Interview with the Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA). Interview with Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT).

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST, "ALL IN": That is "ALL IN" on this Tuesday night.

MSNBC PRIME starts now with Ali Velshi now.

ALI VELSHI, MSNBC HOST: Good to see you, Chris. Thank you. You have a great evening.

And thanks to you at home for joining us this hour.

You know where the movies, the ones about big bad moments in presidential history. The Oval Office is dark. There is ominous music playing. Everyone got this grimness on their face.

So I want you to listen to this. It reads as if it`s taken from one of those screenplays, quote: The evening of the January 5th, the day before the formal certification process, Donald Trump met with Mike Pence.

He urged Pence as the presiding officer at the certification session to throw Bidens electors out. Pence said he didn`t have the power. Quote, one of these people say you do. Trump asked. He gestured outside where a massive crowd of his supporters had gathered. They`re cheering. Their bullhorns could be heard through the Oval Office windows.

I wouldn`t want anyone person to have that authority, Pence said. But wouldn`t it also be cool to have that power? Asked the president of the United States. No, Pence said. I`m just there to open the envelopes.

You don`t understand, Mike, you can do this. I don`t want to be your friend anymore if you don`t do this.

Trump`s voice became louder, and he grew threatening. You betrayed us, I made you. You were nothing, he said. Your career is over if you do this.

Cut! Because that`s where the director would yell cut. If this working from a movie. But it`s not. It happened.

June 6th, today, it`s been a year and a half since January 6th. In that time, the contours of what happened -- of what happens, had become fairly clear. After the president of the United States lost reelection, he and his supporters launched a full scale, multi-prong effort, to overturn the legitimate results of that election, one that culminated from a violent attack on the capitol.

We`ve got a pretty granular understanding of it too. We know that sitting members of Congress were in on the plot. We know that the president`s daughter witnessed her dad tried to pressure the vice president, Mike Pence, to stop the official counting of the ballots.

Heck, thanks to that original reporting that I just read to you from, from Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, we even know that the president threatened to stopping Mike Pence`s friend, for whatever that`s worth. I am totally not going to be your friend anymore, Mike, if you don`t throw the election my way, which is two days away from the January -- from the beginning of the January 6 public portions of the hearings, where investigators will lay out the results of the congressional inquiry, and so what happens, and into who is ultimately responsible.

And yet, we are still learning new details about the lead up to what was almost the successful overthrow of American democracy. The first piece of information today has to do with this.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT: Now it is up to Congress to confront this agree just assault on our democracy. And after this, we are going to walk down -- and I`ll be there with you -- we`re going to walk down, we`re going to walk down. We`re going to walk down to the Capitol.

VELSHI: That was right before the mob of supporters descended on the Capitol on January 6th, appearing to be following orders from the president to march down to the Capitol, along with the promise that the president himself would march down there alongside them. A lot of scrutiny has been placed on this part of the president`s speech. It gets to the quick question, up whether or not Trump incited rally attendees to march to the Capitol.

Trump and his allies had tried to downplay those remarks to some kind of off the cuff slip, that Trump didn`t really mean that he wanted to march to the Capitol with his supporters, to disrupt the certification of the election. Trump`s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, says it was a complete surprise when he heard those words come out of his bosses mount.

Well, today, we`ve got concrete confirmation that Trump`s direction to send to his summit is on Congress was not an unplanned ad lib. But something he had been planning for weeks. According to new reporting at "The Washington Post" today, Trump had been pressuring the Secret Service for weeks to come up with a plan for him to safely march with his supporters to the Capitol on January 6. "The Post" reports that the January 6 -- on January 6th, Trump quote, Secret Service agents scrambled to try to secure a motorcade route, so then President Donald Trump could accompany his supporters as they marched on Congress, to demand that he stayed in power, end quote.

The D.C. police tells "The Post" that the Secret Service that day went as far as to ask the police for their help.

We`re setting up a safe route to the Capitol for the president. D.C. police told Secret Service agents, it was not possible. So the idea was ultimately scrapped.

Today, "Politico" reports of the January six investigation has interviewed the head of Trump Secret Service detail. He was with Trump backstage at the rally on January 6th, as well as in the motorcade with the president. Presumably, his testimony will shed some light on this discrepancy.

It also points to the fact that the January 6 investigation`s focus on the Secret Service has sharpened considerably, not just on Donald Trump security, but on the vice president protection as well. Recent reporting in "The New York Times" revealed that just 24 hours before the attack on the Capitol, Mike Pence`s chief of staff, contacted the vice president`s head Secret Service agents, to tell him that, quote, the president was going to turn publicly against the vice president, and there could be a security risk to Pence because of it.

Following weeks of an intense pressure campaign, led by the presidents, to bully Pence and to refusing to certify the election results on January six, Pence`s chief of staff thought the president supporters might descend to violence if Pence didn`t abide by the president`s demands.

And, of course, he was ultimately right. Twenty-four hours later, Trump supporters were demanding that Mike Pence be hanged for failing to overturn the election for Trump. Pence did have to be whisked away by the Capitol by the Secret Service, narrowly avoiding and a counter with the rioters.

And, of course, we now know that Trump not only provoked those rally or to hunt down Mike Pence that day, he even sympathized with them in real-time. Donald Trump reportedly told his chief of staff that he approves of the "hang Mike Pence" chants that day.

The pressure campaign against Mike Pence, the bullying he endured by Trump and his allies to defy the will of the voters, stack together, it starts to create a picture of a president desperate to stay in power, and who was willing to pull any lever up available to make that happen, especially when you add this new and overlooked detail.

According to "The New York Times", in addition to that berating Mike Pence, to his face, to get him to block the certification of the election results, Trump was also trying to blackmail him behind the scenes. "The Times" reports that Trump`s chief of staff told Pence`s team that the White House was withholding money that Pence needed, in order to set up his post White House office.

Put plainly, it`s all you do what I want. You do not get your money. And as we approach the start of the public hearings on Thursday, consider the witness list here.

Trump`s efforts to overturn the election even if you just focus on the Mike Pence aspect of it all. The list of people who were party to this behavior is long. There are the advisers to Mike Pence, who were on the receiving end of that pressure campaigns. The staffers to Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows who witnessed their boss dole out that pressure on Donald Trump`s behalf.

According to "The Washington Post", all of those people are expected to deliver testimony at the live hearings that begin on Thursday. Marc Short, the vice president`s chief of staff, the vice president`s chief lawyer, Greg Jacob, as well as the top aide to Mark Meadows, named Cassidy Hutchison. They are all expected to deliver testimony during the live hearings.

And apparently invitations are still in the mail. "The Post" reports, the former attorney general, Jeff Rosen, and other Justice Department officials are expected to receive formal invitations to testify in the coming days. You thought you know the whole story, the stuff coming out.

Less than two days until the witnesses start appearing in primetime. What should we expect?

Joining us now is the Virginia congresswoman and member of the January 6 Committee, Elaine Luria.

Congresswoman, thank you for being with us.

"The Washington Post" and "The New York Times" are reporting that you and Congressman Adam Kinzinger will to get their lead the final hearing, which is going to focus on Donald Trump and his actions leading up to and during the riot.

I want to understand what you`re hoping to show the American people, in that presentation that they either don`t already know, or haven`t been willing to hear?

REP. ELAINE LURIA (D-VA): Well, as you lead into our interview here, you describe just the depth and the breath and the number of people involved in what was a wide spread in far-reaching conspiracy to essentially overturn the results of the election. And what we hope to tell through our series of hearings, which will start this Thursday, is just how deep that was and how dangerous it was. Dangerous it remains to the future of our country and our democratic institutions.

As we have all seen, some of that cast of characters that you mentioned, including the former president himself is still out.

They`re out there spreading these lies, trying to claim that the election was stolen. And so, in my mind, the voices that led to the events on January 6, they still exist. They still present the danger and I think that the work of our committee, the things that we will present, will really lay that out for the American public.

VELSHI: And so, let`s accept that as a given, that the forces still exist. That all the things that some Americans, with a sigh of relief, I thinking, are in the rare view mirror all exist. Some of them may have actually strengthened.

The issue here is, do anti-democratic forces just exist in America? Or is there a possibly still active plot by people who look at would happen on January 6, saw the failures, and could try to repeat this sort of thing again?

LURIA: It is entirely possible that some group could attempt to repeat something like this again. I think there is a saying about -- the commonality of every successful coup is that there was a failed coup, an attempt before. So, I think that is very important that we understand all the factors that led to this.

The work of this committee is truly to provide all of the things that led up to January 6, the full accounting of that, the events of that day, and provide legislative recommendations to prevent something like this from happening in the future. So, I think that that is the ultimate product of the works of this committee. We will look after these hearings, because we really need to make sure that the safeguard our democratic institution and that we don`t allow the possibility for someone to look at the events of January 6 and say, well next time, if we did this differently. Perhaps we could be successful.

VELSHI: Obviously, coming up with these love just laid it suggestions would be helpful, and establishing some of these guardrails for democracy. But there is also calls ability. That is not the mission of your committee to deal with people who were responsible for it. But, what is the chain of events?

Is the hope that when you lay out your findings and your report, that the Justice Department or others can actually deal with the people who were responsible for it, more than they already have, we`ll do more?

LURIA: Look, I think I was clear on one of our earlier proceedings from the committee, you know, I really want to lean in on that parallel investigation that is happening with the Department of Justice. They are the ones who truly will hope people accountable for criminal actions. The report from this committee, the information that we put out within hearings, I think will paint a very clear picture from beginning to end, so the present day. Of all the things that happened to lead up to the dangers that still exists, and some of that information will clearly be new to the public and perhaps new to others who are also looking carefully at these events.

VELSHI: We have reports that the committee is in discussion with various Trump administration`s witnesses, like the former White House counsel Pat Cipollone, as well as the chief of staff, chief counsel to the former vice president.

How important is it that these people provide their testimony in public? You seem to have a lot of the information anyway, before people even testify, because you corroborated it at different points. But what`s the importance of those people testifying in front of the public?

LURIA: Well, I think it`s very important that the American people hear directly from people who have firsthand knowledge of the events. That the committee is investigating. So as we roll out the hearings, and get closer to each hearing, we will let the public know who will be participating in each of these hearings.

VELSHI: There are some Americans for whom this is in the rearview mirror. Lots of other things have happened since.

Is it your sense that holding some of these hearings, in public, in primetime, with key testimony, and evidence, will be enough to remind people that democracy itself is at stake? It was put at risk that day, and continues to be a risk.

LURIA: If it is something that I think if you walk up the someone, on the street, if I talk to someone in my district, perhaps not the first thing that comes to their mind. People are very busy, they have a lot of challenges in their daily life.

But when you talk to them, when you engage them about this, about the events of January 6, I think the number one thing is that people express harbor, disdain, from what happens. And I truly think that no one wants to see something like that happen again. I think that, the committee`s ability to have interviewed 1,000 people, to have collected over 140,000 documents, during all this information together, to present away with the American public can see to beginning of end, all of the elements. All of the pieces of this picture comes together. I think people will really look at it and say, this is serious, and that they are glad that they will be able to understand this more fully.

VELSHI: Thank you for your time tonight, Virginia Congresswoman, member of the January 6 committee, Elaine Luria. We appreciate it.

All right. We got a lot to get to on what has turned out to be a very busy news night. Still ahead, I`m going to speak with Senator Chris Murphy. He`s the Democrat who is leading the bipartisan negotiations on gun reform.

It`s also a huge primary night, in states across the country. We`ll get the latest from Steve Kornacki who`s at the big board.

And up next, new indications that the Justice Department`s parallel investigations that we were just talking to into January 6 are beginning to heat up. Like I said, lots to get to. Stay with us.

VELSHI: A few months after Attorney General Merrick Garland vowed that his department would hold all January 6 perpetrators at any level accountable under law, we are starting to see more indications that the DOJ investigation is gathering steam.

Yesterday, five members of the Proud Boys, including its leader, were indicted on seditious conspiracy. It`s a charge that, as Rachel pointed out last night, is really brought by the Justice Department because it is so difficult to prove. Typically speaking, the department would only bring those cases if they knew that they could follow through on them.

That followed the indictment of 11 members of the Oath Keepers militia on the same seditious conspiracy charge earlier this year. There are also reports that the DOJ stepping up its criminal inquiry into another focal point of the plot to overturn the 2020 election.

Fake electors. These are the Trump supporters in seven states won by Biden who signed documents sent to Congress and the National Archives claiming to be the real electors in each of those states. And that was an operation that was directed by the Trump campaign.

"The Washington Post" reports that the Justice Department has now issued subpoenas to and conducted interviews with some of those in Georgia who were connected to the scheme., which backs up recent reporting from CNN that federal investigators had interviewed people related to the plot in at least two states, Georgia and Michigan.

We are also learning new details about the clandestine nature of the scheme, "The Post" now reports that Trump`s elections operations director for Georgia, sent an email, telling the 16 Republicans who signed their names as electors -- they were fake electors -- in that state, to be discreet about it.

Quote: Your duties our imperative to ensure the end result, a win in Georgia for President Trump. But it will be hampered unless we have complete secrecy and discretion, end quote. He also tells them, in bold, quote, please, at no point should you mention anything to do with presidential electors or speak to the media, end quote.

That`s kind of weird because this whole thing about elections is supposed to be done out in public. We know for a fact that part of the message went unheeded, where at least that part did because people did talk. Those fake electors in Georgia allowed a local news station cameras into film them as they signed certificates declaring themselves the rightful electors.

They now have to worry about their own criminal liability. But one of these new revelations about the campaign`s desire for complete secrecy mean for the campaign and those overseeing the plot? What`s their liability? Does this come back to bite them?

Joining us now is Barbara McQuade. She`s a former United States attorney for the eastern district of Michigan. She is now professor at the University of Michigan Law School.

Barbara, good to see you, my friend. Thank you for taking time to be here tonight, because this is one of those questions that those of us not trained in the law don`t know how to think about.

Like, what does it mean that there is now more and more connection between the organizers, the fake electors, and even the messaging that suggests not to talk about this out loud?

BARBARA MCQUADE, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: I think it`s a very interesting development, Ali. And I think it is heartening to see that the justice department is looking at this part of the plot. Because this is part of the core of what John Eastman was urging Donald Trump and Mike Pence to do. Part of throwing out the real electors required having these alternate slates of electors to vote for Donald Trump. And they needed to be in place before January 6th.

The fact that they are done secretly, I think, is especially important. You know, in prosecution circles, we refer to this as consciousness of guilt. If what you are doing is legitimate, there is no reason to cover it up. But if you do things secretly, it suggests that you know that there is something wrong about it.

I could imagine a defense here being, we were just providing provisional ballots. We knew there were some irregularities in the election. And so, just in case, we were filling these things out. That might be one defense.

But if you have someone saying, you have to be secret about it and you cannot tell anyone what is going on. And in fact, I think David said, you have to do this at the Capitol but when you arrive, lie, and say you are there to see a senator. Otherwise, they won`t let you in. That suggests to me that there is something foul about what is going on here.

And it may be that these people who sign these slates, the actual electors, are just sort of ponds in this thing, doing what they are told to do. Whereas, I think the Justice Department investigation should focus and likely is focusing, he`s who gave these directives? And why?

And they should keep following that up and up, to who was the author of this instruction. Does it come all the way back to John Eastman? And those who were planning these plans in the Oval Office?

VELSHI: Will that make a difference? If you go higher and higher and higher? And you find out that what many of us guest to be the case -- that this was orchestrated at very high levels? What is the import of making that determination?

MCQUADE: Well, I think, ultimately, if you could put together all of this, if this was a plot to defraud the American public about the outcome of the election and disrupt the results -- disrupt the peaceful transfer of power -- then you could charge a crime called conspiracy to fraud the United States. It`s essentially using fraudulent intent to prevent the proper functioning of government.

And so, here at the proper functioning of government would be to certify the votes as there were cast across the country. Instead, if there was a plot here to try to get Mike Pence to throughout the legitimate electors and instead use these alternate slates of electors, then it would be a way of flipping the outcome of the election, illegitimately. So, there`s a potential crime there if you can put the pieces together.

VELSHI: I want to ask you about the indictment of these five Proud Boys on the seditious conspiracy charge. You are one of the rare prosecutors who have actually brought seditious conspiracy charges. What is the DOJ -- to charge members of the Proud Boys with conditions seditious conspiracy, in addition to the oath keepers, what`s that tell you?

MCQUADE: This is a very serious charge, Ali. They had already been charged with another crime of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. And that brings with it to 20-year sentence, just like the seditious conspiracy charge.

And so, in many ways, they could have simply left things as they stand instill face considerable amounts of time. But seditious conspiracy requires proof of something far more serious. It requires the use of force to oppose the authority of the United States government. That`s much more than going in and disrupting a government proceeding, using force to oppose the authority of the United States. It really is the closest thing that we have to a charge of treason during times of peace.

The treason statute can only be used when we are at war, for someone who provides aid and comfort to the enemy. But this one brings with it a connotation of his loyalty to the United States. So, it`s a very serious crime. But I think it`s appropriate in a case we want to bring the moral condemnation on people who have actually tried to overturn the United States government.

VELSHI: It was a wise decision to ask you these questions.

Barbara, it`s always good to have you here. Thank you for joining us. Barbara McQuade is the former United States attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan. As always, we appreciate your time.

Well, in the wake of the Uvalde school shooting, is a breakthrough on gun reform possible?

Senator Chris Murphy, the Democrat who`s leading the negotiations in the Senate, with Republicans, says he is, quote, more confident than ever that Congress can strike a deal. He joins us next.

MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY, ACTOR: People, in power, have failed to act, so we are asking you. And I`m asking you will you please ask yourselves. Can both sides rise above? Can both sides see beyond the political problem at hand? And admit that we have a life preservation problem on our hands.

We got a chance right now to reach for and to grasp a higher ground, above our political affiliations. A chance to make the choice that does more than protect your party. A chance to make a choice that protects our country, now and for the next generation.

We got to take a sober, humble, and honest look in the mirror. Re-brand ourselves based on what we truly value.

VELSHI: Actor and Uvalde, Texas, native Matthew McConaughey, made a pitch for new gun laws during today`s White House press briefing. Those remarks came shortly after he met with President Biden to discuss the issue. McConaughey called on members of Congress to do something, to set aside partisan division on guns, and to protect the country from the repeated acts of gun violence that we are experiencing.

He urged action while he remembered the lives of aspiration of the 19 children and two teachers who were shot dead in the Uvalde classroom, two weeks ago, today. Children like Javier Lopez and Annabell Rodriguez, 10 year olds whose families held funeral services for them today.

Two weeks after the shooting, there are still two patients being treated at a San Antonio hospital. The shooter`s grandmother, who is had to be in stable condition, and the ten year old girl who remains in critical condition. This is where things stand for the victims and the survivors of the shooting at Robb Elementary School, as of today.

Meanwhile members of Congress are still trying to act. A bipartisan group of senators have been meeting since the end of May, trying to figure out what they can put in a gun reform bill that could get the 60 votes needed to overcome the filibuster.

Today, President Biden met with the Democratic leader of those negotiations, Connecticut senator, Chris Murphy. Yesterday the senator met with the Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas, and with Kristen Sinema, Democratic senator from Arizona for more than two hours.

But in terms of what will be any adventure ole bill, we know that there are some compromises on the table. Earlier today, Senator Murphy pledged to, quote, not let perfect be the enemy of the good, end quote.

Now, here is the thing, in terms of timing, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said today he`s giving the negotiators until the end of this week to make a deal. So what does that final product look like? At this point, what is actually possible on guns?

Joining us now is Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, leading the bipartisan negotiations on gun reform in the Senate.

Senator Murphy, thank you for being with us tonight.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Thanks for having me.

VELSHI: We are 14 years out from D.C. versus Heller, where 18 years up of the end of the assault weapon ban, and you`ve got to the end of the week to bridge gaps that are that big. What is possible?

MURPHY: Well, let`s go back even further. It`s been 30 years since Congress has passed any comprehensive legislation addressing gun violence in this country. There is a reason for that. This is the most politically complicated, emotionally fraught issue that Congress deals with, and it`s been often very easy for both sides to just retreat to their corner, for Democrats to say, unless we get everything we want, we are not interested in compromise, for the Republicans to say, we are interested in doing nothing.

This moment does feel different. I think it feels different because the public out there, parents, and, kids are really scared. They are really scared, and they are making it clear to my colleagues that doing nothing is just not an option this time around.

What are we talking about? Well I`m being careful not to try to negotiate in public. But it has been broadly reported that we are talking about helping states pass and implemented red flag laws. We are talking about improving our background check system. We`re talking about a big investment mental health. We`re talking about trying to zero in on these 18 to 21 year old, that seems to be doing most of the mass killing, and trying to make sure that we be very careful about getting guns into the hands of the wrong people before they are ready.

So, there is a handful of other issues that are on the table right now but we are trying to put together a bipartisan package that saves lives. Doesn`t do everything I would like. But it shows that we can break a 30- year logjam undoing something meaningful on gun violence.

VELSHI: You are from Connecticut, so when you say this time feels different, I remember Sandy Hook felt different. Parkland felt different. How do you -- how do you get the, every one of these mass shootings at a school, has dug people further into their positions. This has got to be the most emotional conversations when you`re in there with John Cornyn and others. How do you get past that to do exactly what you just said, what Matthew McConaughey said. Everybody just get past themselves for a little while so we can do something to re-brand of what we are.

This is America`s brand. It`s a lousy brand. But it is America`s brand now that people should up schools.

MURPHY: Yes, that`s right. It compromises our nation`s security because frankly, causes a lot of other nations to stand off from the United States because they don`t believe we share the same values. If America really cared about human life, why would we do nothing?

Year after year, of gun violence rates that are 20 times higher than the rest of the high income world.

I think what I learned after Sandy Hook is that this town, Washington, is about political power, and the anti-gun violence movement had very little in 2012. We spent the last ten years building up a movement. We now have more people who are calling offices, demanding change. Then we`ve ever had before. But that ultimately makes a difference.

So, I think that`s a difference between now and then ten years ago, is that we just have a movement, a moment of citizens that is making a difference.

VELSHI: You mentioned red flag laws, for instance. It has been reported that the group is currently a little bit stuck on some of the stuff. It has worked in many states, it has been bipartisan to have red flag laws. People at all right, if you do want to randomly take away the guns of law abiding citizens, but there is a process in which those who might be dangerous to themselves or others can have a hearing, and it can be fair, even Republicans can get behind that.

Where are you on that? Because that does seem to be something that could move some of the needles on some of these shootings. And by the way, on the things that actually kill most Americans which are people who kill themselves with a gun.

MURPHY: So, I think that is really important. When you hear that number of 100, 120 people dying every day from gunshots. Two thirds of that is suicides. We have a growing suicide epidemic in this country. Red flag laws are primarily used to stop suicides, very successfully.

And you are, right there are a lot of pretty red states in which red flag laws have been implemented, and implemented successfully. Republicans in Florida passed a red flag law that has been used 5,000 times since it was passed.

Now, if I`m a gun owner, that tells me that it`s not being abused, only 5,000 times given the tens of millions of Florida residents. But that is 5,000 interventions that probably saved hundreds if not thousands of lives.

I think we are going to get there on red flag laws. I know there are some reservations from Republican colleagues about due process. I think we can answer those.

But I think we will be able to help states implement them, we will be able to put money behind them. And it will end up saving a lot of lives, preventing a lot of suicides.

VELSHI: You spoke to the president today. What is his role on this?

MURPHY: Well, I have the speech that he gave was incredibly powerful. There is no better moral authority on this question of violence in America than Joe Biden. Of course, he speaks from a perspective of knowing what`s lost feels like.

I think he also understands as a former senator that sometimes the Senate has to work out its own issues. And so he has been very generous to give us the room and the space to negotiate our own compromise. Obviously, he is at a sign in the end, so I wanted to go over to the White House and tell him that where we are, in the negotiations.

But I think his bully pulpit is more force incredibly important, but he is smart enough having been in the Senate to know that this is one of the Senate probably has to work out ourselves.

VELSHI: Senator, are you enthusiastic, or are you frustrated right now?

MURPHY: I mean I`m frustrated and heartbroken every single day. Every single day I want to pass this bill, yesterday. I feel like this is different. I know that there is 19 ways that this can fail, and one way that a consensus exceed.

But every single day, we are still on the path of success. And so, I wake up every day optimistic that we can get this done. But I also know that there is a reason why it has been 30 years since we have passed anything significant in the space. This one is as high as anything that we deal with.

But maybe, maybe, because of what people out there are doing, because of the phone calls that they are making, that I hope they will make tomorrow, to their members of congress, this time will be different.

VELSHI: So that is what do you want people to do? You are hoping that more people will call their members of Congress and senators, please, get the deal, get this, done do something.

MURPHY: I mean, that`s what this place is all about. That`s the maracas of democracy. In the, and members of Congress make decisions based on what they think is going to be best for their state, and what is going to help them get reelected. And a lot of members of Congress here have made the bet in the past that they can sit on the sidelines on these negotiations, and pay no political price.

This isn`t about elections to me. It`s not. Right now is just about getting this deal. We just need over the next few days, especially, a real avalanche of people who care about change, who care about compromise, and progress, to let people know that we need to get this done.

VELSHI: And that doesn`t matter which side of the issue you are on. We are all on the same side, that we don`t want more school shooting.

Senator, thanks for your hard work. Thanks to those who are with you on this, and members of both parties who are looking to change. Senator Chris Murphy is a Democrat who was leading the bipartisan negotiations on gun reform in the Senate. We appreciate your time, sir.

VELSHI: Well, on top of all the other news tonight, there are primaries underway right now in seven states. We`ve got the latest with a great Steve Kornacki, right after the break.

VELSHI: Republicans tried to block it, but the voters passed it anyway. In Missouri, it won with 53 percent of the vote. In Oklahoma, it won with 50 percent of the votes. In Nebraska, it was 53 percent of the vote. In Maine, it was 59 percent of the vote. In Utah, it was 53 percent of the votes. In Idaho, 60 percent of the vote.

In all of those states, a majority of voters chose to expand Medicaid, to give health care to thousands of people, tens of thousands, really who did not have access to health care before. Ever since the Affordable Care Act went into effect, Republican-controlled states have been fighting to stop the expansion of Medicaid, which was really the biggest part of the Affordable Care Act.

But almost every time activist managed to get Medicaid expansion on the ballots at the state level, it won. A majority of voters, not a plurality, majority of voters chose to expand Medicaid.

Tonight, candidates will face off in seven states. We`re going to have more on those basis and just a moment, but I want to shine a light on how this issue is playing out in South Dakota. It`s an issue that has not received as much attention as it should have.

This November, South Dakota will be one of the latest states where voters will get to decide whether or not they want to expand Medicaid. Now past is precedent. It will mean that Medicaid expansion has a good chance of becoming law in South Dakota this November, which is why South Dakota Republicans decided to try something different.

Republicans in South Dakota could not take Medicaid expansion off the ballot. So instead, they took the unusual step of adding another ballot measure to the much lower turnout primary election today. One that would make it harder for voters to pass the Medicaid expansion on their own, in November. The measure on the ballot today if passed would, raise the threshold needed to pass Medicaid expansion in November.

So instead of a simple majority of votes being needed to pass Medicaid expansion in November, it would now, if this goes through, have to win with 60 percent of the votes in order to become law. Why 60 percent you ask?

Let`s put up a graphic that I`m going to show you before that when I talk about this. In the six states that expanded Medicaid expansion, at the ballot box, five of them did it with less than 60 percent of the vote. Idaho passed Medicaid expansion with just barely more than 60 percent of the vote.

One of the things you are watching for tonight, and into tomorrow, is whether Republicans and South Dakota will succeed and raising the threshold, making it harder to pass Medicaid expansion this November.

But as I mentioned, there are several big primary races taken place in seven states across the country today. For more on those races, let`s go to MSNBC`s Steve Kornacki, at the big board.

Steve, good to see you again, my friend.

What races are we following tonight? And what do we have in terms of results?

STEVE KORNACKI, MSNBC NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, we are getting some pretty surprising results here so far, Ali, actually, the seven states voting.

Mississippi right now providing the biggest drama. There are two Republican primaries with Republican incumbent members of Congress, who both at this hour, are in some real jeopardy.

One of them is right here, this is the third district of Mississippi. I`m just going to have to write these out for you but. The incumbent is Michael Guest, and currently, this is with more than a quarter of the vote counted. He has received 45 percent of the vote.

His challenger, one of his two challengers, Michael Cassidy, is receiving 47 percent. So Guest is trailing Cassidy with more than a quarter of the vote in.

Why would Guest be in trouble in this district? Guest, the only Republican from Mississippi who voted in favor of establishing a bipartisan January 6 Commission. That has been an issue in this campaign, that is given an opening on his right to Cassidy, Cassidy a veteran run who is now again, as we say, here a little bit of the quarter of the vote in, is leading Guest at this point.

Now, there is still a lot of those to come. There are some areas in the district friendly to Guest that we haven`t seen any votes from yet. And I should note, in Mississippi, the requirement is here 50 percent. We got to get 50 percent or goes to a runoff.

So if this ends up in a situation like you are looking at right now, this would be runoff territory between Cassidy and Guest. But Guest right now is in some real trouble.

There is also, and I can just tell you this, I apologize we don`t have the results board for this, but in the fourth district of Mississippi, the southern Mississippi, a long-serving Republican incumbents, his name is Steven Palazzo. He has come under fire ethics allegations against him, about the misuse of campaign funds, misuse of congressional staff.

He is facing a slew of challengers, and with even more of the votes counted, Palazzo is only at 31 percent right now. So, facing a strong possibility of a runoff for him. A big indication of discontent with Republican voters and the fourth district of Mississippi, with Palazzo, given the votes that we are seeing. He has been there 12 years now.

So, two incumbents and Mississippi at this hour, Ali, are in trouble. That`s where the trauma is right now.

VELSHI: All right. Later on, there`s going to be drama in California and Montana. We don`t have those numbers and yet. What can you tell us about those?

KORNACKI: Yeah. Well, later on, we are going to be looking at, if I go back to this later on, California obviously is going to take center stage in that will be -- Oh, I should point out, one other here, we mentioned the at large congressional seat in South Dakota. This is dusty Johnson, Republican incumbent. He also voted for that independent bipartisan January 6 commission. You see he is leading his challenger. This is the state legislator who he is against here. We have not called this race.

There are some other Republicans here South Dakota, John Thune, Governor Kristi Noem. They are both closer to 75, 80 percent. Johnson is being held to a lower number though he is leading with about a quarter of the vote in.

But it is going to be later on tonight, 11:00 Eastern Time, that is when the polls are going to close and California. Obviously, the drama will begin. There will just put California on the screen.

Not much drama there in the gubernatorial race. Gavin Newsom has survived his recall last year. But it is in San Francisco, where you`ve got the recall of Chesa Boudin, the district attorney who ran on that progressive platform. It`s the most liberal city probably in California, one of the most liberal cities in the country.

Are we going to see Chesa Boudin, the district attorney, are we going to see him recall? The way works in California, so many of these mail-in ballots have been coming, it ready to go, you can report them up pretty quickly. Probably in the 11:00 p.m. to midnight hour. We`re going to get a big batch of votes out of San Francisco, we may know Chesa Boudin`s fate very quickly.

If it`s a lopsided election, at all, if he is thrown out by a wide margin, we can know that quickly, and obviously the other thing we are going to, get a lot of votes pretty early than 11:00 hour is the mayor`s race and Los Angeles here. Karen Bass, congresswoman, Rick Caruso, a billionaire businessman who is running surprisingly well, saw funding his campaign here. We will see whether they head into our runoff together -- watching that one closely, Ali.

VELSHI: W will be with you all night, Steve. Thank you, my friend. MSNBC`s Steve Kornacki.

We`ll be right back.

VELSHI: There are USB-A chargers. There are USB-B chargers. There are USB C chargers. They are micro USB chargers. There are mini USB charges.

There are lightning chargers. There are MagSafe chargers. There are literally dozens of different sizes and shapes for, quote/unquote, standard power adapters. It is truly madness.

And if you live in this century, you likely already know I just told you. I would bet you good money that you got a drawer somewhere and your house where you keep the old chargers, just in case they might end up being useful. And I would bet you haven`t opened that door in a while.

But this does not have to be the way we love. Today, the European Union reached an agreement that would require all new smartphones, tablets, and headphones and cameras, all portable electronic devices, to use one common charger by 2024. Laptops whereby trickier because they use more power, we`ll also have to be on that one common charger by 2026.

And the charger that won out is a fast charging, USB-C cable, which is a personal favorite of mine.

The EU estimates that the legislation will save consumers across the pond 250 million euros a year and cut down on about 1,000 tons of waste a year. But also, to think about how nice it would be if your tablet, your e-reader and your camera, and your laptop, and any other portable device you had all use the same charger, a better future as possible.

That does it for us tonight. It`s time now for "THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE O`DONNELL".

Of course, I say a better future is possible with reference to chargers. But in fact, there are bigger problems to solve, and I know you are going to hit them all tonight, Lawrence.