freedom for women. we know where joe biden and kamala harris. are they have been protecting, as much as they can, with the executives already they have, to protect those rights for women. >> one more for you. reed hoffman, a sort of top democratic donor. >> and a friend. >> gave $250,000 today, for this week, to super pac supporting nikki haley. should democratic donors be supporting nikki haley's candidacy in the hope that the worst-case scenario here is a biden haley matchup? >> the maga apples on the other side, disobey give maga apples, and they're all rotten, including nikki haley. i know nikki haley probably better than most because i was the party chair in south carolina when she was governor. this is a person who allowed their own home hospital to close. this is a person who wants to get social security and medicare. this is a person who does not believe in a women's right to choose. she may try to moderate what he she is saying now, but look at our track record. my advice to any democrat or anybody else, don't think that nikki haley is the good side of the republican party. she's just as rotten as donald trump. >> the apple analogy. works extensively in this conversation. jaime harrison, chair of the dnc, thanks for joining me tonight. that is social for tonight. is now time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening, alex. it was exactly ten years ago today that nelson mandela died, and tonight at the end of this hour, his grandson, kweku mandela, is going to join us from rwanda. he has been traveling around africa spreading the mandela spirit, and he will do that at the end of this hour. >> we need more mandela spirit in this building right now. i will be watching, lawrence. >> thanks. whoever, knowing an offense against the united states has been committed, receives, relieves, comfort, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent he apprehension, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact. this is what an accessory after the fact looks like. the breaking republican criminal news of the day is that the republican speaker of the house is now actively trying to prevent arrests for the federal crime of attacking the capitol on capital on january six, the accessory after the fact requires knowledge that crime has been committed against the united states and that a person with that knowledge zen, quote, assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment. now keep those words in mind. when you listen now to what republican speaker mike johnson said he is doing to the thousands of hours of security video that were recorded at the capitol on january 6th, before he makes all of that video publicly available. >> we have to blur some of the faces of persons who participated in the events of that day because we don't want them to be retaliated against and to be charged by the doj. >> big smile. we don't want them to be charged by the doj. that is the first time in history that a speaker of the house has said that he does not want people who committed federal crimes to be charged by the department of justice. that is the mission of an accessory after the fact. an accessory after the fact is trying to prevent the apprehension of criminals, trying to prevent the punishment of criminals, and mike johnson says, with that goofy smile, like he's a cultist in the middle of a cult, all of whom believe that we don't want the justice department to charge people after they commit federal crimes on videotape. and there's more. >> that's a slow process to get it done. we're working steadily on it. we've hired additional personnel to do that. >> okay. all right. so. the same republican speaker of the house who blocked funding for israel by attaching cuts to the irs workforce to that bill has hired additional federal workers whose top job title should be, accessories after the fact. mike johnson, who wants to fire iris workers who investigate federal tax crimes, as hired new federal workers to cover up crimes. mike johnson is the most pro crime speaker in the history of house of representatives. in fact he's the only one. the only one who has ever publicly admitted to, participating and leaning a cover-up of federal crimes. the speaker seems to think that he's not technically guilty of being an accessory after the fact, because the justice department already has all of this video without any blurred faces of the trump grazed criminals attacking the capitol. but the truth is, throughout the history of american law enforcement, citizens have been identifying criminals for law enforcement officials that the officials could not identify themselves. citizens have been finding criminals for line force meant that law enforcement could not find themselves. the fbi's most wanted list is 73 years old tonight. it was started in 1950. some of the most famous criminals in history were on that list. serial killer ted bundy, osama bin laden medalist years before 9/11. the fbi hope is that somewhere someone in the world will see one of these people on that list, see their picture, then see that person, somewhere in the world, and make a phone call. as has happened many, many, many times over the years. hundreds of the trump crazed criminals who attacked the capital have been arrested only because they were identified by citizens who saw photographs of them or saw video of them and knew who they were or figured out who they were and alerted the fbi. mike johnson wants to prevent all that. mike johnson wants to stop every one of those arrests that could still be made because unlearn citizen makes a call to the fbi he wants to stop possibly hundreds of arrests that could be made. mike johnson is much better than outlying the. trump long trump to sound like a liar every day of his life. he has never once started sounded like anything but a pathological liar to, me going back decades to before he became a politician. mike johnson, sounds like your accountant, telling how mature mortgage deductions going to be this year. >> the release of jerry six tapes is a critical important exercise. we want transparency. we should demand that the american people do. >> we want transparency. his face could not be straighter when he says that. donald trump would strain over a word like transparency if it appeared in his teleprompter, so obviously not meaning what he was saying, but mike johnson? with his unthreatening accountant like demeanor, delivers trumpian lies without the fireworks, and he's going to be an active member of the republican party for decades after donald trump's funeral. liz cheney's new book reveals that she was shocked by mike johnson's advancing preposterous ideas before january 6th about not accurately counting electoral votes. >> when i would confront him and tell him that his legal reasoning was inaccurate, was wrong, he would often suggested he agreed. he did the same thing with kevin mccarthy's chief counsel. he knew that he was making arguments for which he didn't have a basis but he continued to do it. he was desperate in many ways for donald trump's approval, to be sort of in donald trump's inner circle. >> donald trump's inner circle is a crime ring. mike johnson has no legal authority to blur the faces of criminals in that video. that video does not belong to mike johnson. it does not belong to the republican party. the video was created by and paid for the united states congress, a branch of the federal government, which means that it is owned by the federal government, whose authority comes entirely from us. from voters. we all own that video. we paid for it. mike johnson is tampering with the peoples video recorded in the peoples houses. this could never have happened before donald trump criminalized congressional republicans, some of whom participated in donald trump's criminal plot before january six, an almost all the rest of whom have added their voices of support of that plot after the fact by refusing to vote for donald trump's impeachment after he led the january 6th attack. special prosecutor jack smith is now saying in court filings that he wants to use statements donald trump has made after the attack on the capitol to prove donald trump's intent leading up to and during the attack on the capitol. jack smith's court filing says of particular note are the specific january 6th offenders whom the defendant has supported, namely into individuals committed a most serious crimes charged in relation to january six, such a seditious conspiracy and malicious attacks on police officers. -- a group of defendants held at the district of columbia jail, many of his criminal histories and war crimes and jarry six were so violent that their pre trial release would pose a danger to the public. the defendant, nonetheless, as financially supported and celebrated these offenders, many of whom assault alive force meant on january 6th by playing their recording of the national anthem and political rallies and calling them hostages. perhaps most importantly the defendants a embrace of january six rioters is evidence of his intent during the charge conspiracies because it shows that these individuals acted as he directed them to act, indeed, this evidence shows that the rioters disruption of the certification proceeding is exactly where the defendant intended on january 6th, and finally evidence of the defendant statements regarding possible pardons for january six offenders, is admissible to help the jury assess the credibility and motives of trial witnesses, because through such comments the defendant is publicly signaling that the law does not apply to those who act at his urging, regardless of the low gallatin of their actions. that same legal filing, jack smith tells the court that he plans to reach back to donald trump's false statements about elections, beginning in 2012. quote, the government will offer evidence reflecting the defendants historical record of making such claims. for example, as early as november 2012, the defendant issued a public tweet making baseless claims that voting machines switched votes from then-candidate romney to then candidate obama. during the 2016 presidential campaign the defendant claimed repeatedly with, no basis, that there was widespread voter fraud, including through public statements and tweets. the defendants false claims about the 2012 in 2016 elections are in admired miscible because they demonstrate the defendants common plan of falsely blaming fraud for election results he does not like as well as his motive, intent, and plan to obstruct the certification of the 2020 election results and illegitimately retain power. jack smith filing also quotes donald trump's refusals to commit to a peaceful transfer of power when asked about it before the 2020 election. jack smith notes that would know trump was asked in a press conference, in september of 2020, if he would, quote, commit to making sure that there is a peaceful transfer of power, the defendant responded, well we're going to have to see what happens. leon for discussion is andrew eisman, former fbi general counsel informative criminal division and eastern district of new york, the co-host of the msnbc podcast prosecuting donald trump. and probably quite is with us. she's a former u.s. attorney and law professor at the university of michigan law school. she's also co-host of the podcast hashtag sisters in law. they are both msnbc legal analysts. andrew weissmann, when i grabbed the federal definite definition of sex throughout the the fact and apply it to what i heard the speaker of the house say, one just has to wonder how far his words are from potential criminal prosecution here. >> i unfortunately have to say that you have to add his statements of conduct to a lot of other people in congress. on january six. and after that who enabled what donald trump did in here you're talking about something that they all live through and on january six as where the capital police and capitol police you. think he would have some respect as well as some sense of obligation and he would honor his oath of on us office in terms of doing the right thing. in this case there's actually no harm because, in addition to the statements he made, it is also abundantly clear that the government already has those tapes. so he is demonstrating heel will but in fact it will have no effect on the government and their ability to prosecute the january six case or donald trump. >> but, barbara, the government has all this video, but the public doesn't have all this video. and there are people out there who could see this video, if released honestly, and find someone in that video for the fbi that the fbi has not found. that's the way they have picked up an awful lot of these defendants as we go. in so we hear the speaker saying he doesn't want to let this video in any way help the fbi make any more arrests for january six. that's his actual stated intent. >> yeah, this is an incredibly irresponsible thing for someone to say. in some ways he is stating a plan to obstruct the investigation. many defendants were identified on social media with somebody with a, hayden at guy. that person's my neighbor. and that lead was used to put together other evidence to find that the person was they're engaging in crimes on that day. i think what's really going on here is that mike johnson is engaging in this disinformation campaign to revise history and to suggest that, as you say, these people were freedom fighters and hostages and were not what they all know them to be witches criminals. and so it is really trying to re-frame the debate, re-frame what happened before our very eyes on january 6th. and it goes right into a lot of the things that donald trump said, blaming antifa for the attack on january six. some suggested it was some sort of false flag operation by the government. all of these theories are designed to do one thing, and that is to put donald trump in position a victim and prosecutors in the position of oppressors. >> let's listen to what liz cheney said this afternoon in another fascinating interview with nicolle wallace about when mike johnson what she believes mike johnson is trying to do with these tapes by blurring their faces on the tapes. let's listen. >> he is suggesting every day that goes by the suggestion it somehow he's going to release something that will change what happened that day and that will change the facts. and there is nothing that will change that violent assault. so i call on him to release it now. >> andrew, that does seem to be the mission, beginning with kevin mccarthy releasing some of the tape to tucker carlson who didn't really know what to do with it is that there is somehow in these tapes, that's where we're going to find how it was really, i don't know, antifa or something, they did this. >> if it was antifa there would be no reason not to release the tapes. they can't keep their stories straight. of course it would be fine to make it public. i would note that the fbi that has these tapes would be able to, if they thought it would be helpful, to release them to the public, to get leads. they have done that in the past, most notably in the boston bombing case. so there is this ability but it doesn't really get to your point, which is that you have the speaker doing something that's just so in violation of what you expect a public official to be doing. you're supposed to be assisting law enforcement, not thwarting it. and just to go back to the filing the reference the jack smith made today, he talked about that type of obstruction, not just the words of donald trump but two instances of fomenting obstruction violent activity in detroit to stop the count of votes, and that's going to be part of the case that jack smith presents. he talked about evidence from rudy giuliani, attacking counsel for the rnc. because they wanted to use that sort of harassment in those attacks to thwart internal dissension, when people were saying that there is no fraud in the election. this is all of a peace, to barbara's point, about, disinformation but also using threats and violence to wield that fear and power. >> and barbara, the filing also collects so many public statements and then going post january 6th and post convictions of people from january 6th attack. really it expands the range of a relevant evidentiary timeframe in the case. >> yeah, this is an interesting filing, filed on what is known as rules of evidence for a four b, and the government is required to provide this notice to the fence that it intends to offer evidence that is not squarely about the case itself but is about something that is a prior bad act or subsequent panicked shed some light on something like their intent or their knowledge or their motive or absence of mistake or a common plan. and so that's where you see things like, you know donald, you can go back to 2012 unknown to saying things about rate elections. in 2016 he's talking about rigged elections. so the things he said before and after are all about conning the public into this idea that our elections are somehow vulnerable to theft. and so that's the strategy for jack smith, and they must under the rules of evidence disclose the kinds of evidence they are going to use. it's a bit of an interesting window into the government's evidence that we're going to see a trial. >> and andrew, we can expect a filing from donald trump's lawyers saying that none of that evidence is admissible? >> yeah. i mean i think they will say it doesn't meet the rules under 404 b. i think that's going to be a long shot. this evidence, although it's completely right that they have to give notice, it doesn't seem to be that there's going to be any good argument for why this should not come in. just because the evidence is prejudicial doesn't make it improper it can be fairly prejudicial to a defendant. the issue is that the only thing that it can't be done for is you can submit evidence just to show propensity. because he does yes -- but barb said it was coming interject smith's theory, so many other things, which is absence of mistake, motive, intent, plan, all of that is permissible under the rules. >> and barb mcquade, we have a report indicating that it seems as if a preliminary potential juror questionnaires have been mailed out in washington d. c. for a potential march 4th trial of next year to try to begin to sort out who could possibly serve on the trump jewelry, if that is what is appeared. we've seen a copy of it at nbc news images appear to fit what would go out now is a preliminary questionnaire from potential trump jurors. what does that tell us about the possible movement toward the trial here? >> that's progress. that's a good step. that's the first thing that you would want to do is to identify people who can share information and from that you can weed out certain people who will not have to show up physically to report for the trial. and useful in selecting a jury. so i think it's wonderful news if it's going out as early as november for the trial. in a case like this you can remember how difficult it would be to find people who don't already have strong opinions about what happened that day in about on trump's activity with a stolen election. it's important to get any relation. but what strikes me is, not just time it but early, that the cases very much on pace to begin on march 4th. >> barb mcquade, and andrew weissmann, thank you very much for starting off our discussions tonight. >> thank you, lawrence. >> coming up, the tuberville torture tonight in the united states senate. senator amy klobuchar forced the senates coolest republican to surrender. will join us next. coming up, the tuberville torture ended tonight on the senate amy klobuchar, who forced the senate coolest republican to surrender. will join us,