Summary
January 6 committee shows evidence of witness intimidation. "The New York Times" reports that Russia is looking to trade Viktor Bout for WNBA star Brittney Griner in a prisoner swap.
Transcript
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST, "ALL IN": Before we, go a quick note, on Sunday, NBC presents "Ukraine Answering the Call", an hour long special executive produced by our own MSNBC`s Nicole Wallace. Special guest like Alicia Keys, Brad Paisley, Brandy Carlisle and more. They will be raising funds by those affected by the ongoing war. So, be sure to tune in this Sunday, 7:00 p.m. on NBC, 10:00 p.m. on MSNBC.
And finally, finally, before we go, we have a lot of people come and go in the show, turnover is natural, and I don`t do stuff on the show every time, but a very, very special member of our team, Tiffany Champion, who`s been with us from the beginning is leaving and it`s a huge blow. And for the old timers, the ones who have been here since the first day, who spent the whole career for us, if you like the show for years, Tiffany was a huge part of the reason that you did, and we`re going to miss her a lot.
That is "ALL IN" for this.
MSNBC PRIME starts now with Ali Velshi.
Good evening, Ali. And I`m sorry I`m throwing to you late.
ALI VELSHI, MSNBC HOST: That`s all right. That was a good reason to do it, my friend. Have a great weekend. We`ll see you next week.
HAYES: You too.
VELSHI: And thanks to you at home for joining us this evening.
His name was Vinnie the Chin. Not because of his strong jaw. Rather, the name Vinnie the Chin was the play on the Italian name Vincenzo. His government name was Vincent Gigante. And depending on who you asked, he was either the leader of a notorious New York crime family, or a doddering old fool who did not know his right hand from his left.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: It is dusk in New York City and the man coming out of the city is walking down the street in bedroom slippers, wearing his pajamas beneath a bathrobe. This man is Vincent Gigante, and the FBI says he is the boss of the richest mafia family in the country.
His doctors say the man in pajamas is mentally ill, not a godfather but a man with the mind of a child, afraid of the dark.
JULES BONAVOLONTA: He`s crazy as a fox. He has -- he has played this game for many years.
REPORTER: The last time Gigante was arrested, in a bribery case in the early `70s, the charges were dropped, when his lawyers produced letters from psychiatrist, calling him a schizophrenic, with little chance of recovery.
Gigante has even been hospitalized here from time to time. His younger brother, a Catholic priest on the right, walking down the street with Gigante in these photos, says Gigante is a sick man, too sick to talk with us.
The priest called the FBI`s version stupid. Police insist that Gigante is a mastermind.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A smart man would be smart enough to act a little crazy.
REPORTER: Just before midnight most nights, Gigante`s bodyguards take him to this million-dollar town house that he shares with his girlfriend, just off of Park Avenue on the east side. Unaware that we are watching with hidden cameras as he leaves, Gigante he`s no longer walking around in pajamas but the stress like a normal person at this time of night.
BONAVOLONTA: He has been extremely smart. He has outwitted us for a long period of time. But I can tell you right now that the commitment is going to be made where it`s going to become extremely difficult for him to outwit us from here on out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: It`s going to be extremely difficult to outwit us from here on out.
It took a while, but the FBI eventually made good on that promise. In 1997, nearly a decade after that "Nightly News Report" I just played, Vincent "Vinnie the Chin" Gigante was sentenced to 12 years in prison on charges of racketeering and conspiracy to commit murder. When Vincent Gigante died in 2005, "The New York Times" wrote, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents and federal and state prosecutors regarded Mr. Gigante as the most elusive mafia leader of his era and the most difficult to bring to trial.
Vincent Gigante went to great lengths to keep up the appearance that he was suffering from severe mental illness and therefore could not be the head of a notorious crime family. And part of the reason it was so difficult to expose that ruse was at the time, mafia cases like the one brought against Vincent Gigante were rife with witness tampering. Witnesses against major crime bosses were regularly intimidated out of testifying under veiled threats and bribery.
A decade before the Vincent Gigante trial, a witness who is supposed to testify against the famous mob boss John Gotti embarrassed prosecutors and surprised everyone when he got on the stand and suddenly could remember if John Gotti was one of the people who had robbed him. "The New York Post" ran the story that day under the headline, I Forgotti.
But in the case against Vinnie the Chin, witnesses did in fact come forward to testify. They were granted government protection. Many of them ended up in the federal witness protection program. And eventually, prosecutors were able to paint a vivid, firsthand picture of Vincent Gigante`s notorious mob activities and reveal the fact that he was the boss of the Genovese crime family, the so-called Ivy League of the five crime families active in New York at the time.
[21:05:15]
The experience of those federal prosecutors trying to pin down Vinnie the Chin feels like an instructive piece of history for the January 6th Committee as they continue to bring their case against the former president with his own mafia-like tendencies.
This week, we learned from January 6th investigators that Trump world has been engaged in its own campaign of witness intimidation. On Tuesday, the vice chair of the committee, Liz Cheney, outlined to veiled threats that were sent to witnesses testifying before the committee.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY): This is a call received by one of our witnesses. Quote, a person let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know he is thinking about you. He knows you are loyal and you are going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: By now, you probably know the star witness of Tuesday`s January 6th hearing was Cassidy Hutchinson, the 26-year-old former aide to Trump chief of staff Mark meadows.
Hutchinson outlined in vivid the tail how Trump knew that many members of the mob outside his January 6th rally were armed to the teeth that day. She explained how Trump nevertheless instructed Secret Service agents to waive them through security and later desperately tried to go to the Capitol with them. She also described how an irate Trump sided with the mob against his own vice president as they chanted "hang Mike Pence".
Well, today, NBC News reports that the intimidating message that Congresswoman Cheney read at the hearing was sent to Hutchinson herself prior to her testimony. In that message, the sender cites an anonymous person who knows that Cassidy Hutchinson is loyal and is going to do the right thing.
NBC News reports that that person trying to influence Cassidy Hutchinson was her former boss, the Trump chief of staff, Mark Meadows. That`s according to a source familiar with Hutchinson`s deposition.
CNN further reports that, quote, Hutchinson`s security was a grave secure concern of the committee leading up to the hearing. It was part of why they kept their identity secret leading up to the meeting. CNN further reports that members of the committee have also suggested that the two examples they presented were only a fraction of the evidence they have related to possible witness intimidation.
As we first covered on this show last night, threatening messages are not the only issue at play here. Trump`s Save America political action committee is paying and providing lawyers to some of the January 6th witnesses, which raises concerns about whether they are doing so out of the goodness of their heart or in an attempt to shut down their testimony.
"The Washington Post" reports that Hutchinson herself had one of those Trump-aligned lawyers representing her until she cut ties with them, this month, quote, after he suggested that she not testify publicly, following 20 hours of closed depositions.
"The New York Times" further reports that Trump`s PAC has already paid for or promised to pay the legal fees of more than a dozen witnesses in the investigation. Now, of course, potential witness tampering by Trump and his allies -- that is one of the many Trump revelations that falls into the category of those shocking and utterly unsurprising.
We are all now very familiar with Trump`s mafia like intimidation tactics. They were at the center of his first impeachment tactic, when he tried to pressure the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, into investigating Joe Biden. Remember?
Quote, I would like you to do us a favor, though. I would like you to do us a favor, though.
Witness tampering was also just one of the many obstructive acts committed by the former president during Robert Mueller`s investigation. Trump famously dangled pardons in front of Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, in an effort to stop them from cooperating with the Mueller investigation.
Andrew Weissmann was one of the senior prosecutors on the Robert Mueller team at the time. He wrote in his book, quote: We were watching the president mirror the behavior of criminals -- not just by prioritizing loyalty to him personally over loyalty to the law, but by dangling certain rewards and punishments to backup such demands. Mobsters use the threat of whacking potential cooperators to keep everyone in line. The president had the power to pardon, to reward those who stayed loyal.
And here`s the thing. When Andrew Weismann talks about mob-like behavior, he knows of what he speaks. The federal prosecutor, who led the case, against Vincent "Vinnie the Chin" Gigante, all those years ago, was none other than Andrew Weissmann.
[21:10:07]
So, when we start to grapple with what looks like yet another instance of potential Trump world witness tampering, there is only one person who has the kind of unique experience to tell us how we should be thinking about this.
Joining us now is Andrew Weissmann, former FBI general counsel, former senior member of special counsel Robert Mueller`s investigative team. He`s the author of "Where Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation". He`s currently a professor at NYU law school. And he`s older than he looks because of the Vinnie the Chin stuff.
Sorry to outdo you for that, Andrew. But it is a relevant piece of information.
Let`s bring it into the present now. We`ve talked a lot about the past. You are familiar with Donald Trump`s many attempts to obstruct and interfere in the investigation that you were part, of the special counsel, Robert Mueller`s investigation.
What do you make of or what do you think of, what is your mind go, when you hear the revelations that Cassidy Hutchinson received messages saying things like, you are going to do the right thing? Sounds innocuous in the right context.
ANDREW WEISSMANN, SENIOR MEMBER OF SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER`S TRUMP-RUSSIA PROBE: Well, there is no reason for that call unless it`s witness tampering. I mean, there`s no reason to say, you will remain loyal, you will do the right thing. People are going to take an oath and tell the truth. A point of that call was stressing the loyalty and that we are watching.
And the second example that Liz Cheney gave made it even more explicit, saying Donald Trump reads transcripts. So, he`s going to be watching to s what you say.
But to me, when I heard that, it`s really typical of when you are doing an investigation that involves multiple people at the hierarchical organization, that you are going to have people attempt to interfere with witness testimony. It happens, as you mentioned, in mob cases all the time. That can take the form of actual, physical violence. It`s why there`s the witness protection program.
But in political corruption cases, it happens all the time as well. It happens through so-called House counsel. It happens through dangling benefits like when the former president was the president, he could dangle pardons.
And I think that the committee -- the January 6th committee -- is doing all it can by outing this evidence, to say, you know, we know this is going on. I think this is the place where the Department of Justice has to step up. These are credible allegations of witness tampering. It is easy enough for them to pursue those leads and to interview those people, for instance the intermediary who called Ms. Hutchinson as someone who should clearly be interviewed, and if necessary, be given immunity, to find out what he or she has to say about Mark Meadows and why that call was made.
That`s where it`s fine for the committee to out it publicly. But the real way to prevent this is to prosecute it, which is what, you know, when we were in the special counsel, we did, and we prosecuted both Roger Stone and Paul Manafort for tampering with witnesses. And they were both convicted of that.
VELSHI: You tweeted something and I`m wondering if it`s referenced to the same thing. You tweeted: And DOJ should do the same thing if not done already. Time to issue grand jury subpoenas for all these folks in the Donald J. Trump White House and get them under oath, under penalty of perjury.
Is that with respect to this potential intimidation or generally with respect to the information that Cassidy Hutchinson gave the committee broadly about how involved the Trump White House wasn`t everything that went down on January 6th?
WEISSMANN: It was more of the latter. But it certainly encompasses the witness tampering. I mean, if you don`t thwart witness tampering, it`s impossible to get at the truth. So, that is a very important thing to prevent. It`s an important thing to prosecute.
And it can also be really terrific evidence. You may recall Paul Manafort obstructed justice by trying to interfere with the testimony of two witnesses. And he did so while he was out on bail from his criminal case.
And that led to his being remanded and also was, of course, really terrific proof against him, because why would you engage in that conduct if you are innocent? You would need to coerce people to testify falsely if the truth would set you free?
But your point, Ali, I think it`s really important for the department to really step up its game here.
VELSHI: Let me ask you about the other part of this. The lawyers, the Trump super PAC paying for lawyers, for witnesses. Again, I will only take you back to your mob prosecution days -- it`s not illegal to pay for somebody else`s legal fees.
So, how does someone make the connection at someone paying for legal fees might also be some form of influencing judicial outcome?
[21:15:06]
WEISSMANN: Yeah, that`s a great question. So, you could imagine, if you are in an organization and criminal investigation happens, it`s really natural and normal for the organization to say, we will pay for counsel. It`s another thing, though, if that counsel doesn`t truly represent you.
When you are paid by a third party, you are obligation as a lawyer is still to your client, not to who pays you. And the problem in mob cases is that everybody who is given counsel knows they have to accept it and they are not truly being represented by that lawyer.
And here, when you see that Ms. Hutchinson changed counsel to me that`s a signal that she was aware that she had, at the very least, concerns that led her to think I need independent counsel. I`ve seen the same thing in the special counsel investigation, I saw when I was prosecuting Enron, where people decide that they truly want to have independent counsel.
But you are right that just simply paying for fees is not sufficient to show that it is improper.
VELSHI: Andrew, good to see you, thank you for being with us tonight.
Andrew Weissmann is a former FBI general counsel, senior member of the special counsel Robert Mueller`s investigation into Russian interference and the author of "Where Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation". Andrew, again, thanks so much for making time to be with us tonight.
We have got a lot coming up this hour including the latest on WNBA star and Olympic gold medalist Brittney Griner`s trial and detention in Russia and what one grassroots organization is doing a response to the Supreme Court overturning abortion rights.
But coming up next, we`ve got a wacky out of Wisconsin as Republicans and that they do everything they can to enforce minority rule.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:21:36]
VELSHI: Remember back one elections used to have consequences? Meet Frederick Prehn. He`s a dentist, a gun store owner, and until recently, a cranberry farmer. He`s also a member of the Wisconsin natural resources board which sets policy for the state government agency that manages fish, wildlife, air and water resources, et cetera.
Dr. Prehn was appointed by Republican Governor Scott Walker in 2015 for a six-year term, do the math on that. The term expired more than a year ago, but he doesn`t want to leave. He thinks the current Democratic Wisconsin government should have reappointed him. And anyway, there are important votes that he wanted to be there for. So he simply decided not to leave office.
He justified the decision by saying that according to Wisconsin law, he doesn`t have to go until his successor is appointed and confirmed and that`s where the state Senate comes in. The Democratic governor of Wisconsin appointed the board member`s successor, but the Republican controlled state Senate has not confirmed that person yet. And if they ever were to confirm that person, ever since the guy contacted them to say, hey, do I have to leave? They have not lifted a finger to confirm his successor.
So the Wisconsin attorney general sued to remove the guy from the sea that he will not leave voluntarily, but this week, the state Supreme Court ruled that he cannot be forced to go. The justices on the state Supreme Court voted along ideological lines.
Here`s the thing, Wisconsin Supreme Court justices are elected in non partisan elections, but the court has somehow found a way to be divided 4 to 3, conservatives to liberals.
So, to recap, you have a Republican appointee who is squatting in a government job, to which his appointment has expired, because the Republican Senate will not confirm his successor and the conservative majority state Supreme Court is on their side.
So, I have some questions. Is this normal politics? Involving an idiosyncratic figure who just doesn`t want to leave his job that happens to have found a loophole that allows him to keep it? Or is this a coordinated plot between that guy and the Republican-controlled Senate to keep a Democratic governor from exercising all of his powers? Or is it something in between?
Is this the way it will be from now on in Wisconsin, and does this have the potential to be a playbook elsewhere in the United States?
Joining us now is Barry Burden, professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin and director of the elections research center there.
Barry, thanks for being with us this evening.
Let`s just put a little bit of meat on these bones. Wisconsin`s governor, Tony Evers, reacted to the Supreme Court ruling in a statement which he says, in part: Today`s decision continues to underscore the erosion of democratic institutions at the hands of Republicans at the state. It`s wrong-headed, it`s shortsighted, and it`s politics at its most dangerous, end quote.
Do you agree that this is a deliberative erosion of democratic institutions and not a one-off situation of one guy who won`t leave his office and has found a way to stay?
BARRY BURDEN, POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON: I do. It seems like an obscure case of a board in some state that your viewers don`t care about, and a person they have never heard about. That the Supreme Court has essentially said, the state legislature gets to decide how long these people stay.
[21:25:05]
The legislature is controlled by Republicans, in large part because of the districts that put them there, and those districts now lock them in for another decade. It sort of doesn`t matter what the popularly elected governor would like to do, even if the person`s term ha ended, they may stay in that position indefinitely. They might as well be a Supreme Court justice serving for life.
VELSHI: Our viewers may recall, back in 2018, the Republican controlled legislature voted to strip this governor`s office of some of its powers when this current governor one election. So this toying around with what the governor is allowed to do, when the legislature is controlled by Republicans has been going on for sometime in Wisconsin. Is that an extension of that?
BURDEN: It really is. I would say it`s an extension and an escalation. The hardball tactics that the legislative leaders have been using against the governor, as you mentioned, that lame ducks session happened just a couple of weeks ago after Tony Evers was elected in November 2018. By December, the legislature was enacting all kinds of things, in a last-ditch effort to undercut the incoming governor and the incoming attorney general, both of whom were Democrats.
Now, when asked about it, legislative leader said, we are simply trying to rebalance power between the legislative branch of the executive branch. But the balance did not bother them for the eight years that Scott Walker, Republican was governor, suddenly it did. And they have not only succeeded in those lame duck accession efforts, they also refused to approve or even hold hearings on scores that the governor has made not just to the national resources were, but to the University of Wisconsin system and other boards and commissions around the state.
So it`s really knee capping the governor`s ability to govern.
VELSHI: Sort of sounds like when Merrick Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court and Mitch McConnell Senate did not allow that to move forward.
BURDEN: Yeah, that`s right. These are partly all things that are being done by the rules. There is nothing that says the U.S. Senate must hold a hearing on an open Supreme Court nominee within a certain number of days, and apparently in Wisconsin, there is no rule for someone`s term who has expired must then vacate the position.
So people were simply well-behaved until recently. But now, particularly on the Republican side, we are seeing these really aggressive tactics to try to push as far as they can to take advantage of loopholes and technicalities and things that were simply expected, but apparently not required by the law or at least not by the justices who are in power.
VELSHI: What a remarkable story. Barry, thanks for joining us. We appreciate your time.
Barry Burden is a professor of political science and elections research at the University of Wisconsin. We appreciate your time this evening.
Well, still ahead, the abortion rights are overturned and we deal with the fallout and attack of our democracy, you may have complicated feelings about what it means to be an American ahead of July 4th.
But coming up next, we are going to talk about what freedom means for one American who is trapped in a Russian jail right now.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:32:44]
VELSHI: They call him the merchant of death. He`s been referred to in the press as the world`s most notorious weapons trafficker. He`s this man, Viktor Bout. He`s a former Soviet military intelligence officer, then a convicted international arms dealer who was arrested in Thailand in 2008 in an elaborate four-month sting operation that involved American DEA agents, posing as Colombian rebels.
According to federal prosecutors, Bout agreed to sell other things, including hundreds of surface to air missiles, over 20,000 AK-47 fire arms, 10 million rounds of ammunition, and five tons of C4 plastic explosives, but the understanding what the weapons will be killed to kill Americans.
The story was wild enough to inspire a Hollywood film starring Nicholas Cage. But Viktor Bout`s real life story did not have a Hollywood ending. He was convicted in the U.S. on all four counts, including conspiring to kill Americans, and conspiring to provide material to support terrorist. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison and has served ten years of that sentence.
Now that convicted international weapons trafficker, the merchant of death, is reportedly whom Russia wants back in exchange for releasing WNBA star and two-time Olympic gold medalist Brittney Griner. You remember, four and a half months ago, in February, Ms. Griner was arrested in a Moscow airport. Russian officials said they found vape cartridges with traces of cannabis oil in her luggage.
They arrested her and charged with trafficking and narcotics. It just so happened that Griner was arrested and detained just a week before Russia invaded Ukraine. What a curious coincidence.
Today, Brittney Griner appeared for day one in her sham trial. She arrived in the courtroom in the suburbs of Moscow in handcuffs and wearing a Jimi Hendrix t-shirt.
Her wife said today, every time Griner was nearly seven feet tall had to go to court, which is a four-hour trip, every time, she`s chance but in a very, very, tiny cage, her knees been to the ground, because it`s not big enough for her to fit in.
[21:35:02]
She is due back in court next Thursday. It`s important to note that according to "The Associated Press", fewer than 1 percent of defendants in Russia criminal cases are acquitted, because this is Vladimir Putin`s court.
Now the rumored prisoners swap reportedly also includes this man, Paul Whelan, a U.S. former marine who is imprisoned in Russia on espionage charges for three years. In fact, Russian state media claim that exchange talks are already underway.
Brittney Griner is a very, very vulnerable pawn of Vladimir Putin. Holding her essentially hostage, of star American athlete is arguably one of the best things to happen to Putin since he invaded Ukraine and started a war there. It`s the irony of being a political prisoner when you are in jail not for doing anything remotely political.
Joining us now is Kimberley St. Julian-Varnon. She is a PhD. student in history at the University of Pennsylvania who focuses on Russia and the Soviet Union, and particularly African American experiences there.
Ms. St. Julian-Varnon, thank you for making time for being with us tonight.
KIMBERLY ST. JULIAN-VARNON, HISTORIAN SPECIALIZING IN SOVIET UNION AND UKRAINE: Thank you for having me.
VELSHI: I understand you consult about the WNBA`s players union regarding Brittney Griner`s imprisonment. Can you tell us about the conversation?
ST. JULIAN-VARNON: So, I started consulting them earlier on in Brittney`s case and it was our initial discussion and I was explaining just the differences between the Russian and American legal systems, but also to explain the context in which Brittney was being held and detained, in ways in which the war in Ukraine fundamentally makes her case unique in many ways, including the types of asks the Russia would ask to get her released.
VELSHI: It`s a big deal. In terms of -- they have this case against her for dealing in drugs, notwithstanding the fact that all they found on her was a vape and they say cannabis oil -- that`s not much of a thing. That`s not why she is really in jail, that`s not what this is about, would you agree?
ST. JULIAN-VARNON: I completely agree. I mean, just today in her trial, the state prosecutor talked about I think they found 0.7 grams of hashish oil total in her luggage. Allegedly.
And so, the problem is, Brittney is the best chance for Russia to get with Viktor Bout of the United States in a very high-profile prisoner swap. So I can`t help but think that her detainment was a political move to get Viktor Bout out, but also it gives Russia leverage over the United States and because of what to do in terms of the American support of Ukraine.
VELSHI: What? Do you know how she`s doing? This has got to be very rough on her.
ST. JULIAN-VARNON: I mean, it`s completely rough on her. She`s in a foreign country. She`s far away from home. She hasn`t been able to speak directly to her wife. There is a failed phone call last week.
But according to Russian media reports, she has been doing well, and she is keeping her hopes up, and she`s trying to be as strong as she can, until she can come home and be safe. I think that`s just what she will have to do. She mentioned that her wife Cherelle talked about her being it put in a cage to be transported from president. That standard in Russia, but also, in most trials, most offenses are held in cages. As witnesses are discussing what happened, they are held in cages.
So she is constantly in those uncomfortable states, but also she`s a visible minority in a country not just the fact that she`s almost seven feet tall, but she`s a Black woman, and she`s a gay Black woman. All of these things exacerbate her situation in Russia.
VELSHI: Just tell me a bit more about that, how does being a Black gay woman make things worse for her?
ST. JULIAN-VARNON: Well, Russia has some of the most cruel anti-LGBTQ laws in the world. You have people facing prison sentences for allegedly promoting unnatural lifestyles, and that just means talking about being gay, or having a gay relationship in public. So you start seeing these crackdowns happening in Russia, and the fact that Brittney Griner is not only gay, she is openly gay. She`s also married to a woman, all of these things compound to her being seen as different from Russia, is not Russian.
But also as anti-moral, the way that Russians see morals under Putin. But her being Black means she`s a very, hyper visible minority in a country that is overwhelmingly Slavic. So she`s in a particular situation where, if Russia wants to present itself as the antithesis of the United States, they can treat her well to talk about how racist the United States is. On the flipside, Russia can engage in white supremacy, which it has for a long time under Putin, and it has promoted white supremacist, anti-Black violence against her.
So, it really depends on how Putin wants to place himself in the situation.
VELSHI: Should the U.S. government, do you think they are doing enough and could they be doing more?
[21:40:00]
ST. JULIAN-VARNON: I think it depends. You have kind of -- I call it a sticky wicket, because I think they should be probably are doing what they can to get her out, undercover. These are high level conversations that are going to be held that most Americans won`t know about.
So the flipside is, if you do get her released, the fears that you set a precedent for kidnapping and detainment essentially of high level Americans for any other future Russian criminals who are held in American custody. So I think that`s another thing that the Biden administration has to think about.
But finally, you have the domestic support for Brittney Griner, and people want to know why she isn`t, home and why more isn`t being done? Because she`s a celebrity and Black women. And Black women have been carrying this country. And we want answers about her whereabouts and how they`re going to get her home. So it`s a very difficult situation and there are a lot of moving pieces in this case right now.
VELSHI: Kimberly St. Julian-Varnon, is a PhD student in history at the University of Pennsylvania, we thank you for your time tonight.
ST. JULIAN-VARNON: Thank you.
VELSHI: Russia`s war on Ukraine is now in its fifth month, it continues to take a toll on Ukrainian civilians as their hospitals, homes, and schools continue to be destroyed. Parents and children remain separated from one another.
This Sunday, NBC will present a primetime special to help raise funds for families affected by the war by calling Nicolle Wallace, host of "DEADLINE: WHITE HOUSE" here on MSNBC, is one of the executive producers of this hour- long special which will feature special appearances by celebrity chef Jose Andreas, Brandi Carlile, Alicia Keys, Sylvia Liu, Brad Paisley, and more.
The Ukrainian President Zelenskyy will also deliver remarks during the event and echo his previous calls to Americans to do whatever they can`t in the fight for peace.
"Ukraine, Answering the Call" will air Sunday at 7 pm on both the East and West Coast on NBC, and again at 10:00 p.m. Eastern on MSNBC.
As we prepare for our own independence day festivities here, tried to spare an hour for those in Ukraine who are now fighting for their independence.
We`ve got more ahead. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:46:41]
VELSHI: It was ten years ago this week that July 4th celebrations in San Diego famously did not go off as planned.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BRIAN WILLIAMS, NBC NEWS: In case you didn`t catch up with the story over the Fourth of July, the folks in San Diego had a heck of a time the night of July 4th when all their fireworks display went up at once, 20 minutes worth, just over 20 seconds.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: People in San Diego were expecting a dramatic fireworks -- and it was dramatic. But you have pretty much just seen the entire thing. Some sort of technical glitch caused all the fireworks to go off at the same time, and then the crowd was told, that was it.
NICK DAMBROSIO, LA JOLLA RESIDENT: At first, it was pretty good. All the fireworks going off at first. But then everything stopped, and I felt mad.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: This Fourth of July is the ten-year anniversary of the San Diego big baby boom fireworks fiasco. I think it`s kind of fitting, because this week has seen an explosion of news, terrible news, it`s all around a very strange time to celebrate America. It`s hard to process what we have seen in the last week or so.
A bunch of America went into this week still shell-shocked by the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, sending women`s rights back 50 years.
On Tuesday, our entire understanding of the assault on our Capitol last year was rocked as a former White House aide testified that President Trump knew full well that there was a sea of heavily armed protesters at his rally on January 6th and that he lashed out when prevented from marching to the Capitol alongside them.
Our current president, Joe Biden, took part in a historic NATO summit, in which the alliance agreed to soon add to new members -- Sweden and Finland.
Yesterday, we saw the first African American woman sworn into serve on the United States Supreme Court, the same day that the Supreme Court took away one of the EPA`s best tools for fighting climate change.
It has been a weird week in a weird year in a weird couple of years for America, so don`t feel alone if you feel like it is complicated to be celebrating America right now. But this is what America is. Steps forward, steps backward, a never-ending push to make America the country that it could be.
Which is why it was so presently supplies to hear that since the catastrophic Roe ruling on Friday, in the span of that single week, 1,400 people have signed up with the organization Run for Something, 1,400 people who experienced this week and all of its chaos and heartache and said, I`m going to do something about this.
Joining us now is Amanda Litman, cofounder and executive director of Running for Something, an organization that recruits and supports young progressive people to run for office.
Amanda, thank you so much for being with us tonight. You represent the best of what Americans can do in tough times. There are definitely clouds hanging over us and yet you`ve got 1,400 people -- what do the 1,400 people signing up to do? To run, to help people run? Wouldn`t they signing up for?
AMANDA LITMAN, CO-FOUNDER, RUN FOR SOMETHING: So those 1400 people are joining the Run for Something pipeline, which now numbers over 120,000 young people all across the country, who have raised their hands to say, I want to run for local office, what is next? Maybe that means this year, maybe that means five years down the road.
[21:50:02]
But these are people willing to change their lives, maybe change their careers, ultimately to make their community a better place. It`s one of the reasons why I am so hopeful, even though the present is pretty bleak. I
VELSHI: I guess the point is, if there`s some thought that you might run for something now or in the future, at least that means you are involved. At least that means you are reading in. At least that means you are attending meetings. At least that means you are registered to vote and you go out to vote.
So, it`s better than a starting point for citizenship. It`s an advanced course, its PhD citizenship.
LITMAN: That`s exactly right. These are people here who care about solving problems in their community, who were willing to do the work. Many of them volunteer with some of the thousands of run for something endorsed candidates we have worked with over the years. They are knocking on doors. They are talking to voters, especially about hyper-local issues in a way that they really understand.
It`s democracy at its finest and I think it`s really beautiful. But it`s normal people, parents, teachers, refugees, artists, scientists, musicians, rodeo stars, battle rappers, who just think that their voices serves to be heard to.
VELSHI: How do you cause people who are motivated by something so big, like the overturning of Roe v. Wade, into realizing that this success of your political adventure starts local? And it can be a very big deal just to deal with your local issues? That`s how you influence the process.
LITMAN: I think abortion is a really good example now, unfortunately, that now it is unfortunately going to be decided in state legislatures and city councils and even in school boards across the country. You can have city councils, like we`ve seen, in Austin, and mayors, like we`ve seen in Cincinnati, who make abortion basically decriminalized in their community, who set up funds to help residents leave the city to get the care that they need.
You can have the D.A.s like in Michigan and Texas and Kansas in Florida and Arizona who have said, I`m not going to prosecute. They are able to take these really big, sticky, national issues and solve them in some shape, way or form in your community and then live the results of that impact. It is such a beautiful journey.
VELSHI: What`s the distinction between people you recruit to run for office and people you endorse?
LITMAN: Our program runs a bit like a marketing final. So, people sign up, they join a conference call to learn more about how you run, they get a bunch of materials to help you figure out how to get on the ballot. They might work then with staff or our partner organizations.
Wednesday officially file, they can apply for our endorsement. We`ve endorsed more than 2,000 candidates in the five years the organization has been around and helped elect nearly 650 across 48 states, mostly women, mostly people of color, all under the age of 40, all first-time candidates.
VELSHI: That`s amazing. Well, thank you for doing that. Thank you for doing that for democracy.
Amanda Litman is cofounder and executive director of Run for Something. What a fantastic idea, the kind that actually save democracy. Thanks for being with us tonight.
LITMAN: Thanks for having me.
VELSHI: Well, what will Simone Biles and John McCain soon have in common with Joe Biden, Michael Jordan, Meryl Streep, Diana Ross, Pope John Paul II, and Rush Limbaugh? Take a guess and I will give you the answer when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:57:51]
VELSHI: Today, President Joe Biden announced the recipients of the nation`s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. The 17 people receiving this award are a diverse group who have made an exceptional contribution to the country in the arts, sports, civil rights and politics.
The list includes athletes like gymnast Simone Biles and soccer player Megan Rapinoe, as well as the actor Denzel Washington. Also some every day here, like the first American to receive the COVID vaccine, nurse Sandra Lindsey, and Gold Star Khizr Khan, who famously carries copies of the U.S. Constitution in this pockets to give to people.
The late Republican Senator John McCain, Apple founder Steve Jobs, and union leader Richard Trumka will also receive the award posthumously.
In 2016, then President Barack Obama also gave this award to 21 people in an event that was a who`s who of American culture and innovation. Among the honorees than, Tom Hanks, architect Frank Gary, Bill and Melinda Gates, Diane Ross and physicist Richard Darwin.
In Obama`s last year in office, he surprised a teary eyed Vice President Joe Biden with the vice presidential Medal of Freedom with distinction, a distinction most recently given to President Reagan, Pope John Paul II and General Colin Powell.
You can contrast the slates of recipients with some of the people that Donald Trump decided to honor. His congressional allies Jim Jordan and Devin Nunes, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, the wife of Republican mega donor Sheldon Adelson, Edwin Meese, President Reagan`s attorney general who helped cover up the Iran Contra scandal. And you get the picture of the contrast.
So, when Biden holds the Medal of Freedom ceremony at the White House next Thursday, it`s going to look more like what you are used to, a celebration of people who have truly made this country great.
That does it for us tonight. We`ll see you again on my show "VELSHI" tomorrow morning at 9:00 -- I`m sorry, 8:00 a.m. Eastern. We will bring you a special hour on the January 6th investigation with a closer look at what we`ve learned this week, including a crucial conversation about what it means to be a whistleblower in Donald Trump`s Republican Party with one of the most famous Trump era whistleblowers.
Plus, the Velshi book club is back on Sunday, featuring Garrard Conley, author of the beautiful book, "Boy Erased", a memoir about his own experience of being outed to his Baptist family and being forced to choose between anti-gay so-called conversion therapy or risk losing his family.
Time now for "THE LAST WORD". Jason Johnson is in for Lawrence tonight. Good evening, sir.