>> the new speaker, mike johnson, in an october prayer call, says american culture is dark and depraved. the same mike johnson who played a key role in the depraved effort to overturn the 2020 election. also tonight, the judge in trump's new york fraud trial issues a ruling about trump's request for a mistrial, using words like nonsensical, red herring, and bad faith. and what awfulness does the extremist moms for liberty have in store for us next, following their huge losses across the country on election night? but we begin tonight nearly three years since an army of maga extremists laid siege to the u.s. capitol at the direction of donald trump. in a final attempt to hold on to his seat of power. since then, we have learned a lot about the confluence of events leading up to that day and what occurred on the day itself. but one aspect that continues to be shrouded in some mystery was trump's bizarre efforts to get to the capitol and join the very people he unleashed on congress. you might remember cassidy hutchinson's bombshell testimony to the january 6th committee last year, recounting what she was told by trump's deputy chief of staff, tony arnoto, on january 6th about trump's aggressive insistence on going to the capitol. >> i looked at tony, he said did you f'ing hear what happened in the beast. the president said something to the effect of i'm the f'ing president, take me up to the capitol now. the president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. mr. engle grabbed his arm, said sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel. mr. trump then used his free hand to lunge towards bobby engle and when mr. arnoto recounted the story to me, he motioned toward his clavicles. >> trump denied trying to grab the steering wheel or lunging at his secret service ageabout but msnbc has received a new audio recording of trump speaking with jonathan karl talking about how the secret service stopped him from going to the capitol that day. >> but if you look at the real size of that crowd, it was never reported correctly. there were -- it's the biggest crowd i have ever spoken in front of by far. >> really? >> by far. that went down to the washington -- that went back to the washington monument. >> you told them you were going to go up to the capitol. >> i was going to the secret service said you can't. i would have, and then when i get back -- i wanted to go back. i was thinking about going back during the problem to stop the problem, doing it myself. secret service didn't like that idea too much. >> so what -- >> i could have done that and i would have been well received. don't forget, the peopl that went to washington that day, in my opinion, they went because they thought the election was rigged. that's why they went. >> wonder why they thought that. by the way, in case you missed, let me read again what trump said regarding when he returned to the white house after his rally. quote, i said i wanted to go back. i was thinking about going back during the problem to stop the problem doing it myself. who knew trump was so concerned about the insurrection. it is hard to believe given that everything we know about trump's actions or inactions that day, contradicts what trump told jonathan karl. you know, the 187 minutes between trump finishing his rally speech and when he finally put out a video telling his supporters to leave the capitol. but not before telling them that he loves them and they're very special. in fact, from what we know, he just sat there for three hours watching the television coverage, unwilling to listen to the countless pleas coming from his white house staff members, members of congress who were under attack, various fox primetime hosts and even his own family members. >> did you ever hear the president ask for the national guard? >> no. >> did you ever hear the president ask for law enforcement response? >> no. >> did you continue throughout the period of time up until 4:17, continue, you and others, to push for a stronger statement? >> yes. >> were you joined in that effort by ivanka trump, by eric hirschmann, by mark meadows? >> yes. >> i asked kevin mccarthy, the republican leader, about this. he said he called donald trump -- finally got through to donald trump and he said, you have got to get on tv. you have got to get on twitter, you have to call these people off. and the president's response to kevin to me was chilling. he said, well, kevin, i guess they're just more upset about the election theft than you are. >> recently, nbc's kristen welker gave trump an opportunity to clear it all up. >> tell me how you watched this all unfold. were you in the dining room watching tv? >> i'm not going to tell you. i'll tell the people later at an appropriate time. >> did you call military or law enforcement? >> i'm not going to tell you anything. let me put it this way. i behaved so well. i did such a good job. >> yeah, trump actually believes he deserves a gold star for how well he behaved that day. and given that trump has claimed he would absolutely testify at his criminal trials i wonder if his federal election interference trial would be the appropriate time to explain these quite contradictly things, especially if he believed that he could have stopped the insurrection if he wanted to. joining me is charles coleman jr., former prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst. and hugo lowell, political investigations reporter for the guardian. thank you both for being here. charles, i want to start with you because i'm going to read it again. i wanted to go back. i was thinking about going back during the problem to stop the problem and doing it myself. so obviously, donald trump believes that he had influence over the crowd. now, let me play you what convicted insurrectionist rioter steven ayers told the january 6th committee about when he would have left and why he would have left the capitol. take a listen. >> as soon as that come out, everybody started talking about it, and it seemed like it started to disperse basically when president trump put his tweet out. we literally left right after that come out. you know, to me, if he would have done that earlier in the day, 1:30, you know, we wouldn't be in this -- maybe we wouldn't be in this bad of a situation or something. >> it seems to me that he is essentially now admitting he had some control over the crowd. at least that's what he seems to be admitting. and he seems to be kind of corroborating what cassidy hutchinson told the january 6th committee about his insistence to the secret service that he go to the capitol. all of this does not seem good if you're a defendant in a trial like the january 6th case. your thoughts. >> joy, i would agree with you. i would also point out the same things that you noticed during your reading are the same things i noticed as i was listening and watching. namely, when donald trump said, for example, that he believed that the people there were there because they thought it was a rigged election, the immediate thought i had was, how did they get that thought? they got that thought because this was something you were pushing. and now, if you combine that and you combine the notion of you knowing that or you believing and openly stating you believe you would be well received if you would go to the capitol and acknowledging there was a problem, that's also key language when he says during the problem, that's also key language because he's at that point admitting that we're not dealing with a protest. we're not dealing with people who are using their first amendment right to disagree. we're dealing with rioters. so the fact he used that language all of that combined does not bode well for him continuing to have the defense in this case. >> you know, hugo, that would make donald trump the only person anywhere near the capitol, democrat or especially republican, who thought the crowd would receive him well. every republican ran, including josh fist up hawley, including matt gaetz. all of them evacuated. jim jordan, people who were down with the whole madness, but they ran. he seems to think he wouldn't have had to run. around donald trump, are any of his lawyers getting nervous or any in trump world getting nervous that he seems to be admitting to the whole thing scooby-doo villain style? >> yeah, i think it's a tacit admission that trump knew the people at the capitol, the people storming the capitol were his people, and that he had a lot of influence over them, whether to send them to the capitol, that was the language he used at the ellipse rally speech. he said i'm going to march with you to the capitol. then for him to come away from the whole january 6th incident days or weeks later and say well, you know, i could have stopped it as well because effectively they're his people. i think that's a really big admission, and it's the kind of thing that defense lawyers and his team in particular have been very wary about him saying. they have been trying to limit him talking about the january 6th case in particular, especially now that he's been indicting. this was an audio interview that happened a couple years ago, but his team now are trying to stop him from making these sorts of admissions because it's the sort of thing that jack smith, the special counsel, will take up and use against him at trial. >> i will note that judge tanya chutkan has rejected donald trump's team's request to strike references to the january 6th violence from his indictment because again, owning the violence and saying he could have stopped it does seem to me as an admission that is against his own interest. speaking of trying to get him to stop saying words, there is for now a stay on the gag order in the federal election interference case, charles coleman jr. there is an appeal to the supreme court pending apparently trump has indicated he would like to go to the supreme court. his friends, his appointees on the supreme court. since that stay has happened, he has unleashed a barrage of attacks again, attacking the law clerk again, judge engoron's law clerk, attacking judge engoron, going on and on and own. and this after the judge denied trump's request for a mistrial. your thoughts on the fact that the mistrial was denied, and that the gag order immediately upon him -- it being lifted, he went right back in. >> listen, joy, i'm not surprised at either of those things. i knew the mistrial was more than likely going to be denied. people file for mistrials in the midst of trials all the time. they are seldom if ever successful unless there's a clear hard and fast rule that has been broken or violated. so that should come as no surprise to anyone. the fact that they brought the motion itself, i would argue, is frivolous, but it appears judge engoron did not want to go that far. with respect to the gag order, i'm also not surprised donald trump has gone as far as high has in terms of immediately doubling down with respect to his rhetoric, targeting different individuals. here's the thing, as we look at the game plan that he has laid out, it's very clear and it's smart money to bet donald trump feels very good about his odds should he be able to get before the supreme court of the united states of america. and it's very clear that now we see that blueprint laid out pretty plainly as he's already started to make appeals to try to get this there. he is going to try and put the pressure on the courts to get this as far as it can go in terms of getting in front of the supreme court so he can rely on his friends to try to give him carte blanche to say what it is he wants to say, not only during the civil trial but using this as a test case for everything else going on in all of his other legal matters. >> i want to note just for the audience that while we're talking about this, we have now got a ruling in the colorado case that was attempting to remove donald trump from the ballot based on the 14th amendment and whether or not he's qualified based on the idea of insurrection, which is detailed in the 14th amendment. i'll go to you, hugo, on the fact this judge has denied that attempt to take donald trump off the ballot, meaning at least as of now, pending some kind of appeal, he will be on the ballot in colorado. that seems like a fairly important development. and it's a single to other states, i'm assuming. >> yeah, look, we had the same ruling elsewhere. these removal efforts are going to be clearly very difficult because it's such a high bar to remove a candidate from a ballot. and in this case in particular, because trump wasn't charged with insurrection or inciting insurrection in the federal case, it was always going to be an uphill struggle for people to say at the state level that was the conduct he engaged in, therefore he should be removed from the ballot leading up to the election. i wanted to say one thing about the gag order and kind of trump's approach to it, because this has become more and more apparent in the weeks since these orders have come down. it's very clear that trump's team and trump himself sees no downside in assailing the judges or the prosecutors in any of his cases because if he does get hit with a gag order, then he can use that as political messaging to his supporters to say, oh, this is political interference. they're trying to stop me from addressing my accusers. that's the sort of language he likes to use. and the moment that there is a stay on those orders or a pause, high can say it's the judges. he want to claim these cases are political and he doesn't care if that means he's going to be restrained by a judge. >> he's also got a team because one of his most embarrassing sycophant sycophants, elise stefanik, is taking credit. last question to you, on this, charles coleman jr., does it now seem perhaps ill advised that jack smith not have charged him with insurrection, donald trump? let's say eventually he was convicted of insurrection, under the insurrection act, it would make a clearer case for colorado and other states to take him off the ballot. >> you, you're right, it would, but i don't know i would go as far as to say it was ill advised. as you consider that, you also to have consider the alternative. let's say he was charged and acquitted. then that easily makes him have a much stronger case against these 14th amendment challenges that quite frankly from the very outset i was skeptical of and didn't think they were going to go far. but that's the risk that you would have been taking if you are jack smith, which is why as a prosecutor you really have to stick to what it is you believe you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. >> charles coleman jr. and hugo lowell, thank you both very much. up next on "the reidout," extremist parental rights group moms for liberty gave it their best shot, but their attempt to infiltrate school boards across the country was soundly rejected by voters on election day. "the reidout" continues after this. my mom's life is the most important thing to me. hi mom! i called my mom, "i have this gene and i think you need to get tested." she feels like it was truly lifesaving. meet the jennifers. jen x. jen y. and jen z. each planning their future through the chase mobile app. jen x is planning a summer in portugal with some help from j.p. morgan wealth plan. let's go whiskers. jen y is working with a banker to budget for her birthday. you only turn 30 once. and jen z? her credit's golden. hello new apartment. three jens getting ahead with chase. solutions that grow with you. one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours. ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ [bell ringing] and doug says, “you can customize and save hundreds on car insurance with liberty mutual.” he hits his mark —center stage— and is crushed by a baby grand piano. are you replacing me? with this guy? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache! oh, look! a bibu. [limu emu squawks.] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ when you have chronic kidney disease... ...there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure which can lead to dialysis. ♪far-xi-ga♪ farxiga can cause serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections, and low blood sugar. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. when you have chronic kidney disease, it's time to ask your doctor for farxiga. because there are places you want to be. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪far-xi-ga♪ i was on a work trip when the pulmonary embolism happened. but because i have 23andme, i was aware of that gene. that saved my life. - [speaker] at first, just leaving the house was hard. - [speaker] but wounded warrior project helps you realize it's possible to get out there - [speaker] to feel sense of camaraderie again. - [speaker] to find the tools to live life better. - [narrator] through generous community support, we've connected warriors and their families with no cost physical and mental health services, legislative advocacy, career assistance, and life skill training for 20 years, and we are just getting started. the power goes out and we still have wifi to do our homework. and that's a good thing? great in my book! who are you? no power? no problem. introducing storm-ready wifi. now you can stay reliably connected through power outages with unlimited cellular data and up to 4 hours of battery back-up to keep you online. only from xfinity. home of the xfinity 10g network. . in the wake of last week's election, we're learning aot about what the american public can and cannot stomach. it's looking like the post' covid manufactured hysteria about woke education is something they cannot. voters across dhuntry rejected candidates for school boards backed by the conservative moms for liberty, which cast itself as a parental rights organization. it was an equal student shellacking from voters in red, blue, and purple states. they claim roughly 40% of their candidates won their races. 1776 project claim that 58% of their candidates won. however, the american federation of teachers countered the candidates publicly endorsed by conservative groups lost about 70% of their racesationally in elections this week. bottom line, exhausted parents across the board showed that they are sick and tired of book bans, racially exclusive lessons and the anti-lgbtq agenda. it happened in ruby red iowa, where two-term abortion banning governor kim reynolds and the republican legislature have restricted what is taught, what is read, and who you can be. in her state, just one of the 13 candidates endorsed state-wide by moms for liberty won their race. in minnesota, all moms for liberty backed candidates lost, as did all of their candidates in washington state and kansas. 19 of their candidates lost in new jersey and in ohio, 20 candidates backed by the group lost. only five were elected. meanwhile, in battleground pennsylvania, sensible parents flipped school board majorities in districts including bucks county, where every single extremist member was swept out of office. the rejection of education fanaticism went further in virginia, where governor glenn youngkin, who told us he won because he promoted parental rights and promptly went about banning crt and setting up a hotline to narcon people who teach the truth, failed spectacularly, as candidates echoing his 2021 education fanaticism lost. the governor might have seen what was coming, if he spent a little time listening to all virginians and not just moms fo