they are not spending so much on legal fees and all the costs that come along with that and maybe they can come back to the point that they had been in the past. >> yeah, it will be fascinating watch play out. the membership, 4 million is still a lot of people and a lot of people who dropped off are supportive of the causes. fascinating to see. thank you for taking the time. we will be following this with you throughout the next couple of weeks o. "cnn this morning" continues right now. i'm phil mattingly. poppy harlow is off today. nikki haley and ron desantis are going to face iowa voters tonight in cnn town halls. why haley says new hampshire republicans need to correct the hawkeyes. and the first batch of the jeffery epstein documents are unsealed. what it reveals about his relationships with former presidents bill clinton and donald trump. should donald trump be allowed to run for president in

colorado. this hour of "cnn this morning" starts right now. good morning. welcome to the top of the hour. this morning the clock is ticking for ron desantis and navalny a nikki haley as they try to close a gap with trump. tonight on cnn with back-to-back town halls. 11 days -- i told you there was a clock. there is a clock. 11 days until the caucuses. polls show trump dominating his rivals in the state of iowa. yesterday an iowa voter confronted ron desantis on the campaign trail about why he is not attacking the frontrunner harder. >> why haven't you gone directly him? in my viewpoint, you are going pretty soft on him. >> well, what -- but what do you think -- because we -- i

articulated all the differences time and time again on the campaign trail. what the media wants is they want republican candidates to just kind of, like, smear him personally and kinda do that. that's not how i roll. >> meanwhile, nikki haley has been hitting the trail in new hampshire which holds the first republican presidential primaries in a week after iowa. harry, i think we are going to start with -- if you look at iowa be -- we try to talk about, okay, what is the map. let's talk about iowa and the lead that donald trump has, which is enormous. >> an enormous lead. you showed us cbs poll. i am showing the trend line for the dem moin register poll. you see donald trump has gotten stronger. 43% in october. look where he is now. more thaj a majority, more han 50% at 51%.

you see ron desantis within the margin of error where he was in october. nikki haley, she is stable. this is an over 30 point advantage with trump getting a majority of the vote. i want to put this in historic context for you. just how large trump's lead is. folks polled h45% or greater. mondale in '84, bush 2000, gore 2000, historic 2016, and now we see trump at 2024. i would note in fact trump is the only one to actually be at greater than 50% of the vote. the rest were at 50% or lower. trump is the strongest frontrunner in iowa in polling history. >> history? >> history. >> which may give people a window into why nikki haley said this last night. >> i trust every single one of you. you know how to do this. you know iowa starts it. you know that you correct it. you know that you continue to go -- [ applause ] >> there were a lot of people

like, iowans are going to freak out. nikki haley is trying to do well in new hampshire and has a chance when you look at the polling. not in iowa. is she right? does iowa have to be corrected by new hampshire? >> let's take a look here. break it down a few ways. okay. the iowa winner went on to become the gop nominee in caucuses since 1980. bob dole in 1996, goodbye in 2000, the rest, the iowa winner didn't go on to be the gop nominee. maybe nikki haley has a point. let's break this down a little bit further. iowa winners who led in the national polls went on to become the nominee. bob dole '96, bush 2000. donald trump has a huge national polling lead as well. those folks when met the devin six did they not win the nomination? there are in examples of this. no examples. further, how about this? new hampshire correcting iowa's perhaps mistake in the minds of

nikki haley. national gop frontrunners who won iowa and lost new hampshire, bob dole, george bush. both went on to be the gop nominee. so, yeah, it's true. iowa doesn't always pick the president. when iowa goes along with the national frontrunner, that, folks, those folks have gone on to be the nominee. sorta not exactly right from nikki haley as far as the historical numbers were. >> i love how careful you were attributing it to nikki haley. you don't want that smoke. >> i don't need that smoke. i am a big fan. >> harry enten, thank you. ron desantis and nikki haley take questions directly from iowa voters in back-to-back events. the town hall is moderated by kaitlan collins and erin burnett here tonight at 9:00 eastern. colorado's secretary of state responding after donald trump asked the u.s. supreme court to keep him on the state's ballot.

>> a president, the person who has, arguably, the most power in the country, should not be able to do that type of action and run again when every other elected official would be barred from doing so. and i do believe that the united states supreme court should tell the american people whether a president can engage in insurrection and then again run for that office. >> trump appealed last month. that disqualified under the 14 amendment insurrectionist cause. settling whether the republican frontrunner should be allowed to return to the white house. as state courts have come to differing conclusions across the country, this comes 11 days before the first votes in the nation in iowa. >> in his petition, trump and lawyers argue, quote, it in no way engaged in an insurrection. it states, quote, to find that

section 3 includes the presidency must include that the drafters decided to bury the prominent office in a term including low ranking military officers. the constitution's text and structure make clear that the president is not an officer of the united states. joining us to discuss, legal analyst elie honig and tim, a former senior investigative counsel with the house january 6th committee. you have disagreed on this between the two of you over the course -- not on everything. don't give me that face. >> some things. >> disputing elements of this or at least the path forward on this up to this point. based on how you have kind of thought through this over the course of the last several months, when you saw the appeal last night and what was actually in it, do you think it's an effective one? >> i think what's effective about the appeal is that there are a lot of potential off-ramps for the supreme court. i think that's what benefits the

former president. the court can get rid of this case without necessarily getting to the core merits that we want to see them talk about. the court could say that the former president is not an officer. that doesn't get to the insurrection question. the court could find that there was process issues with the state court. the court could find all kinds of things that don't get to the core of did president trump engage in an insurrection. so i think that's a benefit for the former president. he just needs one. it could be procedural. it could be less than substantive. i think that's the most likely way the court actually deals with this. i don't expect the supreme court to issue a wide ruling, opinion to get to the substance, get to the meat of this. so i think that's why if you are going to call it effective, it's that, that it gives the court lots of options out. >> i 100% agree with that. i think that's exactly right. i do not think the supreme court is going to give us a definitive ruling, this was or was not insurrection, trump did or did not engage in it. they don't to that. they are not fact finders.

they don't need to. they are asked to pass judgment on here was this process as prescribed in the constitution, was this process fair and adequate and then, of course, the the president an officer point of view. all donald trump has to do is win one arguments and he has got it. the challengers have to win them all. i think the supreme court is very, very, very likely to take this case, virtually certain. if i had to guess, i think trump will prevail. >> his attorneys point to his tweet from that afternoon telling supporters to, quote, stay peaceful. we know a former aide sara matthews told the january 6th committee that he resisted pressure to condemn the violence. matthews said she urged former white house press secretary kelly mcenany to tell trump to release a statement i want you to hear a little bit of that. >> she looked directly at me and in a hushed tone shared with me that the president did not want

to include any mention of peace in that tweet, and that it took some convincing on their part, those in the room, and she said that there was a back and forth going over different phrases to find something that he was comfortable with, and it wasn't until ivanka trump suggested the phrase stay peaceful that he finally agreed to include it. >> this is relevant almost to most cases at this point. how significant is testimony, right, that was public in these cases? >> i think when you look at the factual record that committee established it fully supports that the former president not only engaged in insurrection, but that he gave aid and comfort to insurrectionists. we are talking about the 108 minutes from when the president left the stage until he told the insurrectionists to go home. he resisted calls to ask for a standdown. he tweeted 3:00 p.m. that day about mike pence not having the courage and even after january 6th he talked about providing

pardons against insurrectionists and providing them comfort. so i think there is a long and established record here that shows that the former president engaged insurrection, he sent people to the capitol that he wanted view lens, he knew there would be violence here -- >> you are saying the tweet is not enough. you think there is enough in the public record -- >> there is more than enough. we put through our extensive hearings over the summer establishing this record, a record that was relied on in maine in part, relied on in colorado in part. i think that record is what people should be struggling with. and i think -- it's tough to take issue with that record. >> could i ask, we were talking about this earlier, you know, the supreme court's probably gonna dodge that. with decent reason, i guess, to some degree. there is no juries. if that's the case, then there is no answer to that question of what under the 14th amendment section 3 constitutes an

insurrection. is it self-executing, based on a criminal charge, based on a conviction. nobody knows the answer and they aren't going to weigh in? >> what they could do is congress has to tell us how this works, congress has to tell us what the process is, and thus far -- >> congress has to define an insurrection? >> no. tell us who gets to decide whether there is an insurrection and by what means. thus far in the 150 years since the amendment was passed all congress has done is pass the criminal law against insurrectionists. that may be it. it may be unsatisfying to people. it's possible the supreme court says that's all congress has done and, therefore, the only way to be disqualified under the 14th amendment is to be charged and convicted of insurrection. we will never get definitive word was this insurrection or not. the place that will be litigated is in the criminal courts with jack smith's case and perhaps the fulton county d.a.'s case and a full airing of the issues. i fagree on the strength of the evidence.

i think the committee made a spelling showing that changed the national discourse. >> we appreciate you guys. thank you. the battle over the border could lead to a shutdown and a showdown when it comes to government funding. jake tapper spoke with speaker john yesterday. and a lan leapt over a court bench and attacked a judge in nevada. your stories need to be told.

at contra costa college, you can become a leader in journalism and help shape world views with hands-on experience at the advocate, contra costa college's award-winning, student-run news publication. learn to use digital media to tell stories and gain the research skills needed to uncover truths while exploring careers in media. so what are you waiting for? the world needs you. start your career in journalism today at contracosta.edu

blaming president biden for what he says is a catastrophe at the southern border. after migrant crossings surged to a record high last month. johnson traveled to eagle pass, texas, wednesday with 60 house republicans where they toured border patrol facilities and spoke with local residents and officials. >> senate negotiators attempting to strike a deal on stricter border policy measures. saying they won't support a deal without the restrictions they passed it in a sweeping border bill last speak. jake tapper spoke with mike johnson yesterday about those talks. >> why not pass the $14 billion supplemental bill that president biden has put before you to at least try to help with some of these issues? >> that won't solve -- >> no. >> no, no. >> well, i am sure the people in

the border patrol agents that you are with think it might do something in terms of making their job a little easier for the next month. >> no, they don't. >> they don't want the $14 billion. >> i quoted the deputy chief of the u.s. border patrol and he said he doesn't need more buckets, more personnel to handle the flow. he needs to turn the flow off. that's what we are talking about. this is not about sending more money. it's about changing the policy. the white house seems to not understand that. >> and now cnn chief washington correspondent and lead anchor jake tapper joins us. jake, what was striking to me is the red line on the house pass bill which if that's the case the negotiations that are happening in the senate are worth nothing. this is dead. there is no agreement. >> yeah. i mean, i think that that's a fair assessment. right now you have three senators, murphy from connecticut, senator from arizona and one from oklahoma,

independent, democrat and republican working hard to come up with some sort of immigration and border bill to get 60 votes in the senate and pass the house. at the same time, the democrats in the senate and the senate majority leader chuck schumer said that hl 2, the house republican's border bill, is a non-s non-start. it's draconian for them, and then the house republicans saying basically this what you need to send to us needs to be h.r. 2. you can call it whatever you want. that's what it needs to be. and this is very much a policy disagreement where it looks like house republicans are just refusing to budge even though their majority in congress for other reasons continues to shrink at the end of the month, as you know, speaker johnson's -- he will only have 219 seats. can only afford to lose two

republicans in any one vote. so that's because of resignations and the ejection of santos and the like. so we are heading towards -- we are at an impasse, it seems, if it -- you know, what i see is democrats moving more and more towards the republican position and making more and more concessions in a way that i have never seen senate or white house democrats be willing to do, but for house republicans, they want h.r. 2, and it's -- that's what it needs to be. >> yeah, we also hear house republicans threatening to shut down the government if they don't get what they are asking for. so this is kind of a powerful enough bargaining chip? >> i mean, i think that that -- that is a pretty powerful barrin bargaining chip in a few weeks, this government funding bill that needs to happen and plenty republicans in the house freedom caucus saying loudly if they don't h.r. 2, they are not going

along with continued government funding. they already have issues, as we know, with the degree of spending that the government does. i asked speaker johnson about that. take a listen. >> the house freedom caucus, a very important flank in the republican party, talking about refusing to vote to keep the government open unless h.r. 2 is law. how seriously do you take those threats? >> well, look, i don't think it's just the freedom caucus. most house republicans who are responding to their constituents' concerns about the border. >> so there you go. speaker johnson saying not just the house freedom caucus. most republicans. he didn't say all. all, of course, are a number of republicans from kiss that biden bon that might be not be willing to shut down the government over this. but we are definitely heading towards a real confrontation. >> jake, this interview -- he

hasn't done a ton of national media outside of kind of conservative media over the course of his first couple of months in the speakership. what was your sense with this trip, with the shrinking house republican majority that you noted earlier, there is no margin for error, in terms of how he envisions a way out of this moment to fund the government, to get ukraine aid, all of these things? >> well, i mean, speaker johnson is not one who necessarily is the biggest supporter of further aid to ukraine. i don't think that's a concern for him and house republicans will tell you if you just pass the israel aid on its own, they will support it. what i think you can discern from what speaker johnson is doing in terms of his appearance on cnn yesterday from the border, his trip to the border with 60 house republicans to talk about this issue, to highlight this issue, and the fact that that is how he is starting his year and this is really how he is starting his

speakership in a real way, i mean, last year when he took over he kind of had to deal with the mess left over from former speaker mccarthy, is that they feel house republicans feel this is a winning issue for them not just with the republican base, but with voters in general, and they see movement from democrats towards their side on this issue. you have even pretty liberal democrats like senator john fetterman from the great commonwealth of pennsylvania wanting to have a strong border is not xenophobic. democrats willing to make concessions on tightening asylum policy, making it easier to deport individuals who came into the country illegally, and they feel like they have a winning issue. the question is how far are they willing to push it? do they need 100% of what they want in order to declare victory or will they be happy with 75, 80%? i have been in this town for a

long time and i can tell you i have seen house republicans for year after year whether the immigration reform measures are pushed by president bush or president obama, house republicans tend to demand perfection in terms of what they think an immigration bill should be and at least historically would rather have nothing than 80%. >> certainly looks like they are heading down that path based on your interview. fascinating conversation, jake tapper, thanks so much. >> of course, you can watch jake on "the lead" 4:00 p.m. eastern here on cnn. now the first batch of the jeffery epstein documents are unsealed. what they reveal about epstein's relationships with former presidents bill clinton and donald trump. a mass email bomb threat sent to government offices and officials around the country. the latest on that situation next.

this morning we are waiting for the release of more documents tied to accused sex trafficker jeffery epstein. the first batch hundreds of

pages were just unsealed last night. they include the deposition from one of epstein's accuser, showberg. she was asked did jeffrey talk to you about bill clinton? she said one time clinton liked them young, referring to girls. >> the pilots told them on a plane they couldn't land in new york and had to land in atlantic city. jeffrey said, great, calm up trump and go to i don't recall the name of the casino, but go to the casino. neither clinton nor trump are accused of any wrongdoing involving epstein. >> joining us an investigator, holly, based on what you have seen up to this point, is there anything in the unsealed documents that provided information we didn't know? >> you know, there is some names that we hadn't seen or seen much

of before, magician david copperfield, who asked someone, you know, have you -- did you know they are paying girls for massages and they are paying girls to bring people for massages. of course, michael jackson was there. but no huge headlines thus far. >> one of the things about these documents though is we are getting a better sense of miss maxwell, the person who was and what her demeanor was like when she was questioned during this deposition. what did you see in those notes? >> yes. you saw some very interesting exchanges between an atwho represented many of the victims and maxwell. there was one exchange in which macaulay asked maxwell, did you ever tell anyone that you recruited girls in order to take

pressure off yourself? and maxwell retorted, you don't ask me questions. like that. >> we expect more documents to be released. this is just the first tranche. what are you looking for? what do you think may come into the public domain over the course of the coming days? >> you know, my suspicion is we may not get a whole lot of new names. the judge when she was justifying releasing the names often said that the does had been widely reported already. but the details. you know, like the new things about clinton and trump. it really so far paints a picture of what the girls and young women were experiencing.

it was quite horrific. >> and we should mention that the names of victims were also released in this. could you talk about why? >> well, again, i think it was because the judge felt like they had been widely reported already. sjoberg had spoken with the daily mail and there were others. there were also minor victims that she said will remain sealed. >> thanks so much for talking about these documents with us. >> thank you. >> multiple states on edge this morning after a mass email bomb threat was sent to government offices or officials in at least 23 states yesterday. according to a copy of the email obtained by cnn, it claimed explosives were placed inside, quote, your state capitol with no specific state named. the threat forced several states to briefly close and evacuate

their state capitols while others conducted searches without evacuations. no states reported finding anything threatening in their buildings. >> in a statement the fbi called the threats a hoax that puts, quote, innocent people at risk and said while it was continuing to gather information there was no indication of a specific or credible threat. joining us to discuss, law enforcement analyst andrew mccabe. appreciate your time this morning. most of the capitols evacuated for kind of a brief amount of time, would seem to be minimal disruptions but the actual effect of this when something like this happens, can you explain to people who see that and think, you know, move on? >> sure. you know, phil, the point of these sort of mass threats and hoax threats is really to disrupt, to harass the targets, and ultimately to create fear and terror on some level, and they all accomplished that. as you said, some places reacted more strongly than others.

in every instance, law enforcement doesn't have the luxury of reading this email and instantly, you know, going with the likely result and dismissing it as a hoax. we they have to take some procedures, some precautions to at least confirm that they aren't dealing with a real threat here. it's easier when it's a mass mailing that's identical received by over 23, 24 different statehouses around the country. it's kind of easier to lean this that direction of saying this is a likely hoax. but you always have to take threat reporting seriously. i think the locations that evacuated their courthouses temporarily conducted logical checks did the right thing, but that takes aenormous amount of resources. >> i am familiar with ran some wear attacks. but with this type of threat, is this something that we're seeing more frequently? >> you know, we have been seeing

these sort of internet-based threats for quite some time. you remember back in 2017 there was a young man who was a dual u.s./israeli citizen, arrested in israel for sending out what authorities thinks were 2,000 threats online. he was doing it for a variety of reasons. trying to profit from them by charging folks fees on the dark web to submit threats to schools. he was also alleged to have significant mental health issues. so the range of possible motives for these things are broad. when you see them directed at political institutions or judicial institutions, i think it's reasonable to suspect that the person or people mind them are somehow motivated by some sort of politically tinged ideology or grievance or anger, but again we don't know that until they find, if they find, the person who has been behind

these threats that we saw yesterday. >> yeah, what's fascinating to me, to your point, not a when, could be an if as well. is there anything law enforcement can do to get in front of these, come pat on the front end as opposed to trying to search in the aftermath? >> really tough to do that, phil. it's hard to predict where the next one is going to drop. to me the most important element in this, and that was certainly my feeling when i was joefrp seeing these matters at the fbi, coordination is the key. so to have each location, each target location that receives a communication like this immediately report it to their local fbi office or local joint terrorism task force is super important. that way at least you have one national entity that understands the total threat picture, where these things are landing and can do the considered research and intelligence collection that

might lead to identifying and locating the offender. that's really the only way to turn these things off, to make sure that folks get investigated and prosecuted if there is a case there. >> and they want to switch it up and bring to you video that i think is sort of brought a lot of amusement on the internet. a defendant violently attacking a las vegas judge in a courtroom, judge mary kay holthus in the middle of sentencing a man for attempted battery. when you see something like this, what are your concerns? >> yeah, there is, of course, nothing funny about the video to anyone who ever worked in a courtroom either as a law enforcement officer or part of the judicial branch. and i think part of that is because we know that there are literally thousands of people who receive judgments they did not want or sentences around the country this federal, state, and local courthouses every single

day, and there is r no way to accurately determine which one of those people is going to snap like this man did and talk matters into his own hands and commit an act of violence. so it's impossible to protect completely against that threat. you know, you have our judicial system is already bogged down by a lack of resources and they are required to maintain an environment that respectful and protects the rights of the defendants. but really at any moment something like this could happen. so it's quite a risk and it creates extreme anxiety for people who work in these environments. i should also say, you know, i don't have hard data on this, but it seems like the current wave of discourse and criticism and attacks of the judiciary of our legal institutions, of our law enforcement institutions, is led to an erosion of trust in those institutions, and you have to think that that adds to this

problem, creates an environment where almost more permissive to strike out against members of law enforcement and members of the court. so i think we're definitely in a time of elevated risk to people who work in that system that we all depend upon for justice. >> it's an important point. andy mccabe, appreciate your time this morning. thank you. >> thanks. and this just in. a new digital ad from chris christie in which he says he made a mistaken endorsing donald trump in 2016. watch this. >> when i decided to endorse donald trump for president, i did it because he was winning. and i did it because i thought i could make him a better candidate and a better president. well, i was wrong. i made a mistake. and now we are confronted with the very same choice again. donald trump is ahead in the polls. so everyone says anyone who is behind him should drop out and

we should make our choice, donald trump versus joe biden. well, joe biden has had the wrong policies and donald trump will sell the soul of this country. >> of course, christie has rejected calls by some republicans for him to drop out of the race and consolidate support behind another non-trump candidate. >> this is an atonement tour that has gone on for some time here with chris christie, yeah, very striking. >> yeah. i remember the day that he declared for trump and stunned his campaign staff in stooern when he did it. >> we will see if it works with voters. >> absolutely. new information on the deadly blast in iran including who the u.s. believes was involved as fears that the israel/hamas conflict could expand to a wider war. more news out of the middle east. a pro iran militia drug in baghdad killing a top kbhander and other fighter, the latest details on that. that's ahead.

we are following breaking news on a story we have been following throughout the

morning. a u.s. official tells cnn the u.s. targeted a member of an iranian proxy group with, quote, u.s. blood on his hands in a strike in baghdad. the target was a member of the official operating iraq and syria and the u.s. have been watching him before the strike according to the official. iran's president is warning israel will pay a heavy price after deadly explosions near the burial site of qassem soleimani. the blast, quote, look like a terrorist attack. the state department shooting down rumors that the u.s. or israel were involved. >> the united states was not involved in any way and any suggestion to the contrary to ridiculous and, number two, we have no reason to believe that israel was involved. >> now, the u.s. has joined 11 countries in condemning houthi attacks against kmushl and merchant vessels in the red sea,

warning against further attacks saying, let our message be clear, we call for the immediate end of these illegal attacks and release of unlawful detained vessels and crews. joining us is former israeli ambassador to the united nations danny da known and cnn political and national security analyst david sanger. welcome to the program. david, i want to start with you and with the news we just heard because i was going to start this discussion by asking what the u.s. can do to kind of de-escalate things, deal with the tensions. what is your reaction to this reporting? >> clearly, the u.s. has decided to step up a bit the pressure on these iranian proxy groups. if you think about the past 24 hours, there was this warning to the houthis who are armed completely by the iranians the red sea. they are the ones who have been doing the attacks on much of the

cargo that has been running through the red sea, and a senior administration official told us yesterday this would be the final warning to the houthis, suggesting that strikes could follow after that. they were nonspecific. then to have this strike inside iraq is particularly fascinating because president biden has been very hesitant to do strikes in iraq for fear of destabilizing the iraqi government. but it's gotten more difficult because that government is made up in part of iranian proxies. >> i want to turn to you, ambassador. you posted on x congratulating the idf for the strike against a hamas leader who was assassinated in lebanon. and, you know, at the time a senior u.s. official actually confirmed to cnn that israel was behind the strike, and yet israel's not taking responsibility. can you help us understand what's happening here?

>> very clear. we are determined to hand down every terrorist who took part in the massacre on october 7th, we haven't forgotten what happened. the ranking of girls and women, kidnapping. not only also different countries. we are determined to do the job, to finish with hamas and they cannot find shelter anywhere in the world. >> why not take credit for that? can you help us understand why not take credit for that? >> i'm saying very clearly, every terrorist who took part, including those in our community, the houthis, and those who helped finance it, to support it, they will pay the price. yes, it will be handed down. that's what we will do.

we will not allow it to continue, attacks like the one that happened. the days will come. today we have a state, we have the power and we will retaliate against the terrorists. >> i want to ask about the relationship with the u.s. because the u.s. has been pushing hard, you know, against two members of benjamin netanyahu's cabinet over comments know need about resettling palestinians outside of gaza. israel's national security and finance ministers both pushing for that, and the u.s. state department spokesman, matt miller, called for them to stop, saying they don't reflect the policy of the israeli government. does this public dispute within netanyahu's government and the u.s. kind of undermine the messaging here? >> well, up and down the u.s. administration, we welcome

secretary blinken to the region, and next week he will come again. the issue of voluntary -- from gaza -- by the government, the discussion or decision. but i think the legitimate discussion, people in gaza want to move out, and will to go allow them to and to allow for asylum there. i don't think they stop it. like any other -- wants to move, move to another country. but there is no official decision of the government about this issue. >> clearly, this is about forced migration. i want to turn to you, david sanger, and ask what you are hearing from the white house in terms of trying to, if not keep th these things >> it's a very hard line to go run, audi. in part because on the one hand the pressure on the u.s.

military is to establish or re-establish some deterrents. and you're not going to do that if you are -- if you are only playing defense in the red sea. if you are not going back after the sources of the attacks on u.s. forces in iraq or in syria. you can't just be spending your time intercepting weapons. and yet, at the same time, president biden is trying to make sure that he does this in a selective enough way that he does not open up new fronts in the war. and it's not at all clear to us that they're going to get this right. it's a really tough balancing act, and you're dealing with a bunch of independent actors. they all have one commonality, which is that iran has been feeding them arms, intelligence, and so forth. but we don't have evidence that the iranians are necessarily calling the shots here. and that's what's making this so

difficult. it's such an array of different players in the middle east at such a volatile moment. >> david sanger, ambassador, thank you for speaking with us. the death toll in japan has risen to 84 as rescuers couldn't to search for survivors from a deadly earthquake on monday. our crews are the ground in the city that was hit the hardest next.

the death toll rising to 84 after a 7.5 magnitude earthquake devastated japan's west coast on monday. rescuers are racing against time in the search for sur vivors as many people are thought to be trapped under their collapsed homes. >> thousands more residents are still without power and water. and hundreds of others are cut off from help due to landslides and blocked roads. hanna has been live at some of the hardest hit areas from the earthquake. what have you seen, what are people telling you? >> reporter: when you walk through this town, it's practically silent. there are no local around

anymore and the quiet is only operated when rescue operators are trying to pull people out from under the rubble or emergency earthquake alarms are going off. it's very desolate in this town. this is what we saw. once an idealic sea-side town in minutes, reduced to rubble. the life kioko built gone in seconds. >> translator: i've never seen anything like this. >> reporter: with phone lines down she can only hope her friends are alive as she recons with her new reality. >> translator: the aftershocks are really scary. they happen multiit will times throughout the night. last night was really intense. >> reporter: what happened last night? >> translator: last night i think there were two magnitude five aftershocks and felt like the entire ground was getting pushed up beneath me.

>> reporter: some remain stuck under their collapsed homes. just behind me dozens of police officers are trying to pull a woman they believe is stuck under the rubble of her house. the police are from a prefecture over 300 kilometers away, which shows the scale of rescue operations. racing against time, emergency personnel work into the night. the constant aftershocks and fires hamper rescue operations, making it take days. dozens still missing. entire communities cut off by landslides. fallen fallen trees and broken roads. >> this is just one of the many roads that have been completely destroyed. making it nearly impossible for aid to get in. >> reporter: for us the journey took all day as we navigated

these roadblocks alongside the dozens of fire and aide trucks on their way. while bypassing fallen debris. but what little help does get through is far from enough. water, food and blankets are in short supply. essential goods that must get to survivors. at evacuation centers reports of people dying according to city hall officials. >> translator: the situation is terribly challenging but until those 72 hours crucial for saving lives pass we must do our utmost to save as many people as possible with everything we have on the ground. >> reporter: but the full-scale of devastation still unknown. those who had the means to flee their hometowns have gone. while others try to find remnants of their lives scattered among the rubble.

phil, i can't stress enough how little these people had. some of the survivors had a bottle of water each day for sustenance. by the time we got there last night there were no mats or blankets left so we slept in our car. that's nothing compared to locals because they don't have a home to return to phil. >> it's a horrifying situation. really important piece. thank you very much. we want to remind you that ron desantis and nikki haley take questions directly from iowa voters in back-to-back events. the cnn republican town hall air live tonight at 9:00 eastern. >> i am excited to watch that because i think those are important moments that create moments but also it's about time for people to vote. >> and the focus on the voters is where it's at. cnn "news central" starts now. ♪