rampant voter fraud in st. louis did not happen, did not happen. over 3 million votes cast. there were only four irregularities, none of which could have been solved by voter i.d. but the lie hung there, and it hung there and it's doing its damage. it's the same lie that you hear happening now with trump, that the people in the cities, in philadelphia, in detroit, in atlanta, in milwaukee, that they stole this election. that is linking criminality with blackness and, therefore, providing that kind of hard narrative that then pushes forward all of these voter suppression laws that are targeted at african-americans, they're targeted at hispanics, they're targeted at asian american and pacific islanders, at young people and poor people. >> professor anderson, i want to ask you about the thesis of your new book which is reflected in the title. you say voter suppression is destroying our democracy. what does our democracy look like without federal voting rights reform? >> it looks like what we have during the jim crow era where we would have federal elections in states like alabama and mississippi where you would have single-digit voter turnout rates. when you start to think about what single-digit voter turnout rates look like, in terms of moving people up the power ladder in congress so they're now sitting as the chair of the judiciary committee, or the chair of the foreign relations committee, that does damage. you're having this small, cauterized group of people determining what federal policy looks like for all of us. we had, by 1940, only 3% of age-eligible african-americans were registered to vote in the south because of the poll tax. disenfranchisement does damage to a democracy and it did damage internationally. so when the u.s. was putting pressure on the soviet union to open up the eastern bloc and bring democracy, you had the foreign minister turning to the secretary of state saying, when are you going to bring some democracy to south carolina? >> wendy, let's talk about the current day here, because absent federal action, this will be fought in the courts. will that effort be successful based on what you know about who is bringing these cases and the courts in which they're being filed? >> so i want to just start by saying that there is still a path forward in congress. the game is not over for the for the people act or the john lewis voting rights advancement act. despite the setbacks, this is still a top priority for both the majority leader in the senate and the house, the speaker of the house, and the president. so i want to be clear, negotiations are happening now and they're -- hopefully there will be a path forward, because the laws we currently have in place are simply not sufficient to fully protect americans' right to vote against this onslaught, against this assault that we are facing today. that said, the courts play a critical role, and they are a critical backstop. if we just look -- unfortunately, they've been getting less protective, increasingly making it harder for american voting rights, and we saw that especially in the last presidential election cycle where after dozens of courts actually issued rulings expanding voting rights, removing barriers that would have made it difficult or impossible for many people to vote safely. they were all abruptly reversed right in advance of the election under new doctrines that are making it harder to enforce voting rights. so the courts are important and critical and necessary but simply not enough with our current laws. >> wendy weiser, carol anderson, garrett haake, shannon pettypiece. while we were having that conversation, you saw on the left side of the screen queen elizabeth flanked by the world leaders who participated in that event. we see them walking off there. i think that's president biden in the back of the pack with canada's justin trudeau next to the queen. coming up next, explosive new revelations about donald trump's justice department. republicans accused of seizing documents of representatives and their family members. >> it's hard to express just how shocking an abuse of power this really is. plus, we'll go back live to the u.k. where queen elizabeth and members of the royal family just arrived for a dinner with president biden and his former g7 leaders. and later millions of americans are out of work, and they're about to lose the $300 extra money a week they get that so many of them rely on. will the move by the g7 fix the support shortage? we'll have more on that, coming up. support shortage we'll have more on that, coming up 27 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients to support immune health. facing leaks takes strength. 27 vitamins and minerals, so here's to the strong, who trust in our performance and comfortable long-lasting protection. because your strength is supported by ours. depend. the only thing stronger than us, is you. ing gain flings, their laundry smells more amazing than ever. ah, honey! isn't that the dog's towel? hey, me towel su towel. there's more gain scent plus oxi boost and febreze odor remover in every fling. gain. seriously good scent. love the scent of gain flings? then you'll swoon for long lasting gain scent beads. hi, verizon launched the first 5g network, and now we want to be the first to give everyone the joy of 5g by giving every customer a new 5g phone, on us, aha! old customers. new customers. families. businesses. in-laws. law firms. every customer. new 5g phones when you trade in your old ones. and if you're not a customer, we'll help cover the cost to switch. just ask wanda. she's been with us since... (gasps)... now. upgrade your phone. upgrade your network. hearing is important to living life to the fullest. that's why inside every miracle-ear store, you'll find better bedtime stories. you'll find a better life is in store at miracle-ear, when you experience the exclusive miracle-ear advantage. it starts with our free hearing assessment. plus innovative products that fit your needs and budget. with free service and adjustments for life. we're so confident we can improve your life, we're offering a 30-day risk-free trial. call 1-800-miracle today and experience the miracle-ear advantage for yourself. i think we can safely say the word bombshell is overused these days when new information comes to light, but it's hard to describe the "new york times" story that dropped last night in any other way. they report, quote, as the justice department investigated who was behind the leaks of classified information early in the trump administration, it took a highly unusual step. prosecutors subpoenaed apple for data from the accounts of at least two democrats on the house intelligence committee, aides and family members. one was a minor. now, nbc news has confirmed those details via an official familiar with the subpoenas, and congressman adam schiff and eric swalwell have identified themselves as two of those who had their private information seized. now, the trump doj was already under fire for seizing call logs and e-mails from journalists. that's a shocking development in itself but it's not unheard of. seizing the private information of congressmen, however, if they're from the opposing party, experts say that might be unprecedented in modern american history. senate democrats are now demanding that the former attorneys general, barr and sessions, must testify before the senate judiciary committee and they're subject to a subpoena if they refuse. all right, joining us now are nbc national security correspondent ken dilanian, and msnbc contributor betsy woodruff swann, and in a moment we expect contributor barbara mcquade to join us. you've also contacted the doj, no comment from them, but betsy is now asking the doj to look into this, but they're only doing anything because the investigators commented on this. >> the revelations that the doj went after the news media, whichly initially they defended it, but after the white house got involved, the doj is now saying they will never do that again. what's going on here is a clash of interest in our democracy which goes beyond donald trump, geoff. you and i make our living in part based on leaks and we think leaks are an important part of holding government officials accountable. doj national security advisors are more than happy to put someone in prison if they think they leaked classified information. so they will go after these cases, in fact, donald trump leaked more classified information than anyone in recent memory. it's usually the attorney general who reins in these prosecutors and say, wait a minute, we're not going to subpoena the media records, we're not going after members of congress. in this case it was the opposite. they had donald trump and his associates screaming from the rafters -- >> i'm sorry, i have to go to the doj where merrick garland is giving a speech on voting rights. >> i appreciate everyone with the rights of america. i was confirmed, and in that time i've had the pleasure of working directly with certain members of the department. i went through two investigations of unconstitutional policing in minneapolis, minnesota and louisville. i discussed with you the criminal indictments on civil rights charges for the death of george floyd, and i worked with you for protecting every americans' right to vote. today i look forward to speaking to you, all of you, about the work on the voting sector. that work has personal reference to me. when i first came to the justice department as a 16-year-old, drew daiz took me under his wing, beginning a lifelong friendship. at that time drew was working in the city of rome which included the extension of the voting rights act and the clearance provision. the brief was filed just weeks after i arrived at the department, and in seven months later and in an opinion by douglas thurgood marshall, they said the act was plainly a constitutional method of enforcing the amendment. there are many things that are open to debate in america. but the right of all eligible citizens to vote is not one of them. the right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, the right from which all other rights ultimately flow. in introducing the 1965 voting rights act, president johnson told the congress, quote, it is wrong. deadly wrong, to deny any of your fellow americans the right to vote. in signing the 1982 reauthorization of the act, president reagan stated, quote, the right to vote is the crown jewel of american liberties, and we will not see its luster diminished. and in signing the 2006 reauthorization, president bush stated that the right of ordinary men and women to determine their own future lies at the heart of the american experiment. this proposition has not, of course, always been accepted. when the constitution was ratified in 1788, most states limited the right to vote to white men and often only those white men who owned a certain amount of property. since then, constitutional amendments have expanded the franchise. the 15th and 19th amendments prohibited citizens' rights to vote based on gender or sex and it only was for people 18 and older. but the voting rights on people of color has never been steady. moments of voting rights expansion have often been met by counterefforts to curb franchise. actually securing the protections guaranteed by our constitutional laws has always required vigilant enforcement by congress, the courts and the justice department. this department's role effectively began in the 1870s. the reconstruction amendments adopted after the civil war were a dramatic step forward. the framers of the 14th and 15th amendments recognized that access to the ballot was a fundamental aspect of citizenship and self-government. representative john bingham, the principal author of the 14th amendment, called the right to vote the source of all institutions of democratic government. bingham and other framers of the reconstruction amendments also knew that a meaningful right to vote requires meaningful enforcement. months after ratification of the 15th amendment, congress enacted the first ku klux klan act. it reenacted the right to vote and instructed martials to bring criminal rights against anyone who acted against the provisions. a few weeks after that, congress created the department of justice, and president grant charged it with enforcing the act and protecting the rights promised by the 14th and 15th amendment. amos ackerman, the first attorney general president grant appointed to lead the new justice department, zealously fought to protect black voting rights, directing u.s. attorneys that it was their, quote, special duty to initiate proceedings against all violators of the ku klux klan act. in the next few years, doj lawyers successfully prosecuted hundreds of ku klux klan leaders and others. those efforts helped to secure a brief period of meaningful black voting rights in some parts of the former confederacy. but the federal commitment to protecting black voting rights waned as construction due to a close. in 1866, the supreme court severely cut the department's enforcement efforts by holding that the first ku klux klan act exceeded congress' power under the 15th amendment. between 1890 and 1908, every southern state enacted a new constitution or amended its constitution to exclude black voters or significantly impede their participation. the courts did not stand in the way, rejecting every constitutional challenge. for the next half century, no branch of the federal government did much to protect voting rights. that began to change in the late 1950s when the justice department renewed its efforts to protect the right to vote, and the supreme court reestablished traditional oversight of the political process. in 1957, congress enacted its first major civil rights statute since reconstruction. the civil rights act of 1957, based on a legislative proposal first drafted by this department, enabled the creation of doj civil rights division and authorized the attorney general to sue to enjoy voter discrimination, a denial of the right to vote. the first registrar for violating the act, the united states versus lind, was brought by john dior, an attorney who served during the eisenhower administration. by 1963, the department had filed 35 suits challenging discrimination or threats against black registration applicants in individual counties. but as attorney general robert kennedy said that was a, quote, painfully slow way of providing what is, after all, a fundamental right of sit sdplenship. as the supreme court announced, in this effort the department was seriously hindered by the burden of bringing case-by-case challenges. the department urged the supreme court to revisit its unwillingness to review constitutional and statutory protections of the franchise. in gomilion versus lightfoot, they brought up the gerrymander in alabama which had verified the city's boundaries to confirm 93% without removing a single white voter. in reynolds versus sims four years later. they held that 149th amendment protects the right of each citizen to have an equally feblgt active voice in the political process. ly they follow the judiciary and both followed the civil rights movement that swept the country. 1965 in the wake of bloody sunday, and based on a record developed in large part by the civil rights division's mitigation, congress enacted what president johnson called, quote, one of the most monumental laws in the entire history of american freedom, the voting rights act. the act was reauthorized and signed by president nixon in 1970, by president ford in 1975, by president reagan in 1982, and by president bush in 2006. under the preclearance requirement of that law, doj objected to more than 1,000 discriminatory voting changes between 1965 and 2006. but in recent years, the protections of federal voting rights law have been drastically weakened. in 2013, the shelby county decision effectively eliminated the pre-clearance protections of the voting rights act which had been the department's most effective tool to protect voting rights over the past half century. since that opinion, there has been a dramatic rise in legislative efforts that will make it harder for millions of citizens to cast a vote that counts. so far this year, at least 14 states have passed new laws that make it harder to vote. and some jurisdictions, based on disinformation, have utilized abnormal post-election audit methodologies that may put the integrity of the voting process at risk and undermine public confidence in our democracy. the civil rights division has already sent a letter expressing its concern that one of those audits may violate provisions of the civil rights act that require election officials to provisions that form the n original basis for the department's 1960 investigation in the lind case. the division also expressed concern that the audit may violate a provision of the voting rights act that bars intimidation of voters. as part of its mission to protect the right to vote, the justice department will, of course, do everything in its power to prevent election fraud, and if found, vigorously prosecute it. but many of the justifications proffered in support of these restrictions have relied on voter fraud that have been protected by this administration as well as the previous one, cities and states, that have considered them. moreover, many of the changes are not calibrated to address the kinds of voter fraud that are alleged as their justification. to meet the challenge of the current moment, we must rededicate the resources of the department of justice a critical part of its admission and forcing federal law to protect the franchise for all voters. in 1961, the attorney general called into his office the attorney general for civil rights, burke marshall, and marshall's first assistant, john dior. at that time before the 1960s act, the only way to guarantee the right of black americans to vote was to bring individual actions in each county and parish that discriminate against them. kennedy told his assistants that was what he wanted to do. well, general, burke marshall replied, if you want that, we've got to have a lot more lawyers. well, today we are again without a preclearance provision. so, again, the civil rights division is going to need more lawyers. accordingly, today i am announcing that within the next 30 days, we will double the division's enforcement staff for protecting the right to vote. we will use all existing provisions of the voting rights act, the national voter registration act, the help america vote act and the uniform and overseas citizens absentee voting act to ensure that we protect every qualified american seeking to participate in our democracy. we are scrutinizing new laws that seek to curb voter access, and where we see violations, we will not hesitate to act. we are also scrutinizing current laws and practices in order to determine whether they discriminate against black voters and other voters of color. particularly concerning in this regard are several studies showing that, in some jurisdictions, non-white voters must wait in line substantially longer than white voters to cast their ballots. we will apply the same scrutiny to post-election audits to ensure they abide by federal statutory requirements to protect election records and avoid the intimidation of voters. in that regard, we will publish guidance explaining the civil and criminal statutes that apply to post-election audits, and we will likewise publish documents to early voting and voting by mail. and because the upcoming redistricting cycle will likely be the first since 1960 to proceed without the preclearance divisions of the voting rights act, we will publish new guidance to make clear the voting protections that apply to all jurisdictions as they redraw their legislative maps. under the assistance of the deputies and the assistant attorney general, they will use promoting access to voting. it ensures assisting people as permitted by law. we will also work with congress to provide all necessary support as it considers federal legislation to protect voting rights. although we will not wait for that legislation to act, we must be clear-eyed. the shelby county division eliminated critical tools for protecting voting rights. and, as the president has said, we need congress to pass one voting rights act which would provide the department with the tools it needs. we will also partner with other federal agencies to combat election information that potentially tries to suppress the vote. finally, we have not been blind to the dramatic increase in menacing and violent threats against all manner of state and local election workers, ranging from the highest administrators to poll workers. it undermines our process and violates several laws. the criminal division of the civil rights division, as well as the department of security and criminal divisions, the 93 united states attorneys and the fbi will investigate and promptly prosecute any violations of federal law. nearly two and a half centuries into our experiment of government of the people, by the people, for the people, we have learned much about what supports a healthy democracy. we know that expanding the ability of all eligible citizens to vote is the central pillar. that means that ensuring all eligible voters can cast a vote, that all lawful votes are counted and that every voter has access to accurate information. the department of justice will never stop working to protect the democracy which all americans are entitled. in an editorial published after his death, the great john lewis recalled an important lesson taught by dr. martin luther king jr. quote, he said each of us has a moral obligation to stand up, speak up and speak out. when you see something that is not right, you must say something. you must do something. democracy is not a state, it is an act, and each generation must do its part. thanks to all of your work, the department of justice will always stand up to ensure the survival of the central pillar of our democracy. thank you. [ applause ] >> we have been listening to u.s. attorney general merrick garland deliver a policy address on voting rights there at the department of justice. we heard the attorney general say a lot of things are up for debate in america. the right for eligible americans to vote is not one of them. he made a couple announcements. he said he wanted to double the staff at the doj civil rights division, and he also said he's going to rededicate the resources at the department of justice to enforce federal laws to protect the franchise of all voters. i want to bring back our panel who was with us before the start of the attorney general's remarks. we have with us barbara mcquade, who among other many titles is a former prosecutor. barbara, i just want to get your reaction to what we heard from the attorney general. one of the things i didn't hear him say, maybe i missed it, was potentially using the full force of the federal government to join with some of these folks who are bringing lawsuits in these states that have enacted or are trying to enact, in some cases, more restrictive voting laws. >> he didn't say that, but it sound to do me like there's a strong hint that may be coming. i think it is a breath of fresh air to hear the attorney general speak about the importance of voting rights. it strikes me that he didn't choose to speak in the great hall in the justice department in a very nice room that has a lot of great technology. instead he chose to do it here in front of the entire department of justice staff. to me that says he's making it a priority. with regard to laws, geoff, we've already seen that first step, that letter from cam carlin when she was acting attorney general to the civil rights division to arizona, talking to them that they may be in violation of the civil rights act by intimidating voters and failing to safeguard ballots and election records. that's usually the first step to filing a lawsuit, telling them we're concerned, we want to hear from you, and if we're not satisfied with that response, the typical response is to file a lawsuit. i would keep my eyes on arizona. >> and ken dilanian, who we saw just a moment ago, the general speaking with vernida gupta. she's in the red blazer there. give us reaction given that's the building you cover. >> it's an accurate, forward-leading announcement in terms of the hiring that will need to take place. it's kind of a statement that in the absence of legislation, the executive branch is going toits might to try to enforce the voting laws in this country. a significant day, jeff. >> also on the screen is kristin clark in the blue who is integral to this civil rights division work that the dms is going through. the trump doj, and the way it targeted, as far as we know, at least two democratic members of congress. betsy, i understand that you and your colleagues at "politico" actually spoke to the former a.g. bill barr about this, and he's trying to distance himself. what did he say to you and your colleagues? >> that's right, you know you're dealing with a scandal when it's too spicy for bill barr to have found himself connected to. what he said was he was not aware of any subpoenas going out that were targeted at members of congress. in other words, what he was trying to communicate to my colleagues is that this wasn't his fault, it wasn't his responsibility. in addition to that, people close to another former trump attorney general, jeff sessions, have also tried to signal, hey, he actually shouldn't be held responsible for the fact of these subpoenas going out. this is really noteworthy, because usually barr and sessions are two of the most dogged defenders of just about anything controversial that the trump justice department engaged in. this appears to be a bridge too far even to those trump stalwarts. i e mailed mary mccord who honed the justice department division in the early days of the administration. she held that spot temporarily. i asked her if she knew what happened given that these subpoenas went out, according to the "new york times," during the first year of trump's presidency. she told me all she could say was these types of subpoenas would have had to have been approved at the very highest level of the justice department. this would not have sailed through without political appointees knowing about it, greenlighting it. the biggest challenge for appointees is trying to get somebody to take responsibility that the justice department tried to scoop up private information and relayed it to lawmakers who engaged in oversight at the justice department. it is clearly making a host of doj officials very uncomfortable, and it takes a lot to do that. >> doj is not -- what you have the president denying these requests, and a minor apparently got swept up in all of this. how does this strike you? >> after the abuses during the nixon administration, with j. edgar hoover, there were a lot of policies put in place. certainly lawmakers are not above the law. that's a crime and that should be investigated, but there is a safeguard in place to make sure there is a political motive that it is necessary to achieve a substantial federal interest and that there is no reasonable alternative to obtaining these records. as betsy said, i agree with mary mccord, it would go to the highest levels of our justice department, rosenstein or jeff sessions would have to red-flag it because of sensitivity. i guess if there is a predication, a factual reason to believe that, say, adam schiff uses his son's cell phone to try to disguise the origin of his phone calls, that seemed in light of the fact that donald trump was tweeting away how these very people were his enemies. i think it's a good step to have him investigated to find the leakers. >> if sessions ordered this basically under duress without real justification, what are the long-term consequences here. >> that's the real question, geoff, although there could be trouble if justice department officials participated in this activity. i just want to underscore both of my colleagues alluded to, which is adam schiff issed part of the party of eight. so even the fact they're briefing him, they better have had a darn good reason. that's the bottom line here. my thanks to the tleef tu. across the pond it's just about time for dinner, and that means it's time for some pomp and pageantry. they're breaking bread with the queen and other members of the royal family. as you can see, they gathered for a photo with queen elizabeth, and prince charles made a talk before dinner. >> one were ever needed the sheer example of scale and sheer speed as to whether the global crises can combine pure will with businesses and public utilization. >> he also went on to say that we should actually do that for our klein. the president of the eurasia group and founder of the g7 group. today is day 3. how is it going for biden? >> i'm always struck when we have this conversation how president biden has framed this trip. how often have we heard him say covering and the shadow of his predecessor donald trump. when he says america is back, i think the question he is facing behind closed doors from his g7 partners is, yes, but for how long? can you make these kind of assurances that america's word is its bond again when there is every possibility that we could see a trump or trump-like figure elected again in three years. that issue was very much focused on voting rights and the kind of tactics that the president engaged in. but, of course, president biden's answer to this is to do what he has also done back at home and in a domestic agenda which is to encourage his fellow democratic leaders to do everything they can to provide tangible results to their people as much as possible. you see that in their announcement that the g7 is matching the u.s. commitment providing 500 million coronavirus vaccines to the poor and developing world. they're also having a discussion about a global minimum tax part of what biden has called the importance of building the economy bottom up and middle out and strong middle class and we know as this summit continues tomorrow, they're also turning to some of theed a veer serial relationships is an important part of their discussion in the next few days, jeff. >> the president is overseas when you have small democratic values, principals under attack here at home. the message to the allies, america is back. but is that a message that they are buying? how can president biden better convince those who might be skeptical? >> good time to convince them that the united states is leading the world in the ability to produce and distribute vaccines. 500 million jabs, whether you're effective as democracy or not. 500 million more that we can export and at this time in the pandemic, that really matters. dido tens of thousands in financing that is announced and the united states is also taking the lead on for lower income countries so that matters. but your point is an important one which is as powerful as the united states is and has been whether we talk about the role of the u.s. dollar or military or u.s. tech companies or u.s. energy production, the fact is the united states is also by far the most economically unequal and politically dysfunctional of the other g7 countries on the stage. and that makes it harder. i mean, even on something like climate where biden is really aligned. how much of biden's climate agenda can he get through a legislative process here in the united states. allies are aware of the fact that that is a serious problem. how about this infrastructure bill? how much is going to be green compared to what the european union has done in the last 12 months stimulus and relief. those are open questions. even if you get to one of 2024 and whether it is a democrat or republican that takes over. the questions are much more urgent and real than that. >> so, ian, in the 45 seconds we have left, what are you looking for out of this sit down between president biden and vladimirpute putin next. >> i'd like to see no press conference so that there aren't any surprises from putin because that is where biden is going to be more vulnerable and well organized the plan. the single worst meeting biden has had the working-level meeting with the russians went much better. not many headlines. i think this meeting of putin's is going to be more like the latter. >> ian bremmer. and we have a quick but important programming note. kirsten just sat down of his meeting and you can see a preview of that interview on nbc "nightly news" with lester holt. a setback for police reform. we'll go live to capitol hill after a very short break. don't go anywhere. customers are engaged. near real time data for fast decision making. this is business at the speed of 5g. because the more businesses do with 5g, the more your network matters. it's us pushing us. it's verizon vs verizon.
their way of life. it is not talking about white riots in memphis in 1866. it's not talking about white supremacy and white violence in texas in the eastbound 60s and the 1870s. that's why we have frerd statues, why we have certain states celebrate the birthdays of rob e. lee and others. >> sorry. we have a delay here. the rewriting of history or the not writing of it. it led to our fellow americans being ignorant. that has to be last word. thank you. another weekend of tragic gun violence in america leaving at least 17 people dead across the country including a 10-year-old boy. will we ever reach the point where we say, enough is enough?
so just like an oxen or a bull pulling a wagon, the black folks were in the same situation. they didn't have a choice. >> the five civilized tribes aligned themselves with the confederacy in the civil war. slaves were still needed to improve the economic fortunes of these tribes. the confederacy lost, by the way. so after the civil war, the federal government negotiated with these tribes on treaties generally referred to as the treaties of 1866. >> in article two of the creek treaty of 1866 it says that you won't have slaves anymore.
>> in article two of the creek treaty of 1866 it says that you won't have slaves anymore. that's a wrap. it won't happen anymore. those slaves that you had, they're now your tribal members. they're now your citizens. black people who had been with the indians, now ten, 15 generations, either enslaved or married among them or their children. they were called the freedmen. the united states government forced the tribes divide up the land with the freedman. >> the slaves who belonged to the cherokees could come right back to the territory and settle on indian land. when allotment came, they gave us an equal right with them in land droves. the united states forced them to do this, i've been told.
tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. it's time to start a new day. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy. and save at trelegy.com. memorial day in the united states did not become a federal holiday until the congress declared it one there 1971. officially the roots could be traced back to may 1866 in waterloo, new york, where a tradition began to honor local veterans who fought for the union army in the civil war. david blight found this new york tribune article from may of 1865 in which a correspondent in
when you can't even spell sausage without usa. exercise your right to mix it up, and throw on some johnsonville sausage. because freedom is delicious. memorial day in the united states did not become a federal holiday until the congress declared it one there 1971. officially the roots could be traced back to may 1866 in waterloo, new york, where a tradition began to honor local veterans who fought for the union army in the civil war. yale historian david blight found this new york tribune article in may of 1865 in which
similar atrocities across this country in the decades after the civil war and the collapse of reconstruction. in memphis, tennessee, in 1866 some black families burned to death in their homes because the racist mobs who attacked them wouldn't let them run outicide after setting them on fire. in new orleans that same year black freedman attempting a peaceful march were met by a mob of former confederate soldiers and dozens were killed. the spark for the wilmington north carolina race massacre in 1898 was a creation of a white, black fusion government which was violently cut down. the early decades of the 20th century were an era of pure racial mayhem as war was waged on the formerly enslaved and their children and grandchildren in the south and in northern cities where blacks were fleeing and seeking work and a decent life. four years before tulsa there was a series of race massacres in east st. louis, illinois, in july of 1917 in which more than 100 blacks were beaten, shot and