IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

Transcript: The Beat with Ari Melber, 6/7/22

Guests: Don Beyer

Summary

Injured officer to testify at new insurrection hearing as well as Trump`s Secret Service chief. Atlanta DA cracking down on artistic freedom with prosecutors indicting black men over fictional lyrics while slow- walking Trump probe over election interference. Georgia case has renewed scrutiny on America`s unequal justice. Actor Matthew McConaughey made an impassioned plea at the White House today, discussing responsible gun ownership. Representative Don Beyer of Virginia joins THE BEAT with Ari Melber to talk about how the Democratic lawmaker unveils a plan for a 1,000 percent tax on assault weapons.

Transcript

NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC HOST: Thank you for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. We are so grateful. THE BEAT WITH ARI MELBER starts right now. Hi, Ari.

ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: Hi, Nicolle. Thank you. Welcome to THE BEAT. I am Ari Melber. And let me tell you, we actually have an unusual show for you tonight.

We have a special report on justice in America and whether Donald Trump will be charge in Georgia for election crimes. That actually remains the one place, the one jurisdiction where he faces the most criminal liability. It`s one of our special reports that we`ve been working hard on as a team and that`s coming up high in tonight`s show after our first break. So I wanted to tell you that upfront.

The question, though, in that special report actually overlaps with the top story tonight, the January 6th Committee barreling towards those high stakes, live primetime hearings Thursday. News now breaking about how the Secret Service scrambled to find some way that Donald Trump might have joined what we now know was a march that ended in a criminal breach of the Capitol that day.

We`re also learning that this hearing will feature testimony by the first Capitol officer injured as well as new video evidence that appears to blow the lid on a secret militia meeting in an underground parking garage. This was on insurrection eve.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stewart. Pleasure.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Pleasure is all mine. I`m going stay close just to make sure my guys are OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And I`m going to shoot tomorrow.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tomorrow. I got a lot of stuff to do tomorrow.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: That`s what the meeting looked like. Both of the individuals you see there are now awaiting their trials for sedition. One of the most serious types of conspiracies on the federal books.

We`ve got a lot going on tonight as I mentioned, so I`m going to get right to it and bring in our special guest on this busy news week, former U.S. attorney Barbara McQuade and veteran political strategist and former Obama adviser and aide, Chai Komanduri.

Barbara, when you look at that kind of video evidence what does that mean for the committee making the case that not only was this bad for democracy, which people know, but then it was an organized conspiracy?

BARBARA MCQUADE, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTION: I think this really debunks any of those arguments that we`ve been hearing all along that this was just ordinary tourists or a crowd that got a little bit out of hand and a little overly enthusiastic in their efforts that day. You know, at least some of these people were carefully coordinating, and organizing. And so I think that rings true in the Oath Keepers` indictment and now the Proud Boys indictment for seditious conspiracy.

I think the next level investigation has to be whether there was someone organizing even above them to provide funding and other kinds of things. And that`s what`s so important about these things, getting to the bottom of those organized efforts.

MELBER: Barbara, does it matter that the then-president told that same group we just showed there, the Proud Boys, to stand by, if he lost the election?

MCQUADE: I think that there is certainly an argument to be made that that was a call to action. I don`t know that that alone is enough to implicate him criminally. I think he would say, I was just exercising my First Amendment rights. But I also think it is something that terrorism experts refer to as stochastic terrorism, which is, I`m going say something out in the public domain in hopes that somebody picks up on it and acts on it.

It`s the same way that ISIS radicalizers get people to take up arms in America against Westerners who are not part of the ISIS ideal. It`s the same principle. But tying him criminally on that alone is probably not enough. I think you`d want to see more evidence that he was involved in a cleaner organization of this.

MELBER: Understood. And understood the precise legal point you`re making which goes to the standards there. Someone can say something horrific, it`s not something you`d want to hear from a democratically elected leader with regard to a peaceful transfer of power, but as you remind us, that there`s a different standard if you`re talking about crimes.

Chai, you`re not hear to deal with the sedition conspiracy standards or incitement. You`re here to deal with what Congress tries to do in these sort of moments, which is on its best day, use the power and the audience that it has to present something to the nation based on the leaks that we`re already seeing. And you know a lot of these people involved at the staff level and otherwise. What do you think is the challenge for this Thursday, and are they stepping up to the plate?

CHAI KOMANDURI, POLITICAL STRATEGIST: I think they`re very much stepping up to the plate. I think the reality is what this committee is going to try to do is present a narrative for the American people to follow and understand. You know, one of the big things that has happened in America over the last year and a half I would say is Americans have felt demoralized. Basically the site of seeing Donald Trump get away with one thing after another.

The fact that he is not being held accountable for any of his actions time after time has really created a narrative that has been deeply hurtful to America and to American democracy. The idea that he`s this MAGA superman and everything can just bounce off his chest, everything that`s thrown off of him.

[18:05:02]

That really goes to this narrative of Donald Trump as this guy that rules don`t apply to me. I enjoy white male privilege at its highest form and I can offer that to you, my voters. That is a narrative Democrats really have to pierce, and over the last year and a half it has really hurt Democrats that they look so infective, so weak, in some cases so sort of cowardly, I`m going to be honest about that, in terms of how they deal with the former president.

They look like people who cannot get things done to the American voters. And this committee is really important in terms of turning around that idea, that image that has done so much to hurt the Biden White House, hurt the Democratic Party, and hurt the United States.

MELBER: And Chai, I`m going to put the question to you that we`ve discussed with other experts and people who watch THE BEAT know we have a wide range of -- we try to have a wide range of experts and views and people can make up their own mind. We spoke to a lawyer earlier this week about whether the committee should go so far as to state its position by the end, based on the evidence it has of whether Trump did in fact commit a crime or not.

We`ve heard a federal judge discuss that in a nonbinding way, as I`ve emphasized. We`ve heard plenty of other people discuss it, and we`ve heard the counterargument that if they do that it`s somehow, quote-unquote, "further politicizes the issue." As someone with experience in these matters, do you have a view over whether they should go that far or stop short for some reason?

KOMANDURI: They should not stop short. I do think they should go that far, and I think Nancy Pelosi knows it. I think she knows it, and the type of people that she has picked to be in this committee, you know, Liz Cheney, Jamie Raskin, Stephanie Murphy. They`ve all impressed me about one thing. There`s one thing that`s really important about all of them. None of them seem particularly afraid of Donald Trump.

They all seem like that they are designed by Nancy Pelosi to sort of get away from this Marty McFly concept, Democrats don`t like confrontations, and really going to like a sort of "Top Gun Maverick" concept, that they will take the shot. And that is something that`s been missing. I mean, this is, you know, beyond this particular committee hearing we have to look at a narrative over years that have been building up, with Mueller, with Alvin Bragg, with the two impeachment trials.

Trump time and time again has evaded accountability for his actions. The one time he was held accountable by voters in November 2020 he has successfully talked himself out of that. He has convinced the GOP base that, you know, the big lie is true. I actually won that election. He has convinced people of this.

MELBER: Right.

KOMANDURI: And that narrative has to be broken. That is essential for Democrats, that`s essential for the country. And you know, there`s no other choice but to say to Donald Trump, you must be held accountable for their actions. And one thing I`ll leave you with is something Bill Clinton said. You know, he said voters will vote for somebody who is strong and wrong over somebody who is weak and right. I think Nancy Pelosi knows that, and I think that`s what she`s trying to do with this committee.

MELBER: A classic quote. And to your point, we remember in "Back to the Future", Marty McFly had a good heart. I mean, he was the person you`d want to be your friend or family member, but until he stood up for himself, what was it worth, Chai?

KOMANDURI: Exactly. And that`s one of the big things in "Back to the Future," when he -- his father played by Crispin Glover creates a clenched fist and stands up to Biff, the bully. That`s finally when everything kind of turns around. And that`s one of the biggest things. You know, bullies keep pushing. And you Trump is doing that. He has been pushing and pushing American voters, Republican voters, Republican leaders.

What can I get away with? How much more outrageous can I get away with this? And, you know, that`s what January 6th was kind of the culmination of. Trump is constantly pushing the envelope like a bully to see what he can get away with, and until now he`s been able to get away with a whole lot with not a lot of accountability.

MELBER: Barbara, I`ll give you the final thought here in this block, either on the law or any of the points Chai made, or any wisdom you draw from either "Back to the Future" or its cartoon progeny "Rick and Morty."

MCQUADE: Well, I think the most important thing that is left to be disclosed to the American people is Donald Trump`s intent. Did he have fraudulent intent? Did he know that he actually lost? Has he ever said that out loud? Is there sufficient evidence to prove that? And I think that is the smoking gun evidence that I`m going to be looking for. Both in January 6th and in any criminal charges that the Justice Department is able to put together.

There`s certainly plenty of circumstantial evidence that many people told him so, from William Barr to his cybersecurity director to 60 different judges.

MELBER: Yes.

MCQUADE: So there`s circumstantial evidence. But is there direct evidence where he ever said out loud, I know I lost but I`m just going say I won?

MELBER: All fair. Final question to Chai on a lighter note, what is the better sequel, the Western one or the future one?

KOMANDURI: I actually am a big fan of the Western one. I think that that`s actually a great clever movie and very underrated. I think the future one, you know, Robert Zemeckis did a lot of things that he did ended up doing better in some other movies.

[18:10:03]

It`s very bold in terms of what is accomplished. But it`s not as strong as a movie as Mary Steenburgen. Terrific actress. You know, they`re all terrific in the Western one, "Back to the Future Three."

MELBER: I think you both made important points. We`re also now considering what`s more intense, being a legal nerd or a film nerd. But we don`t have to pick sides tonight. We`ll leave that an open question.

Barbara and Chai, thanks for kicking us off here.

We`ve got a lot of news. The other big story here across Washington is the push for gun reform. In fact actor Matthew McConaughey, he was on Washington on that, noting that he is a gun owner but he also backs action to keep children safe today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY, ACTOR: Maite wore green high-top Converse because it`s the same green Converse on her feet that turned out to be the only clear evidence that could identify her after the shooting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: We have more on that important story for you tonight. But as promised, next up is our special report on justice in America, exposing double standards and looking at, quote, "thug and gangster activity" down in Georgia, the last jurisdiction where Trump could still be indicted for trying to steal the election. I promise you this story matters. I promise you what you`re about to see is original reporting and it`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:44]

MELBER: The fallout continues from a celebrity trial that captivated millions of people who may not usually follow legal news. A jury siding with Johnny Depp after weeks of testimony and evidence that ranged from the serious to the absurd.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can`t say that you carried cocaine in that box?

JOHNNY DEPP, ACTOR: No, but it looks like it would fit some cocaine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You poured yourself a mega pint of red wine, correct?

DEPP: A mega pint?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

ELLEN BARKIN, ACTRESS: He was drunk all the -- most -- a lot of the time.

DEPP: Isn`t happy hour any time? On my side of the bed was human fecal matter.

AMBER HEARD, ACTRESS: He lost control of his bowels and I cleaned up after him.

KATE MOSS, MODEL/EX-GIRLFRIEND: He carried me to my room and got me medical attention.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s quite a lot of blood everywhere.

DEPP: After writing on the walls, the blood had kind of dried, as it were. I once gave Marilyn Manson a pill so that he would stop talking so much.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: All right, but for all of the oddities that made it into court, you know what was never introduced as legal evidence against Depp? This.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEPP: Do you think this wise, boy? Crossing blades with a pirate?

Gentleman, my lady, you will always remember this as the day that you almost caught Captain Jack Sparrow.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: No. How Depp acted on stage was not proof of how he acts in reality. The case never used his art against him for the obvious reason that a search for truth cannot rely on fiction. It would be laughable for a prosecutor to argue that because Depp was a fictional pirate he must act like a pirate in real life. That`s obvious and straightforward.

But in another courtroom just 600 miles south of that trial, that`s exactly what`s happening. Prosecutors filing new charges against artist Jeffrey Williams and Sergio Kitchen citing their art as criminal evidence. Now those names may not ring a bell, which is part of the point. Jack Sparrow was not in Depp`s trial, but here the government is trying to use these artists` fiction and their characters against them.

Kitchens performs as Gunna, a singer and rapper with two number one albums. Here he was at the Met Gala just last month. Williams performs as young thug. He`s known for a melodic trap style and gender bending performances like you see there, in a dress. Both now charged in a massive 88-page indictment of 28 people in Atlanta for drugs, guns, and violent offenses. The D.A. using a broad racketeering law to charge people for some activities basically committed by other people they know if she can prove it`s all part of one racketeering conspiracy.

But that`s not all, the D.A. claims these artists` art is itself criminal evidence, citing their lyrics 11 times in that indictment. So in trying to prove real crimes in the street, the indictment keeps going back to art from the studio, and prosecutors say they know that art does have some first amendment protection, but they argue well, if the lyrics reveal real criminal intent, then they can be used in court.

That`s what they say. So let`s take a look.

(MUSIC)

MELBER: Wait, wait a minute. That`s actually not the evidence in this case. Those are white artists. So that wouldn`t come up. Prosecutors do not typically treat white people`s art in America as criminal evidence. Didn`t happen to Johnny Cash, who was arrested seven times. Didn`t happen to Jack Sparrow, government named Johnny Depp in a case that was about violence. Didn`t happen to Eric Clapton who was arrested for drugs.

[18:20:06]

No. When many of these white artists ran into law past or recent, their artistic fiction is treated as fiction. Well, right now prosecutors are treating fiction by prominent black artists as if it were fact. Every lyric you`re about to see here, from the new case about the two artists I just mentioned is cited as criminal evidence by these prosecutors.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEPP: Son, I`m Captain Jack Sparrow. Savvy?

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Prosecutors literally building their case on these lyrics. Take that last one, which uses that kind of cowboy rhetoric that`s been around a long time, even before "I Shot the Sheriff," where the character narrating a song denies one offense while directly copping to another.

Prosecutors are literally asserting in court that verse with the lines "I got something to do with that body" and "I get all types of cash, I`m a general," is a, quote, "overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy." So just those song lyrics alone are offered as an entire element of the crime. In law that`s called an overt act.

Now it sounds absurd, but the audience here is a system where most judges are, quote, "white men in their 70s who do not get rap music," as one lawyer put it. Now in court, a prosecutor referred to Williams` slang name, King Slime, arguing he`s this gang`s leader.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You see the shadow in the back of the room. He`s the one directing traffic. He is the one they`re all afraid of. He`s the one that`s King Slime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: He`s King Slime. So what are the other overt acts here? Well, the case offers as evidence pictures of bandannas or gang signs from social media marketing and music videos. It`s a lot of overt acts that are rooted in potential fiction and fictional evidence I got to tell you seems pretty weak for a big case. A stronger case might feature more physical evidence or real people testifying rather than quoting songs.

And prosecutors may yet bring more of that at trial. Kitchens who I told you about faces one count basically of being accused of being in the gang where other people did bad or illegal things. Williams faces many counts, including evidence allegedly linking him to a killing because he allegedly rented a car, prosecutors say, was used when other people committed murder.

Well, if prosecutors can prove at trial that he was involved or directed that violence, well, that`s a different story. But under law that should turn on whether he, Williams, the real person, did that. Not whether a performance character Young Thug ever made art mentioning violence or whether people call him King Slime.

Now anyone fairly convicted of violent crime should be punished, period. Fanni Willis, the new D.A. down there, has applied a fast and aggressive approach to this celebrity case, but she`s also proven slower in the most significant issue on her whole docket about this infamous demand by Trump to get illegal voter fraud in Georgia.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT: So, look, all I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: The same D.A. has that case. A grand jury considering this right now. Will there be charges? And what do these cases all here in the same docket tell us about justice in America? This report concludes when I`m back in just 60 seconds.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:34]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Rapper Young Thug whose real name is Jeffrey Lamar Williams, and Gunna, whose real name is Sergio Kitchens, were among the 27 people arrested on gang related charges.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: We are back covering a very active docket down in Atlanta where that case is pending. This is all part of the new Atlanta D.A.`s pursuit of several different cases, and she`s made waves for that gang indictment while also moving slowly as mentioned in the probe of Trump`s efforts to steal Georgia, where the D.A. has been doing witness interviews and gotten key testimony from the now pretty famous elections official Brad Raffensperger.

He was the one who of course defied Trump`s demand to find illegal votes in Georgia on the other end of that infamous phone call. He risked his career and more to stand up to Trump, and while he has been cooperating with this probe, he`s so concerned about D.A. Willis` approach that he publicly rebuked her for slow-walking the inquiry. A split between two officials who are both proven to oppose Donald Trump`s plots is striking.

He doesn`t think that she`s being as aggressive as she could, and certainly not as aggressive as she`s been in other cases, which shows this larger double standard in American justice. There are signs Trump might skate, despite acting like a stone-cold thug. Shaking people down while his own backers, if you want to call that a conspiracy, were literally going at those police barricades and going right through them, beating up officers, threatening to kill Mike Pence, while Trump said, maybe they should.

Now that is just a savage gangster mindset. And yet Trump may get away with it. While a young man who performs as Young Thug is facing the full powers of this same prosecutor, full speed ahead. No slow multi or grand jury review, no hesitance about throwing just any kind of evidence at him.

So, you look at these cases together with the same D.A. at the same time, and you got to ask, what else would Trump have to do to face the full powers of this D.A.? Does he need to get a stage name? Maybe old thug? Does he need to drop a diss record against Mike Pence? What kind of steps would he have to take to get treated like these other defendants in the same jurisdiction?

It could be funny if it wasn`t so serious. And this goes to the wider justice debates in our nation. There have been some reforms but the deepest inequities here are structural. The criminal justice system`s aggressive pursuit of black men is deeply embedded across law, politics and culture. There`s a totally different set of rules in the fixation on the supposed specter of black male violence at every turn across history, and there`s a crackdown on artist, black artist who dared to reflect or confront these conditions I`m describing even with mere words or their art.

Leaders condemn that speech when they offer it as practically like violence itself. And that`s the broader thing here I want to make sure you see tonight because the playbook is old. It is bipartisan, and now as crime rates rise again, well, we`re seeing that `90s playbook get a reboot.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Gangster rap has become incredibly popular and profitable by selling lyrics about black-on-black violence.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: An anti-rap backlash is spreading.

BOB DOLE, FORMER REPUBLICAN SENATOR: A line has been crossed, not just of taste but of human dignity and decency.

BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT: The kind of hatred that you do not honor today.

DOLE: From songs about killing policemen and rejecting law.

CLINTON: If you took the words white and black and you reversed them, you might think David Duke was giving that speech.

GERALDO RIVERA, FOX NEWS COMMENTATOR: Hip-hop has done more damage to young African-Americans than racism.

BEN SHAPIRO, CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It`s not actually a form of music, it`s a --

ERIC BOLLING, FORMER FOX NEWS ANCHOR: That line in the song, quote, "And we hate the popo. Want to kill us in the street for show. KG?

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, FORMER FOX NEWS COMMENTATOR: Oh, please. Ugh, I don`t like it.

MAYOR ERIC ADAMS (D), NEW YORK: I had no idea what drill rapping was. We`re allowing music, displaying of guns, violence. It is alarming.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: That`s part of the ideology that shapes the wider system. You see it there. A Democratic mayor right now admitting ignorance about this while equating art with crime. A Republican senator saying black artist work has no, quote, "decency." A Democratic president saying a black woman`s poetry, that Clinton was quoting, might match the words of Klansmen, David Duke. That`s the tone.

[18:30:00]

These are the leaders` writing laws and appointing judges. It goes way beyond partisanship, it`s deeper than diversifying government because the racial injustice is here are always about who is being policed. So back to those Atlanta defendants. Legally, they`re presumed innocent. But that is not how they`re being treated.

Their lawyers offered to surrender their passports, pay millions of dollars for 24-hour surveillance, and do drug testing while they await trial on bond, but a judge rejected all that. Ruling both must be jailed until trial because they pose a risk of violence. Again, legally presumed innocent, and the system sets the schedule for that.

So, while presumed innocent, they will be in jail right now until next year, which makes it much harder to prepare for trial. Now, most court cases do not involve celebrities, we cover those too, and they show the wider truth. Rampant racial disparities from how police make arrests, to triple the rate for the same drug offenses based on race, or are more likely to use force against minorities more likely to kill them. The list goes on.

Williams and Kitchens are famous, celebrated well connected millionaires in the prime of their careers at the top of the charts. If you watch the news, and you don`t happen to know their music, that`s fine, but I`ll bet you your kids, nephews or grandchildren do know their music. But these two men are still black in America.

If this is how the system treats them. Well, why now and imagine how it treats other black Americans day in and day out who aren`t famous or well known, imagine that. But if you`ve been paying any attention, you already know.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But Los Angeles police arrested a black man who is simply taking out the trash.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: White citizens calling police on African-Americans engaged in typical everyday activities.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A Starbucks manager called 911 Thursday because the men refuse to leave.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As black people, especially black men get harsher sentences --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A York County judge sentenced him to 1,823 years for armed robbery.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Six officers open fire --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Breonna Taylor --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Sandra Bland --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Tamir Rice, who was 12 years old.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Police shooting a black man, Jacob Blake in the back multiple times.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop, stop, put your hand right (INAUDIBLE) stop --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One officer is pressing his knee into Floyd`s neck.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE) taser, taser, taser.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: This is not just happening over there. This is not just down south. This is not fueled by one political party. And this is not going to just improve over time. To quote another artists, this is America. Now the best thing we know about democracy is that when people do know the truth and want to act, change, major change is certainly possible.

The worst thing is that when people don`t know the truth, or don`t care, and they become a part of accommodating and tacitly supporting whatever the government is doing in their name. The choice is up to us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:38:13]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY, ACTOR: Responsible gun owners are fed up with the Second Amendment being abused and hijacked by some deranged individuals.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Actor Matthew McConaughey making an impassioned plea at the White House today, discussing responsible gun ownership. He also met with lawmakers and with victim`s parents from his hometown of Uvalde.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCONAUGHEY: Maite wore green high-top Converse with a heart she had hand- drawn on the right toe because they represented her love of nature. Camila has got these shoes. Can you show these shoes, please? These are the same green Converse on her feet that turned out to be the only clear evidence that could identify her after the shooting. How about that?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: He`s a communicator. He`s someone who might pierce through some of the polarization in America because people are used to listening to him. And while actors are known for playing parts and scripts they don`t write, today he was speaking for himself.

And he also as a communicator talked about something that is so gruesome and difficult when we cover these things that we debate, how much detail to get into and you discussed. How this AR-15 reeks -- reaps a certain kind of carnage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCONAUGHEY: These bodies were very different, they needed extensive restoration. Why? Due to the exceptionally large exit wounds of an AR-15 rifle. Most of the body so mutilated that only DNA test or green Converse could identify.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[18:40:00]

MELBER: Our guess now is someone leading the fight on this, Democratic Congressman Don Beyer has a plan to get around. Republican filibuster obstruction and still regulate and limit assault-style weapons in a manner that could get through the Senate. It`s an interesting plan. And, sir, we will get into that. That`s why we invited you on but first, given that Mr. McConaughey was also meeting with lawmakers today, your thoughts on what he said?

REP. DON BEYER (D-VA): Well, I had not realized that the bodies were that torn up. I don`t think I`ve ever seen a body in person that`s been shot by an assault weapon. So, it was very moving and I`m hoping that Mr. McConaughey, is able to move some Republican senators. So those are the votes that we`re going to need.

MELBER: Yes, that makes sense. It`s tough stuff. You are doing, sir -- you`re -- you -- yes, you, sir, are doing something that, frankly -- you know, there`s the policy and the ethics of this is also the sheer politics, and I tried to keep it real. A lot of Democrats are accused of sort of sitting around complaining about Mitch McConnell and going home for the day. That`s not what you`re doing.

You say that this is a creative way to have a different type of plan. Let`s read a little bit of it, and you tell us about it. The bill would hit AR-15 on the economic front with up to 1,000 percent tax. Thus, it could pass potentially without any Republican votes. With regard to the marketplace, these guns cost up to you know, 500 to a 2K.

The tax could add five to $20,000 to their sale prices. Tell us what you`re planning would do and why you think it`s an alternative to get around McConnell?

BEYER: But you just described it perfectly. The challenge is in the House, we continue to pass good common-sense gun safety bills. Last year, we passed a -- you know, a universal background check bill, we close the Charleston loophole. This week, we`ll pass a bill that raises the assault weapon age from 18 to 21, and advanced high-capacity magazines.

The challenge is that they all go to the Senate and because of the filibuster, this tradition that you need 60 votes. It`s really unlikely that we will be able to get them passed. So, there is a process, is rarely used called reconciliation. That is something has a big fiscal impact, a lot of money is involved, you can do it with a simple majority vote.

We love the idea of actually turning the democracy back over to the majority vote idea rather than the 60-vote limit. So, by putting the big tax, this excise tax up to 1,000 percent on assault weapons. We`re hoping that we can do it just with 50 votes and the vice president in the Senate.

MELBER: Yes, and it sounds intricate. But you look at how it would be enacted. I look at this, you know, as a journalist and a lawyer, the policy impact would be -- I`m just looking at the notes here, that if you get the price up over 10K, that`s above most people`s credit card limits.

So even if as we`ve learned recently, we`ve had these tragic cases where somebody says I don`t care if they are -- whether they care about a credit limit if they`re going into a mission where they might die, but they can`t tangibly get the weapon. So, do you view this as essentially a different way to effectively ban it for most people?

BEYER: Yes, although we`re trying not to say ban, if it`s seen by the Senate parliamentarian as an absolute ban, it probably wouldn`t be eligible for reconciliation. We`ve just made it very expensive and especially made it expensive for an 18-year-old like we`ve had recently. They can`t even borrow that kind of money right away, they might be able to borrow $1,500, not $20,000.

So, we`ve just made it like the old syntaxes, really expensive, but most importantly, avoiding the filibuster and trying to make sure that we can have democracy by the majority, rather than the super majority.

MELBER: Yes, and briefly, congressman, expensive is one of those words that gets thrown around Washington and other places, it would seem that the cost of the misuse of AR-15 runs much higher than then 20k.

BEYER: Oh, much, much higher. And in fact, virtually any of the gun safety bills, the cost to the public from the new laws is a trivial compared to what we lose in human life and human capacity every year, who can ever even put a value on the lives of those lost children in Uvalde.

MELBER: Yes. Congressman, very interesting idea. Is the speaker supporting this yet?

BEYER: I hope so, we have lots of incoming calls. I`ll see my colleagues for the first time in a couple of minutes. And we plan to add many, many co-sponsors to the legislation this week.

MELBER: Well, you know, I haven`t worked in the Senate for two decades, but I hope so sounds like not yes, yet. That`s my Washington translator. So, people learn about this and that`s why we wanted to make sure to hear from you and we`ll keep an eye on it. I hope you come back, Congressman Beyer.

BEYER: Thank you very much.

MELBER: Thank you. Coming up, these hearings this week on Thursday are going to make a big impact. So why is Fox News turning to a cancel culture approach and is that hypocritical? And Peter Navarro who was here just last Thursday before his indictment, he had another interview since his indictment but this time it was with Tucker.

[18:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MELBER: We`ve been covering plenty of serious stuff, but there is also humor even within the darkness. Late-night has been having an absolute field day with some of what`s come out of the January 6th probe lately. Stephen Colbert digging back into Trump aide Peter Navarro and the way he describes his role. This was in a new Colbert late show just last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, CBS: Navarro was one of the ringleaders of the attempted coup, and we know that because he cleverly confessed the entire plot on national T.V.

[18:50:00]

PETER NAVARRO, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE AIDE: This plan we had called the Green Bay Sweep. We were going to challenge the results of the election in the six battleground states.

COLBERT: Green Bay Sweep. So, Navarro thought he could admit to trying to overturn a fair election on national T.V., and there`ll be no consequences because he gave it a fun nickname.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Sports branding has indeed been an odd part of some of the coup plodding, then there are signs that some conservatives are actually concerned even whatever branding they do, is not going to withstand what could be a mountain of damning evidence coming forward in these hearings starting Thursday.

That may be why Fox News isn`t even playing or pretending. Unlike other news networks, they say they just won`t carry the hearings for their viewers. Other networks mind you are actually preempting entertainment shows and advertising to cover this because that`s the tradition of news organizations when they cover news no matter which party might be more in charge of Congress.

Fox, though has been deeply, deeply committed to misleading about what happened at the insurrection, downplaying it. Now, the network has said that on the business channel, they will cover the hearings, as warranted. I mean, why? Doesn`t even purport to make sense if that`s the finance channel. But anyway, the bigger issue for them is that their top hosts are in a tough spot.

They did privately agree with the thrust of this committee probe. In other words, Fox News hosts on January 6th, agree with the committee in June 22. Literally, the main thrust of the committee. The problem for Fox is that they all took it back. At the time those hosts on record in writing said something. We tell you what it is. It`s not that shocking.

They said insurrections are bad. And if insurrections are bad, then you try to stop them. So, Hannity pled with the White House to get Trump to, quote, ask people to leave the Capitol. Others went further and said this terrible day was destroying Trump`s entire, quote, legacy. The question becomes what is Fox telling viewers instead now.

We actually just got a preview because Trump aide Peter Navarro did his first interview since the Friday indictment. He was the lead guest on the lead show on Fox, its most-watched show. Tucker, where the host tried to make it all about race with some misleading information about history and Navarro`s case.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST, FOX NEWS: He`s now facing years in prison. So, what did Peter Navarro do to deserve treatment like this? Well, he resisted a subpoena from the January 6th committee. The January 6th committee is Washington`s latest partisan Inquisition. Navarro resisted that subpoena because he had nothing to do with January 6, nothing whatsoever. That`s not disputed.

Peter Navarro did not break into the Capitol. He didn`t encourage anyone else to break into the Capitol. He wasn`t even there that day. He had no idea it was going to happen. Again, that`s beyond dispute --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Actually, it`s not beyond dispute. And there will be evidence and testimony at the hearings, which apparently, they`re afraid to show. Mr. Navarro is entitled to the legal process. He is legally presumed innocent like any other defendant. There is evidence though, that he was part of planning that overlapped with the desire to overthrow the election on the 6th.

Whether that ever got to the point that he knew how bad and violent it`s going to get is an open question. In fact, we`ve interviewed him about that, and he`s entitled his defense. But there is plenty in dispute about all of this. So that`s how Tucker introduced the guest. Painting that sort of picture, and then handing the floor over to Mr. Navarro where they discussed the indictment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NAVARRO: They subpoenaed me illegally. A clear violation of the separation of powers in our Constitution. The legislative branch is not supposed to be the judge, jury, and executioner. It`s absurd on its face, in every step along the line -- go ahead.

CARLSON: Well, I have no doubt that it`s unconstitutional.

NAVARRO: They didn`t call my attorney. It`s like al-Qaeda terrorists. Denied food, denied water, denied an attorney.

CARLSON: You can`t arrest people for political reasons. It`s very simple.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: It`s true. You cannot arrest people for political reasons, which is why Mr. Navarro`s statements in his civil lawsuit and on this program Thursday that he would try to lead the charge to do that is wrong. However, Mr. Navarro was arrested for blatantly defying the subpoena in ways that everyone saw.

But take note, as they do their censorship and their canceled culture and blackout the actual hearings, they are preparing the ultimate Trumpian counterattack. A projection of their worst impulses, lead the charge, go after your enemies on their opponents. But we are paying attention. We`ll be right back.

[18:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MELBER: Early in our show tonight, we looked at the case of black men in the justice system in Atlanta, how they`re being treated, how they`re being held right now awaiting trial. And by the end of the hour, we heard from a Trump aide protesting a brief couple hours for an arraignment in jail. He`s now out. Mr. Navarro. And we talked about the use of lyrics like this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC CLAPTON, SINGER: I shot the sheriff.

JOHNNY CASH, SINGER: But I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Johnny Cash`s admission in that song was never used in any of the seven times he was arrested and it goes to a racist double standard. Now online we can discuss this further I`m @AriMelber, and I asked you do you think fiction, art, and lyrics should be used as criminal evidence or not? Do you think it`s fair evidence or not? We can continue the discussion @AriMelber because we`re out of time with THE BEAT. And keep your T.V.`s on because "THE REIDOUT WITH JOY REID" starts now. Hi, Joy.

JOY REID, MSNBC HOST: How you doing? I heard I shot the sheriff. I will just assert that the Bob Marley version is the only version you need. I going to leave it there.

MELBER: I agree.

REID: All right, boom! Thank you very much. Really appreciate you my friend, have a wonderful evening.

MELBER: See you.

REID: All right, Cheers.