reidout. inside with jen psaki starts now. inside with jen psaki starts now. okay. i've been looking forward to talking to my first guest tonight for a very long time. when we first launched the show, nine months ago, earlier this year, we made a big list of people we wanted to talk to. and liz cheney was always near the top of it. well, tonight, liz cheney is here, here with me in new york, and this would've been pretty surprising to me a few years ago. i'm gonna be honest. i did work on john kerry's campaign in 2004, and i tried very hard to defeat george bush and her father. four years later, i was a part of the transition when president bush and vice president cheney handed over to barack obama and joe biden, peacefully, by the way. of course liz cheney had a political career of her own. when that would come to be defined by her work on the january 6th committee and her willingness to speak out against donald trump when it wasn't always easy. look, i know that when i sound the alarm about the former president, which i do frequently, there are a lot of people who tune me at. who am not getting through to. but when liz cheney sends that alarm, as loudly as she's doing right now, that's another thing entirely. it's a perfect time to be talking with her, because donald trump is talking a lot about his desire to be a dictator. and that's because he wants to be a dictator. that part is pretty clear. the harder question to answer is, how do we talk about that? because the sad reality is there are people in this cotry who hear him say things like that, and they like it. as republican senator mitt romney put it,rump's base loves the authoritarian streak. i think they love the idea that he may use the military in domestic matters, and that he will seek revenge and retribution. that's why he's saying it and has the lock nearly on the republican nomination. the senator is right, in my view. even though a dictatorship is antithetical to basically everything the country stands for, a lot of people in trump's base kind of love it. because it makes him sound strong. my friend dan pfeiffer summed up this problem in a great piece out this week, saying that when the world feels out of control, people are willing to sacrifice a lot for the perception of safety and security. we've seen that over and over again in politics. that's why it's so important to call it trump's authoritarian rhetoric. for what it really is. not a sign of strength, but a sign of weakness. authoritarianism isn't actually a governing approach that comes from a position of strength. authoritarians around the world want to control the people they govern because they can't earn their support and they don't respect their votes. it comes from a place of desperation, not a place of leadership. see, donald trump has never had the support of the majority of this country. he lost the popular vote in 2016 by nearly 3 million votes. he lost the popular vote in 2020 by 7 million. and when he lost that election, he tried to steal it. he tries to convince his supporters that elections are rigged before they even happen. that's what's happening right now. because he's afraid he will lose. he threatens to lock up his critics because he can't handle the public disapproval. he talks about going after the media because he's pretty thin skinned. i think we know that. he cries fake news because he can't handle the truth. exaggerates his personal wealth because he's insecure. literally everything that he does is actually a sign of weakness masquerading as strength. now, this facade could of course come from -- donald trump spends much of the next year sitting in a courtroom. especially since the justice system isn't susceptible to the strongman tactics. we saw a sign of urgency from special counsel jack smith just this morning. smith asked the supreme court to decide whether trump is immune from prosecution for crimes committed while in office. and just hours later, the court said it would consider whether to hear the case on an expedited basis. but here's the thing. there's no certainty he will be held accountable for the election. there's no certainty that the courts will stop this wannabe dictator, which is why this message is so important here. and the message needs to be that we are not talking about a strong leader here, but a week one. joining me now is former republican congresswoman liz cheney. she's the author of the new book oath and honor. it's such a pleasure to be here today -- i want to thank you for speaking out as much as you have. it's not easy to go against the grain of your party. >> thank you for having me, i appreciate it. and these issues really are ones, as we've talked about, that span across party lines. >> i want to start kind of where i ended there, which is about dictators. you have worked around the world, you've worked on national security issues. are some of these impulses, these authoritarian impulses of trump's, are they a sign of strength? are they a sign of weakness, as i said? what are your thoughts? >> you know, i think that the first thing i would say is that we have to be very careful that we don't sort of ignore exactly what you're pointing to. because this is the united states of america, because we've never really had to deal with somebody, we've never had to deal with somebody like this before, it can become too easy to say, well, dictatorship can't happen here. and i think that the really important message in this is about the people who were around him who stopped the very worst of what he was trying to do, we know will not be around him again. in a second term. therefore, he will be fire, far more dangerous in terms of his willingness to ignore the rulings of the courts. we've talked about the pardon power, and his willingness to use that if he needs to. and the fact that he always be tried to stay in office once we. nobody can responsibly say, you know, what he won't do that again. he's fit to be president. >> and your book makes that very clear, that we weren't prepared in many ways, and we need to be prepared now. i want to read a part of your book that really stuck out to me. you said, and you touched a little bit on this, certainly, donald trump would run the u.s. government with acting officials who are not and could not be confirmed by the senate. he would obtain a bogus legal opinion allowing him to do it. he would ensure the senate confirmation progress is no longer any check on his authority. the type of resignation threats that may have kept trump at bay before it will no longer be a deterrent. trump will be eager for those who oppose his actions in the justice department and elsewhere to resign. and at the department of defense, you would again install his own team of loyalists. people who would act on his orders without hesitation. that's a pretty stark assessment. i think a lot of people are trying to understand what's the biggest risk and what this all means. somewhat of those things keeps you up at night? >> i think they all do. and what really keeps me up at night is the idea that there are so many people now who seem to have forgotten what he already did once. and who seem not to be focused on how much power we instill in someone as president. and a president who's willing to do the things he's watched him do before certainly will do those things again. i think, you know, the story of the lead up to january 6th and what he was willing to do, for example, with the defense department, the fact that today, still, he is saying, well, mike flynn would be part of the future administration, and mike flynn, of course, said he should deploy the military to seize voting machines, to re-run the election. i mean, and these are not people he's distancing himself from. which, you know, it's an important point. if you look, for example, at the text messages between sean hannity and kayleigh mcenany on january 7th, they were saying no more crazy people. basically, keep trump isolated. keep the crazy people away from him. you know, now he's spending all his time with -- >> surrounding himself -- >> exactly. steve bannon and others -- second term. >> this group of a nail blares as something you've talked about a fair amount in your book. we were talking about pardon power before the show started, and one of the things you talk about in the book is sort of these powers of the presidency. that people aren't maybe aware -- there is pardon power. they're of course is the nuclear codes. there's being able to deploy military. are those -- which of those is scariest to you? or what do you think people aren't tracking the most of those powers? >> i think that in many ways, all of them share the common thread, which is it doesn't matter how many guardrails you try to put in place. if you elect a president who's gonna blow through guardrails. and if you look at the constitutional structure, the presidency is checked, according to our framers, by the congress and by the courts. and we're of course now in a situation where we know the republicans that are in the majority in the house, certainly, and many republicans in the senate, won't check him. won't stand up to him. and then, if the courts issue rulings with which he disagrees, you know, he's been clear, and in fact, ignored 61 out of 62 court cases that he lost. it's clear that neither one of those other entities will be able to be a check on his power. >> to check him. so one of the other things you've talked about, and you said this publicly since book came out, is you think he'll try to stay in office. >> right. >> what does that look like? you're so familiar with the powers of the presidency and what enablers could do. how does he do that? >> well, first of all, he tried to do it once. when you think about when he woke up on the morning of january 6th, he knew that he had lost the election. and yet, he thought he was gonna remain in the oval office. he thought he was gonna remain as president after january 20th. and you can imagine a scenario where he could say for the people, you know, we just need to delay the election, as he's already said previously. and suggests that for some reason, there was incurable fraud. and so the election couldn't go forward, and she we should just delay it. and people hear that, they say, but the courts would step in. certainly, a federal court would issue an order saying, no no, you have to go forward with the election. but if the president ignores the court's orders, it doesn't matter that they're compulsory. and i think that's the most important thing for people to recognize. it's not our system, the framework of our constitutional structure depends upon individuals to defend it. and the president is, you know, at the pinnacle of those who are duty bound to defend it. so we're in real ginger if we elect someone like donald trump who won't. >> i do want to turn to the legal cases. you are a lawyer, of course. you talk about a lot of these in the book. and there is what i think is a surprising but pretty big development today. because pretzel prosecutor jack smith is now asking the supreme court to decide whether donald trump is entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for his alleged crimes committed while in office. that's something he's raised as a way to kind of delay or get himself, of course, out of the legal case. what do you make of smith's decision? was it a wise one? what will it get him? >> i thought it was exactly the right thing to do. i think he's clearly demonstrating that donald trump 's efforts at delay are not ones that he thinks the court should abide. i also don't think that it's a close call at all. the notion that somehow, a president has got complete immunity for criminal activity that he committed while in office. it just strikes me is not a close call. i thought it was the right decision, and i think we've seen the supreme court move very quickly to say that they'll take the case. >> which is interesting. in your book, you also tell us story of how back in january of 2022, when the court granted access to trump's -- i think you are a little more optimistic, i think it's fair to say, about what they might do. and a lot of people, many democrats, are skeptical. this three appointees from trump there. as you look at this case, it seems like they've moved rapidly. how confident are you that they would fully take the case, that they would rule in favor of jack smith? >> you know, i think it's one of the really heartening things about what's happened over the course of the last several years now, that we've seen, almost without exception, judges and justices, and doesn't matter if they were appointed by a democratic president or a republican president. they have been absolutely steadfast in terms of recognizing the threat that donald trump poses in upholding the rule of law. and it was very interesting, as you mentioned, on the committee. you know, i think we saw the sort of traditional analysis of the courts. and i think both sides do it. but, you know, the democrats would say, the republican justices can be counted on, or the republican appointed judges or justices, and the republicans assume, you know, the opposite, and i think it was very important that what we did see wise, in every case, the courts understood how important the work of the committee was. understood how important it was that we be able to conduct the investigation in a timely fashion. and so, we really were able to do things like get access to documents on a much quicker timetable than we might have expected. >> so we shouldn't be skeptical? people shouldn't be so worried out there? >> i think people should be really understand and be impressed with how our courts and our judges and justices have operated. but recognize and understand, then, the damage in the danger that donald trump and republican enablers are doing every time they go out and attack and demonize either the judges -- this notion that somehow the system is weaponized is a really damaging one, and it's wrong. >> as we look to next year, obviously, there's gonna be a number of high-profile people testifying. in georgia, that will be on television. one of the people who is reportedly on that list is vice president pence. you talk about him a lot in your book. how do -- you daughter of a former vice president, a student of history, how do you view, how should we all view the potential for a former vice president testifying against the former president? >> i mean, i think it's a sad thing for the country. and there's so many moments where you just sort of have to stop and think, imagine how it got to this place? but the fact that you have, you know, the vice president pence did what i believe was very important and patriotic duty on january 6th, not to yield to donald trump's pressure. but the extent to which donald trump's overall plan to seize power really did involve pressure on the vice president, even after pence had told him very clearly, and he told them this as a president of the senate. he said, i don't have that authority. i don't have the power, i can't do that legally, it's unconstitutional. and donald trump, as with many other people who told him the same thing, was unwilling to listen. >> do you wish the former vice president was more outspoken publicly? >> certainly. i think there are a lot of people in our party who, you know, we need everybody basically on the field. we need everybody explaining the danger of the former president. and i think, you know, that includes the former vice president. >> liz cheney, i have so much more to ask you, including those enablers and some of your former colleagues in congress. you have a lot to say about in this book. we'll be right back with liz cheney. cheney get it with boost infinite, and send your favorite people to a wireless wonderland of endless delight where they'll unwrap the joy of the latest iphone year, after year, after year. gift the titanium iphone 15 pro. enjoy unlimited wireless and the latest iphone every year for $60 a month. boost infinite. 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. (♪♪) honey... honey... dayquil severe honey. powerful cold and flu symptom relief with a honey-licious taste. because life doesn't stop for a cold. dayquil honey, the daytime, coughing, aching, stuffy head, fever, honey-licious, power through your day, medicine. ♪i'm hearing different ways for me to screen for colon cancer.♪ ♪it's time to use my voice,♪ ♪i've got a choice, more than one answer.♪ ♪i sat down with my doc.♪ we had a talk. ♪knew just what to say.♪ ♪i asked for cologuard and did it my way.♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪i did it my way!♪ if you struggle. and struggle. and struggle with cpap. you should check out inspire. no mask. no hose. just sleep. we are back with former learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com republican congresswoman liz cheney. so, you do not hold back about some of the in a blaze in congress and your book at all. and when you're writing this book, mike johnson was not known by a lot of people. but, now he certainly is. and i want to talk about him. but first, i want to spend some time talking about kevin mccarthy. and i want to play some sound from an interview he did just this weekend. >> can you count on your support? >> yes. >> that's an endorsement? >> i will support the president. i will support president trump. >> would you be willing to serve in the trump cabinet? >> and the right position. look, if i'm the best person for the job, yes. >> i mean, watching that, i was thinking, why? you're leaving congress, so why? >> yeah. i mean, i can't explain it. it's pathetic. there is sort of an element of, it doesn't really matter what donald trump has done to the country, what donald trump has done to the congress, donald trump has done to kevin mccarthy -- >> to him! >> yeah. it's just kind of going back for more. and i think it's sad, but i also think history is going to show that kevin's unwilling to do the right thing, sort of each time that decision came, did real damage. >> unquestionably. you've said that kevin mccarthy's successor, mike johnson, cannot remain speaker through 2025. and we know the role from your book and from a lot of reporting that he played around january 6th, as an enabler. you're very familiar with the power of the speakership. so breakdown for us, what could he do? why is that so it's concerning? >> well, the new congress will be sworn in on january 3rd. then, on january 6th, 2025, the joint session will happen where the electoral votes are counted. and, being in a situation where you have the speaker of the house who's already shown that he's willing to do things he knows to be wrong in order to placate donald trump, presents a real risk. and especially if you begin to think about, what does it mean, potentially, if no candidate gets 270? if the election is thrown into the house? if you're in a situation where the speaker can give more leeway to people who want to make objections can make that easier to do? there is a whole series of things that we could find ourselves depending upon the majority, depending upon a speaker who is already demonstrated he won't stand up against don