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

Transcript: The Beat with Ari Melber, 6/22/21

Guests: Mark Thompson, Chai Komanduri, Jacqueline Alemany, Emily Bazelon, Mara Gay, Barbara Res

Summary

Republicans block debate on voting rights legislation in the Senate. The Trump Organization probe expands to more executives.

Transcript

NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC HOST: As we continue to watch this vote in the Senate, our live coverage picks up now with THE BEAT WITH ARI MELBER.

Hi, Ari.

ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: Hi, Nicolle.

I want to hold you over for another minute, although you have been doing plenty of work over this momentous day.

But I`m curious what you think about what you were, of course, discussing with some of your panelists, but the larger imperative here. Does this break through? How does this vote, which is important for all the reasons you have been covering -- does it get the country to take another look at how the Senate operates today? Or is that hard to do?

WALLACE: So, I mean, all I have is history and my own reporting on this.

And history would show that, when Mitch McConnell obliterated the filibuster to push through judges, his power rose in his own caucus and his political power rose in his state, as did that of Republicans.

So the idea that there`s political peril in doing away with it, I think is faulty. The other thing that I hear more and more on TV, and I hear a whole lot off TV, is it there`s political peril in leaving it in place. There`s political peril in the Democrats going out to their voters in two years and saying, guns, I know we have got 85 percent of the public clamoring for something about the epidemic of mass shootings, but we can`t get through the filibuster.

Infrastructure, we had to go small because Joe Manchin wanted it to be bipartisan. Voting rights, yes, I`m so sorry that drop box you left your ballot in the middle of pandemic, finis.

I mean, I think there`s real political peril in all this failure to deliver in two years. So I think they`re choosing between bad and worse. And I think, today, the worse is leaving the filibuster in place.

MELBER: Yes, it`s really striking when you lay it out like that, because, sometimes, the doomsday arguments only seem to run in one direction. Oh, what if we do this? What if they do this and it doesn`t work?

You`re saying, well, what if you don`t do it? What is the cost to that, particularly if you have to go back to the voters after everyone said 2020 was this historic, important election, you go back and say, well, we just couldn`t -- we couldn`t get more things done, we just couldn`t?

I will give you the final file. And then, of course, we`re going to bring in our next round of experts as we watch the voting.

WALLACE: Well, just an image. I mean, I asked Beto O`Rourke. I said that, for me, having spent time in the party formerly known as Republicans -- I don`t know what they are now -- I mean, the question now is, can Democrats fight like Republicans, who just don`t lose any sleep?

They don`t break a sweat over getting rid of a -- I mean, the filibuster isn`t even a law. It isn`t in the Constitution. It`s a norm. And if we learned anything over the last four years, Republicans won`t just walk over the norms. They will burn them down to get what they want.

So I think the story is the enduring story of the Trump years. For five years, Democrats have brought knives to gunfights.

MELBER: Yes, I think you just hit it on the head. It`s a norm. And if one wants to argue that, at some point in the past, it was a norm that bred some negotiation, fine. That`s a nice history lesson.

It`s certainly not how it`s being used this year. It`s certainly not how it`s being used on that floor right now on these critical issues, as you say.

Nicolle, always good to report and chat with you.

WALLACE: Thank you so much, my friend. Have a great show. I will go watch.

MELBER: Absolutely. Thank you.

And I want to welcome everyone to THE BEAT. Obviously, you are watching us here. I am Ari Melber.

And we`re right in it. This is the live coverage of this Senate vote on a bill to do a lot of things, number one, to overhaul the way elections work in this country, number two to protect your voting rights.

Now, Democrats pushing for these protections. Republicans are all stampeding towards another filibuster. So this is what they call technically a procedural vote, because the vote is on whether to actually bring the entire merits of the legislation to the floor, where then you would have the real vote.

Republicans planning the block even that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): There is a rot, a rot at the center of the modern Republican Party. Donald Trump`s big lie has spread like a cancer. They don`t even want to debate it because they`re afraid.

SEN. RAPHAEL WARNOCK (D-GA): What could be more hypocritical and cynical than invoking minority rights in the Senate as a pretext for preventing debate about how to preserve minority rights in the society?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: That`s just some of the impassioned debate we have been seeing on the Senate floor. If there is an even split, the vice president returns to Washington preside over the vote.

Republicans expected to block all of this with the filibuster. This is that Jim Crow era relic that I was just discussing with Nicolle that no doubt you have heard of in the context of so many Washington fights.

Now, if you want the numbers, this is what`s going on out there, 14 states, 22 new laws all running against your right to vote. Indeed, if you tally up proposals, there`s over 300 bills going on this largely GOP voting crackdown.

That is a map of America. But it`s also a map of how widespread it is to make voter suppression policy. Now, Republicans, for their part, say, basically, those proposals, the map you saw, they say it doesn`t really exist.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): There`s no widespread effort to stop voters from casting a ballot. And there`s no desire to hand states` constitutional authorities over to the federal government. Our Democratic colleagues are struggling to accept this reality.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: Reality has been up for debate.

Now, Democrats are also pointing to a potentially important step, the swing vote in the Senate, Democrat Joe Manchin, voting with his party on this bill. And that`s after promises to work with him on a new voting plan.

So there are next steps, even with this floor debate going down exactly as many expected.

I want to bring in for our special coverage "The New York Times" Mara Gay, Emily Bazelon line from "The New York Times Magazine" and "Washington Post" congressional correspondent Jacqueline Alemany live from Capitol Hill.

Jacqueline, what are you seeing down there? Is there anything different than what`s expected? And, if so, what comes next?

JACQUELINE ALEMANY, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Hey, Ari. Greetings from a tiny little booth on Capitol Hill, where I snuck out while we`re waiting for speeches to wrap up.

Things are playing out is exactly as we expected it earlier today. Joe Manchin was a little bit on the edge there, touch and go, but ultimately is deciding to vote with Democrats. That still means, though, they are lacking a supermajority, that 10 Republican votes in order to actually proceed.

But this is what we expected. As a senior GOP Senate aide said to me yesterday, this bill is toxic, antithetical to federalism and the Republican Party. There was no way that any Republicans were going to get behind this. It was destined to die.

That leads us to the filibuster. Most conversations these days are leading us to the topic of the filibuster. And the problem with that for Democrats, at least when it comes to pushing through their bold agenda that Majority Leader Chuck Schumer touted earlier at the end of May leading into June, is that there aren`t the votes there. Democrats would need all the support at the entire Democratic Caucus in order to eliminate the filibuster, this supermajority.

And you`re seeing people, more than just Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, against breaking with it. Let`s look at Maggie Hassan and a few other endangered Democrats right now, Mark Kelly as well. They have put together -- they have put forth some arguments that their colleagues have tried to dispel about how the supermajority is not integral to the Constitution and what our framers had in mind.

But that is a conversation and debate that will continue to play out internally amongst the Democratic Caucus as they`re figuring out how to proceed forward now.

MELBER: Mara.

MARA GAY, EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBER, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": It`s extremely frustrating. I mean, the dynamics here are very difficult.

Politicians, those of us who are journalists who cover them, as we all do, they have short-term self-interest to think about. So these are Democrats who are worried about getting reelected and about what will happen to them and what the Republicans will do to them if they destroy the filibuster.

But the reality is, not just for the Democratic Party, but more for the survival of the country long-term, the filibuster needs to go. And so there may be some sacrificing that needs to be done here by some of these Democrats and, also, I think a public campaign. The Democrats really need to get the American people. They need to go directly to them, I believe, and explain why the filibuster is -- it`s not something that the founders of the country envisioned as integral to the United States and its government.

It`s actually something that started in the 1840s, informally, with Senator Calhoun, who used it to protect slavery. And so I think just trying to understand the history around this would help. But the reality is that, for the Republicans, this is no longer about compromise, the way they`re putting it. This is about power.

And the Democrats really need to step up their public relations campaign, both internally and externally. They need to take their case directly to the American people, and they need to play hardball.

MELBER: Emily?

EMILY BAZELON, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": I mean, I think that the history of the filibuster is really important, the history that Mara is laying out.

The filibuster is a friend the to -- rule by the minority. And I don`t mean minorities in the United States as people. I mean the minority political party, because it means that the Senate cannot proceed unless it has the supermajority. And the filibuster was not in the Constitution.

It`s also true that, at the time the Constitution was written, the Senate had a very different composition. Now we have a Senate that is heavily tilted toward small states and their power. And the differential between a big state being represented by two senators and a small state in terms of what that means for how much power one`s own vote receives in the Senate, it`s just hugely different than it was in the 18th and 19th or even much of the 20th century.

And so I think that`s another part of the dynamic for understanding why the structural role that the filibuster plays is really just not part of how the framers envisioned the country working.

MELBER: Yes.

And that`s the background, Jacqueline, Democratic senators who are basically out here taking the public position of, well, they think everything in the Senate should be held to a supermajority vote. I mean, it`s hard to take them at their word that, if you were starting from scratch, that would be your idea.

Politically, it means getting nothing done and handing the keys over to the other side. Substantively, it is not a traditional position in most democracies that everything would take a supermajority. There may be special cases. But that`s what Sinema in this new piece says, which seems to be her clap-back before this vote has even transpired.

We`re covering this now for viewers joining us who didn`t catch our open, because this is happening now. This is a big deal. It`s finally this floor vote on the attempt to bring the voting rights bill to the floor, the procedural vote on the cloture.

But here`s what Sinema said, And we will put this on the screen: "Instability, partisanship and tribalism infect our politics. The solution is not to continue weakening our democracy`s guardrails."

Jacqueline, what`s your reporting say about whether this was expected or surprised by the Senate Democrats? They obviously were hoping that tonight would put pressure on her and Manchin, not that she would double down in "The Post."

ALEMANY: I`m not sure that anyone necessarily expected those who have been historically, since they started their careers in Congress, against the filibuster to change their mind and to crumble under this first real test and call to suddenly eliminate the filibuster.

But what I will say is, we have seen public pressure work pretty effectively. There`s been a number of cases -- everyone can do their Googling themselves -- of lawmakers who have -- Democratic lawmakers who were previously against elimination, and just in favor of making small, more incremental reforms who have changed their minds in recent weeks.

But, look, this argument and what you all are saying that you want Democratic senators to go ahead and do, learn the history of the filibuster, that`s actually what Democratic lawmakers have been doing for years now.

Jeff Merkley has a 12-page filibuster slide deck that I have actually gotten a peek at before that goes through the history of the filibuster, and actually pokes holes directly in Kyrsten Sinema`s op-ed. And I also think it`s worth stating, in her op-ed, she mentioned several things that could potentially happen if the filibuster is eliminated that actually wouldn`t be protected by the filibuster, and are actually can be done through budget reconciliation.

That`s besides the fact, but...

MELBER: Now, Jacqueline, are you trying to make the other reporters in the segment jealous that not only are we covering the filibuster, but you have a multi-slide PowerPoint on its history?

I mean, juicy.

(LAUGHTER)

ALEMANY: I wish it were a little bit juicier, but it`s all really just to say that history has not changed the minds of some of these lawmakers.

MELBER: Yes. No, I`m -- to be clear, in case viewers -- I`m making fun of the PowerPoint, not our esteemed reporters here.

But it does remind you why, in discussing this, Mara, it is difficult to find the political heat. I mean, the fact that you have to learn the terms cloture and filibuster and 60 votes just to get to the fact that maybe this isn`t the wisest position for at least what the Biden administration says is getting their agenda in place, right there, you`re going to lose some voters.

And so, Mara, walk us through the political side of this, where, obviously, someone like Senator Sinema, who knows her -- she`s got to where she is by knowing what she`s doing. And a lot of Democrats and progressives think that she`s wrong on the substance, but she is of the belief that either this works for her in Arizona or it certainly is unlikely to backfire, because she doesn`t need to be the one who changes everything.

GAY: She may be able, in fact, to keep her seat in a year-and-a-half or what have you by walking this tepid line in this way.

But if the Democrats think that this is a winning strategy politically, I believe they`re sorely mistaken. They need to show that they have gotten something accomplished.

And I just want to say as well, it is extremely frustrating to see Democratic or any lawmakers, the lack of political courage and willpower, at a time when we have voters who are under attack for simply exercising their right to vote who are showing up to the polls, civil rights leaders who are showing great courage in the face of, frankly, an increasingly radicalized right-wing parts of the country, who are showing up to do really hard work on the outside.

It`s really time for the Democrats to do their job and start strengthening American democracy. I think democracy is under threat. And we can all sit here and pretend like it isn`t, but that`s not reality. So they need to figure out how to get these moderate Democrats on board and how to make it palatable for them.

They need to win over the American people. And they need to make the case to the country that this would actually -- that removing the filibuster would actually strengthen the Democratic government that we have.

I mean with was a small D.

MELBER: We have been listening to Mara Gay here. And as we keep our eye on the Senate floor, we are hitting about the quarter-hour here, 6:15-ish on the East Coast, I just want to tell our viewers at home what we`re watching and why we`re in breaking news mode, because this is a significant moment.

You can see that with your own eyes by the fact that you see so many senators on the floor of the Senate, which is a rarity. You see that only in big symbolic days or at key big floor votes like this.

Now, this is a big procedural floor vote. You can see on the right-hand side of your screen the vice president of the United States, Kamala Harris, overseeing it on the far left. You can see Senator Schumer, majority leader, and many other senators here around the floor.

We have now tabulated 88 votes in on what is this procedural vote, which, in plain English, is a vote for whether or not this voting rights bill will hit the floor. And with the numbers we have, and as has been reported throughout the day on MSNBC, we expect that the Democrats will not defeat the filibuster, which means this vote will lock in the Republican filibuster.

That`s happened on many votes, because it is quite a common tool. But, tonight, it is quite significant because this is the road that many Democrats and many in the Biden administration want to use as a prelude to reform the filibuster, saying, if you can`t get an up-or-down floor vote on voting rights in this country, then maybe the filibuster, in this case or others, should not be allowed.

So, with 88 votes in, as a newscaster, I cannot yet report the outcome, although, for many, as you know as a viewer, the outcome has been a fait accompli all day, because we expect this party-line final resolution.

Our panel stays as we await that moment, which would be gaveled in by the vice president.

But, as our panel stays, I also want to bring to the conversation a frequent BEAT guests, Chai Komanduri. He worked on three different presidential campaigns, and has been, Chai, if I may say so, associated with the -- call it the bold establishment veteran position within the Biden era.

You`re someone who`s worked with people -- for people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. You are not what the grassroots would call a radical or a rando, to use a more casual term. You have been inside this Democratic Party for a minute now. And yet you have come to the view -- walk us through it -- that to leave the status quo in place with as much leverage for Mitch McConnell no longer makes sense.

Walk us through what you see here on the floor tonight.

CHAI KOMANDURI, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Yes, I mean, the thinking in Washington -- and you saw it in Sinema`s piece -- is, we need more bipartisanship in Washington. And because of that, we have to keep the filibuster in place, even if that means H.R.1, the Voting Rights Act, goes down to defeat. The most important thing for bipartisanship is keeping that filibuster in place.

That is completely wrong. If you want bipartisanship in Washington, the reason there is no bipartisanship in Washington is for a simple reason. It`s not because of political polarization or social media and these other forces. It`s simply because there are no moderate Republicans.

There are plenty of moderate Democrats. There is Jon Tester. There`s Abigail Spanberger. There`s Kyrsten Sinema. There`s Joe Manchin, et cetera. All the social forces equally work on Democrats as Republicans. There are plenty of moderate Democrats. There are no moderate Republicans.

If H.R.1 were allowed to pass, you would have nonpartisan commissions draw up these lines, not Democratic commissions, nonpartisan commissions. That would not necessarily mean it would help Democrats. And that does not necessarily mean it would hurt Republicans.

It, however, would hurt Trumpist Republicans. Moderate Republicans, however, could very well thrive with these new districts. If you increase the number of young people, increase the number of minorities who vote, have nonpartisan commissions drawing up these districts in a fair, bipartisan or nonpartisan way, moderate Republicans -- and there used to be so many of them -- would thrive.

They would make a huge comeback. And that`s what you need for bipartisanship. You need moderate Republicans. Kyrsten Sinema needs moderate Republicans to work with. She has none to work with. And passing H.R.1 wouldn`t really go much further to solving that problem than just keeping the filibuster in place.

MELBER: Emily, how about that?

BAZELON: I see the argument.

I think, from the point of view of Republicans who are thinking about primaries and getting primaried from the right, the short-term incentives to vote against a voting rights bill remain in place.

There`s some research that actually suggests that increasing Democratic participation, just making it easier for people to vote, might not hurt the Republican Party in general elections. But there seems to be a kind of faith in that belief, linked to President Trump, linked to his way of casting a lot of doubt and suspicion on mail-in voting in 2020.

And it just seems like it`s becoming entrenched, even though there is some evidence to suggest that both parties could benefit from a world in which more people vote because it`s a little easier for them to vote.

MELBER: Yes.

Part of our panel stays. We`re going to re-rack here a little bit. I`m totally have 98 votes in, so we`re getting very close to the official governing moment of this vote.

I want to thank Jacqueline, who is going back out to do reporting.

I want to bring in Mark Thompson, a BEAT guest and the host of "Make It Plain" podcast. He is actually aboard the Freedom Ride bus organized by Black Voters Matter, campaigning for voting rights.

Thank you for joining us.

What are you fighting for?

MARK THOMPSON, "MAKE IT PLAIN": Well, we have been going to a number of cities, New Orleans; Jackson, Mississippi; Birmingham, Alabama; Nashville, Tennessee.

Right now, we`re in Columbia, South Carolina. We will be in Raleigh, North Carolina, tomorrow. But as we go, Richmond, Virginia; and Washington, D.C., we`re going from city to city engaging voters who are very concerned about all of these new voter suppression laws.

(CROSSTALK)

MELBER: Well, let me -- I`m interrupting. Let`s listen in.

THOMPSON: Please. Of course.

KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The motion is not agreed to.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): Madam President.

HARRIS: Mr. Majority Leader.

SCHUMER: Madam President, I want to be clear about what just happened on the Senate floor.

Every single Senate Republican just voted against starting debate, starting debate, on legislation to protect Americans` voting rights. Once again, the Senate Republican minority has launched a partisan blockade of a pressing issue here in the United States Senate, an issue no less fundamental than the right to vote.

Could we have order, Mr. President -- Madam President?

HARRIS: The Senate will be in order.

SCHUMER: I have laid out the facts for weeks.

Republican state legislatures across the country are engaged in the most sweeping voter suppression in 80 years, capitalizing on and catalyzed by Donald Trump`s big lie. These state governments are making it harder for younger, poorer, urban, and non-White Americans to vote.

Earlier today, the Republican leader told reporters that -- quote -- "Regardless of what may be happening in some states, there`s no rationale for federal intervention."

The Republican leader flatly stated that, no matter what the states do to undermine our democracy, voter suppression laws, phony audits, partisan takeovers of local election boards, the Senate should not act.

My colleagues, my colleagues, if senators sixty years ago held that the federal government should never intervene to protect voting rights, this body would have never protected -- passed the Voting Rights Act.

The Republican leader uses the language and the logic of the Southern senators of the `60s who defended states` rights, and it is an indefensible position for any senator, any senator, let alone the majority -- minority leader, to hold.

And yet that was the reason given for why Republicans voted in lockstep today: Regardless of what may be happening in some states, there`s no rationale for federal intervention. That is both ridiculous and awful.

All we wanted to do here on the floor was to bring up the issue of voting rights and debate how to combat these vicious, oftentimes discriminatory voting restrictions.

And, today, every single Democratic senator stood together in the fight to protect the right to vote in America. The Democratic Party in the Senate will always stand united to defend our democracy.

I spoke with President Biden earlier this afternoon as well. He has been unshakable in his support of S.1. And I want to thank the president and the vice president for their efforts.

But, regrettably, regrettably, our efforts were met by the unanimous opposition of the Republican -- of the Senate minority.

Once again, Senate Republicans have signed their names in the ledger of history, alongside Donald Trump, the big lie, and voter suppression, to their enduring disgrace.

This vote, I`m ashamed to say, is further evidence that voter suppression has become part of the official platform of the Republican Party.

Now, Republican senators may have prevented us from having a debate on voting rights today, but I want to be very clear about one thing. The fight to protect voting rights is not over, by no means. In the fight for voting rights, this vote was the starting gun, not the finish line.

Let me say that again. In the fight for voting rights, this vote was the starting gun, not the finish line.

As many have noted, including my friend Senator Warnock this morning, when John Lewis was about to cross that bridge in Selma, he didn`t know what waited for him on the other side. He didn`t know how long his march would be. And his ultimate success was never guaranteed. But he started down that bridge anyway.

Today, Democrats started our march to defend the voting rights of all Americans. It could be a long march, but it`s one we`re going to make.

Today, we made progress. For the first time this Congress, we got all 50 Democrats unified behind moving forward on a strong and comprehensive voting rights bill. And make no mistake about it. It will not be the last time that voting rights comes up for a debate in this Senate.

Republicans may want to avoid the topic, hoping that their party`s efforts to suppress votes and defend the big lie will go unnoticed. Democrats will not allow that. Democrats will never let this voter suppression be swept under the rug.

We have several serious options for how to reconsider this issue and advance legislation to combat voter suppression. We are going to explore every last one of our options. We have to. Voting rights are too important, too fundamental. This concerns the very core of our democracy and what we are about as a nation.

So we will not let it go. We will not let it die. This voter suppression cannot stand. And we are going to work tirelessly to see that it does not stand.

I yield the floor.

HARRIS: The clerk will call the roll.

MELBER: We have been listening there to Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer giving an impassioned speech, the Senate splitting there on this procedural vote on the voting rights bill 50-50.

Vice President Harris presiding over the important vote. We could see her chatting there, still up at the lectern.

We are told to expect remarks from the vice president, which is also fairly unusual for any day of Senate business. And so we will bring those to you live here on MSNBC as they occur, 6:28 p.m. here on the East Coast in Washington, D.C.,

And you can see the Senate floor starting to filter out. This was the expected outcome, but it is now official. This is a GOP filibuster, Republicans using this mechanism, the cloture vote, the procedural vote, to formally filibuster and block any floor consideration of the voting rights and election reform bill.

There you have it. And what we just heard from Senator Schumer was what was expected, but it was quite impassioned, the majority leader making the argument that this vote today is meaningful, even though it`s not the outcome the Democrats wanted, because they wanted progress.

But he says they have nonetheless had some measured steps here. Number one, Senator Schumer emphasizing that they did get all 50 votes for this step, including Manchin. Number two, he says that this vote shows that the national Republican Party, not just the state crackdowns that we have reported on, the national Republican Party, through this vote, is signing up that voter suppression as part of the platform.

We`re going to keep an eye on the floor, where you see other senators now coming up to speak. We will bring you, as mentioned, the vice president`s remarks, if, as expected, she makes them.

I want to bring our panel back in, starting with Chai.

Well, let me actually -- let me do this.

Let me start with Mark, who I`m realizing, as a point of order, I had to depart from, and then go to Chai and the rest of the panel on reaction to Senator Schumer.

But, Mark, I will ask you to hold your other comments in the chamber, rhetorically, so to speak, and first give us your reaction to what we just heard and this breaking news from Senator Schumer.

THOMPSON: Well, I think Senator Schumer was accurate in everything he said. And he called out the Republican Party for what it is.

Democrats -- 50 Democrats represent 43 million more people than the 50 Republicans do. And this is a holdover from really the time of enslavement. Many of these senators represent places that don`t have the same population, while the majority of people support this legislation.

So this is not a democracy. This is a minority that is controlling this. And at the risk of making a controversial metaphor, I mean, we know what minority rule is. And there`s a term for minority rule, and that`s called apartheid. We fought against that as well.

The -- this is history made tonight, Ari, on your show. A minority of Americans, representing a minority of Americans, is doing all it can to prevent democracy and from the majority of people in this country voting. And we have got to do something about that. That`s why we`re in the streets.

I totally agree with Senator Schumer. Something`s going to have to be done. And we just got to have -- got to keep organizing and mobilizing. And people are going to have continue to (AUDIO GAP) for their voting rights, so we can have some semblance of democracy in America with what they`re trying to take (AUDIO GAP)

MELBER: Let me take it quickly to Chai and then Mara.

And we are now getting advised the vice president will be coming out shortly. And we will go right to that, as always, for the news when it happens.

But, briefly, Chai, what argument did Senator Schumer make there, in your view?

KOMANDURI: Yes, I mean, he made the right argument.

But -- and he basically said, so much for bipartisanship. There has been nothing but an outstretched hand on the part of the Democrats. Joe Manchin has offered compromise solutions, taking out the voter I.D. provision, still allowing Republican legislatures or Republican secretaries of state to purge voter rolls.

I mean, those are tremendous concessions. There`s been an outstretched hand. And I think what Schumer -- Senator Schumer was really trying to say is, all they have been met with on the Republican side is a closed fist. There`s absolutely no interest...

MELBER: And let`s listen -- let`s listen in to the vice president.

(JOINED IN PROGRESS)

HARRIS: ... the United States Congress could take up, which is about the fundamental right to vote in our country.

And I think it is clear, certainly, for the American people that, when we`re talking about the right to vote, it is not a Republican concern or a Democratic concern. It is an American concern.

This is about the American people`s right to vote unfettered. It is about their access to the right to vote in a meaningful way, because nobody is debating, I don`t believe, whether all Americans have the right to vote. The issue here is, is there actual access to the voting process, or is that being impeded?

And the bottom line is that the president and I are very clear. We support S.1. We support the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. And the fight is not over.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Which Republicans did you talk to tonight?

MELBER: Vice President Harris speaking here after presiding over the Senate floor vote. She`s walking there out of the chamber.

I just want to underscore, this is fairly unusual. The vice president, of course, has the constitutional duty to oversee the Senate, although it`s ceremonial, so we don`t always see it in action.

And when they do, they don`t always come out and speak. I think we`re seeing -- and I want to go to Mara now with our panel. I think we`re seeing just the level of coordination, of import that the Democratic Party, with its current leadership, is putting forward here.

And I could say it or someone else could say it, but I think it`s quite -- quite obvious and clear. We`re also speaking about the first minority woman in the White House, president or vice president, in this role. And she is saying that, in her positive way, as she put it, she said she hopes no one`s actually opposing the right to vote.

And yet that`s what today`s action does, and trying to conjoin with the -- her former colleague, Senator Schumer, Mara, who`s arguing that this is a revelatory moment for the modern Republican Party for any Americans who may have been watching, but thinking, well, it`s not this bad or it`s local or it`s not coordinated.

Your response to what we just saw?

GAY: Yes, it is unusual, Ari.

The Democrats are sending a clear message. And, specifically, I would say, at this point, the White House is sending their message. It knows that this is an important issue. And the Vice President, Kamala Harris, is speaking directly, I believe, as well not just to Democratic voters, but to black voters and others whose vote is directly under threat: We see you. We will fight for you. Hang with us.

I think that`s really important, because there are people in the street putting their bodies and lives and safety on the line right now to protect the rights of all Americans to vote, not just black Americans.

I think this is historic for actually a much darker reason today. And that`s that we have not seen access to the ballot debated in this way and turned into this partisan issue since, in fact, the 1960s and 1970s. So, if you`re an American who grew up with parents who lived through Jim Crow, as I did, this is your history books, some of the darkest hours of your history books coming to life, and reminding us that progress is not inevitable.

And, at every turn in this country, the filibuster has been used to stop the expansion of democracy and to prevent America from living up to its promise to allow all of its citizens full access to the ballot and to the rights and privileges of citizenship in this country. That`s how the filibuster has always been used, or mostly been used, I should say.

And it`s very dark. And I actually don`t believe that minority rule in this country would truly be sustainable if the majority in this country could take it seriously. The real question, I believe, for Democrats tonight is, what line do the Republicans cross where you say, enough is enough?

Do you have a line in the sand where you say, OK, it`s time to kill the filibuster? And, if not, what does that mean? If so, where is it? The American people want to know, because, while we`re debating this, these laws are being put into place, and they`re going to be real Americans who are going to have a very difficult time voting not long from now.

So the time to act is now.

MELBER: And, as you say, there`s no solution there where people say, well, just get involved and go vote.

No, we`re covering tonight what`s happening in the Senate about whether people will be able to freely and fairly exercise that right to vote or not, and whether this anti-democratic tool, this filibuster obstruction, will be used for anti-democratic ends, to prevent people from voting.

And those people, as is often the case in American history, are black and brown people and some other people. We have seen voter I.D. discriminating in other ways, including against the elderly. But in the main and in the recent politics, we know what this is.

Mark, we were speaking with you earlier.

I`m going to ask my control room to just go full on your position, because Mara was just walking us through the stakes of this. And there you are on a Black Voters Matter bus out there doing this work around the country.

Earlier in our coverage on MSNBC, we had footage from another such grassroots effort. There is this counterpush. But the news tonight, my job to issue the news, whether people like it or not, is that the Republicans did exercise their obstruction under the current rules in the Senate. That`s what happened.

So the question now is whether people doing what you`re doing on the Black Voters Matter bus, people putting pressure on individual senators, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden, how hands-on does Joe Biden want to get -- we just saw his vice president making an impassioned statement -- in pressing the current incumbent Democratic senators to change something or not.

So we go back to you on that, on that thought.

THOMPSON: Well, everybody on the panel, I think, has eloquently expressed what the issue is.

And, as a matter of fact, they voted this down, the Republicans did, precisely because of who was presiding. There is a fight against having diversity when it comes to elected officials, when it comes to people serving in government.

So you have a woman who is African-American and Indian American and Jamaican American and a woman. She checks all the boxes. And they look up there at her and say, obviously, we want to make sure that this does not continue.

The Republican Party still intends to continue to be the party not even of poor and middle-class whites, as Reverend Barber would say, but, rather, the party of privileged rights.

LaTosha Brown and Cliff Albright founded Black Voters Matter. I am their guest on this bus. As we go from city to city, people are activated, motivated. Tomorrow, as I said, we will be in Raleigh, North Carolina. We will go to Richmond, Virginia, as well.

On Saturday, we invite all to join us on the National Mall. We will have a peaceful demonstration in front of the U.S. Capitol. And we will demand that this voter suppression end and also lift up one of the oldest examples of voter suppression that has been going on for a couple of centuries. And that`s the lack of statehood for the District of Columbia.

But I think that this is going to motivate even more people to get out and vote. And Chai said something important. Bipartisanship is dead. First of all, you all, if -- why are Democrats like Manchin the only ones using bipartisanship?

What Republicans have you seen even use the term? And when you don`t see others invoking that terminology, it lets you know that it`s not even real.

Mara is right as well. This filibuster is an enslavement relic. It has got to go. You cannot have people`s right to vote blocked in this way. So we have got a lot of work to do. We ask people to continue to remain organized, to remain vigilant, continue to fight.

And this has to be challenged on all these state and local levels as well. Get involved. This is why -- let me just say it`s important to run for offices that are down-ballot, because you can effect change at the local level, whether it be on election boards or city councils, legislature. All of that is important.

And, again, we invite everyone to join us, if you can, in Washington, D.C., at high noon on the National Mall in front of U.S. Capitol.

MELBER: Yes. And I expect we will be checking in with you on the work you`re doing, on how that goes, because this is a story that emanates out of the United States Senate.

That`s where the news was made tonight, and yet, as is so often the case in the quest for voting rights in America, one that has to be fortified around the nation.

I want to thank all of our panelists, some of whom have already left us, whom you see on the screen on this historic night. Thank you very much.

We`re going to fit in a break.

There are other stories going on. We have an update, courtesy of "The Wall Street Journal" and other reporting about why the Trump Org criminal probe in New York is escalating, a new executive caught up in it.

And we`re covering this on the day of the primary for the new DA in New York.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MELBER: There`s a big vote in New York today that impacts the criminal probe into the Trump Organization.

Today, New Yorkers will vote for the next DA. Whoever replaces Cy Vance when he leaves in December inherits this Trump Organization case that`s been heating up. Indeed, there`s reports it`s expanding into a broader cross section of Trump executives, prosecutors looking at Matthew Calamari.

You may recognize his name. He was once a bodyguard. And he`s under investigation for whether he also received tax-free goodies. "The Wall Street Journal" reporting is also now confirmed by sources who spoke with NBC News.

Prosecutors suggesting he needs his own lawyer. And now they have one, the report showing that Calamari and his son have tapped a new lawyer. There`s red hot heat also on the CFO of the organization, prosecutors working on getting Allen Weisselberg to flip and give up evidence.

Now, without Weisselberg`s cooperation, "The Washington Post" has noted it`s also unclear whether prosecutors will be able to establish required intent on Trump`s part for crimes.

So, to be clear and fair, this is heating up, but there`s reporting that suggests prosecutors still need more evidence. The case, though, is clearly expanding to people who are very close to Donald Trump.

I want to bring in a former Trump Organization executive, Barbara Res, author of "Tower of Lies: What My Eighteen Years of Working With Donald Trump Reveals About Him," and former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance.

Barbara, we will get to you on the people.

I want Joyce to begin by just walking us through what it means that this investigation appears to be going up and down the ladder.

JOYCE VANCE, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: It`s a really interesting stage in the investigation, Ari.

It looks like a full-court press on all potential witnesses who could cooperate directly against people at the top of the Trump Organization, the former president and his children.

And something I think we should caution your viewers is that it`s very difficult to know what`s happening in a prosecution from the outside. We`re hearing reporting that prosecutors have sort of hit a little bit of a hurdle, that they`re not able to flip some of the witnesses that they would like to have.

But, sometimes, that can just mean that prosecutors are using investigative techniques that they don`t want to compromise by revealing too much. So, we don`t know exactly what`s going on here.

It`s fair to say, though, that prosecutors have reached the level of witnesses. And I view these people as potential witnesses. They are certainly target defendants. Prosecutors would likely prefer to have their testimony in exchange for a cooperation agreement.

They are now at the level in the Trump Organization that suggests they`re at the point where they have difficult decisions to make about who gets prosecuted and who gets a pass.

MELBER: Barbara, tell us about Matthew Calamari.

BARBARA RES, FORMER TRUMP ORGANIZATION EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT: I hired Matt.

Trump picked him -- met him at a U.S. Open. He was working with temporary security. And he pulled some kids out of the way that were sitting in someone else`s seat and impressed Trump. And he got his card. And he told me to put him on as head of security on Trump Tower, and that`s what I did.

And he`s a good security guy, I guess. The next thing I know, he is the COO. I mean...

MELBER: It`s wild.

So, I mean, it shows the bumps. So he goes from a casual run-in to a serious position. I mean, you hire someone for security, you better hope you vetted them and they`re on the right side of things. And from there, you say he goes into becoming an executive.

So, what does that tell us about the way this place runs and whether Calamari knows anything that investigators want to know?

RES: OK, let me say that, when they say Weisselberg knows where the bodies are buried, that`s a euphemism.

Calamari knows where the bodies are buried. He`s been with Trump through thick and thin. Every single move that Trump ever made, Matt has been there or someone else, but usually Matt. And he might not know anything financial, but he probably was sitting around when things were discussed. So, he probably has information.

The thought that Trump gave him something to engender his loyalty, that`s happening. Trump was doing that all along. He gave out little things, like tickets to the Open. And he gave out big things like cars, I mean, anything.

It was all chits. It was all to collect back loyalty or a favor or something like that. That`s sort of the way -- like a godfather. So, I don`t doubt that Trump gave Matt different things. We will find out. But we know one thing for sure. He gave his son a job. And that`s a big deal.

So, for anyone that -- and he`s done that with others. For anyone that gets a job for their child that works for Trump, it`s an automatic loyalty and do everything I say, because, if you don`t, not only do you get fired, but your kid loses his position.

MELBER: Right. It locks them in extra, which, as you say, is more synonymous with other types of organizations.

You know the term standing tall, Barbara?

RES: I think so, yes.

MELBER: Yes.

I mean, Weisselberg`s been standing tall to the investigators up to this point, according to all evidence we have, including basic indicators, like he keeps showing up to work. If he`d cut some deal and quit, it would look different.

Is Calamari also the type to stand tall?

RES: Probably more so even than Allen, but I don`t think he would want -- go to jail, to be honest with you.

Now, I know them both very well. They`re not the kind of people that Trump is usually associated with, like, what`s his name, Roger Stone or the other guy.

MELBER: Roger. Manafort.

RES: Manafort, yes.

They`re regular people. I mean, they have probably been contaminated and probably been brought in and drawn into all sorts of things. But I think that the idea, the notion of going to jail is something that would be anathema to both of them, especially Weisselberg. His kids are involved.

And I don`t know -- Joyce would know -- what kinds of things prosecutors will do to get someone to flip, as it were. I can imagine that they had the ability to say, I will go after you on your taxes. I will go after you for not reporting this. I will go after you for the sort of apartment I gave your son.

If that happens, I think it all folds in.

MELBER: Joyce?

VANCE: Well, Barbara makes a really good point here.

We don`t know exactly what prosecutors are thinking about charging. So we don`t know exactly what sort of deals are available. But the best deal for someone in Weisselberg`s position, really, many defendants that I have encountered, is, if they have a child who`s got criminal exposure, if they have a child who may end up going to prison, the deal that they are often willing to take is a deal that will save their child.

They`re willing to go to jail themselves to see that happen, to go to prison themselves for a significant amount of time, so long as their child doesn`t have to. And, in this situation, that means telling the truth, testifying about what they know, whether it`s actual or simply theoretical bodies that are buried someplace.

And it looks like that`s exactly the strategy that the Manhattan DA`s office is using. Something that you started out by flagging, Ari, is the fact that there`s a time clock ticking in the Manhattan DA`s office.

MELBER: Right.

VANCE: The election is upon us. Cy Vance is likely looking to cap his career.

And it seems to me that you don`t put all of these resources into this investigation, only to come up empty-handed as the very last thing that you do as the district attorney in Manhattan.

MELBER: It seems like a reasonable inference.

I got about 30 seconds, Barbara.

The new "Post" story said that Weisselberg had previously stated his income between $300,000 to $500,000 a year. Does that strike you as about right, or not?

RES: Weisselberg?

MELBER: Weisselberg, yes.

RES: Yes, it strikes me as about right, because I think about what I was making. That was a long, long time ago.

I imagine that`s correct. That`s the surface. That`s what`s reported to the IRS. What -- the other things he gives, who knows? There`s no limit to it.

MELBER: Yes, and that`s what the investigators are digging into, which is, for all the supposed billions that allegedly are sloshing around, and, on the lifestyle, if that`s the number, was it true? Fine. Or was it off by a lot because of the real number?

And that seems to be a recurring theme.

RES: Well...

MELBER: I`m running out of time, but go ahead.

RES: When you look at the way the lifestyle, and the schools for the kids, and the fancy apartment, and it`s very different from his Long Island lifestyle, I don`t know, the $300,000.

MELBER: Yes, and that`s -- I think that`s what they`re digging -- one of the things are digging into.

Barbara and Joyce, thank you.

We`re going to fit in a break.

When we come back, we close our hour with those impassioned remarks from Vice President Harris.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS: This is about the American people`s right to vote unfettered.

It is about their access to the right to vote in a meaningful way.

The bottom line is that the president and I are very clear. We support S.1. We support the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. And the fight is not over.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MELBER: "The fight is not over." Those are the final words in our broadcast tonight, Vice President Harris speaking after presiding over that vote where Republicans filibustered this election reform bill.

That does it for me.

"THE REIDOUT WITH JOY REID" is up next.