this is the estimate of how many pregnancies happen. so possible that folks sttravel out of state, maybe medication abortion, possible that they carried them to term. one of the issues even in the five states with exceptions, they say exceptions are clearly not working and that could be bay they have requirements that the rapes are reported to law enforcement. we know a majority of survivors don't report rape. there are gestational limits as well. so all are contributing to the fact that even in states with sx epgs ises, exceptions are not working. >> but what we saw play out in the case of kate cox in texas. where the exceptions have limits. >> yeah, hearing over and over medical exceptions. >> thank you very much for following that. "cnn this morning" continues right now. three american soldiers killed and more than 30 injured in jordan.

>> first time that u.s. service members have been killed from hostile fires since the war this gaza began. >> we shall respond. >> former president trump pushing u.s. lawmakers to torpedo a bipartisan deal to help fix the crisis at the u.s. border with mexico. >> i'd rather have no bill than a bad bill. >> if that was a law, i'd shut down the border right now. >> the question is whether republicans will listen to donald trump or whether we'll pass the biggest bipartisan reform in 40 years. >> 49ers and chiefs in the super bowl for a second time in four seasons. >> gist proud to be a 49ers. on. >> chiefs still the chiefs. believe it, you got to fight for your right to party! it is top of the hour.

president biden is now vowing to respond after a drone attack killed three u.s. soldiers in jordan. so what will that response look like? >> we've had a tough day. last night we lost three brave souls in an attack on our base. we shall respond. >> the president saying we shall respond. iran this morning denying any involvement in the deadly attack on the military outpost. but u.s. officials are blaming iran backed militants and say the drone appeared to have been launched from syria. president biden facing pressure from some republicans to strike back. senator lindsey graham telling this i am to hit iran now, hit them hard.

and senator john cornyn urging president biden to, quote, target tehran. >> the white house has been dreading this exact thing for several months now as the u.s. tries to prevent the war from gaza from spilling in to an eve. what president biden decides do is hugely kons gwenn al and complicated by ongoing hostage negotiations with hamas. arlette saenz is leading us off. this incident is without question a significant escalation. the president has vowed to respond. any sense of when or what that response 3450i9 might look like? >> reporter: not yet. that is the big question facing the white house. president biden called the attack on the u.s. forces despicable wholly unjust and now they are working to decide how to respond. in a statement warning dhaeeath of the service members that we will hold them to account. of

the service members that we will hold them to account. the president said it was iran backed militant groups responsible for the attack. but the u.s. still working to determine which specific group carried out the attack on u.s. forces. overnight iran denied any involvement or responsibility for this attack according to iran's news agency. and it speaks to one of the challenges facing president biden going forward as he and his team have tried to prevent thissen com conflict from widen to a broader conflict in the middle east. while u.s. and coalition forces have been attacked, more than 150 times since the october 7 attack, this is the first incident that included deaths of u.s. service members which is really raising the stakes for president biden as he is charting the course of action as he is vowing to respond. >> and how does the u.s. sonde

in a way that will be a deterrent? because all the responses so far have not deterred the iran backed groups. but at the same time, not do anything that would further exacerbate this to an even broader regional crisis in the middle east. >> yeah, that is something president biden and his team will spend part of the day trying to work to figure out, how exactly to respond. a lot of the u.s. response that we've seen so far is targeting weapons and buildings used by some of the groups. but the u.s. could decide to take things a step further. the president has been under extreme pressure to act including from some republican lawmakers up on capitol hill. senator lindsey graham is one of those who has been pushing for the u.s. to strike targets inside iran, but at this time it remains unclear what exact course of action the president will decide to take, but he has vowed that the u.s. will be responding in this incident especially now that they have seen the loss of these u.s. service members. but one of the key imperatives

for this white house has been trying to prevent this from broadening into a regional -- more of a regional conflict. >> and saying at a time and mash manner of our choosing. thank you very much. and joining us now, mark he is pesper. is it possible to strike the balance of increasing deterrence but not escalating more widely? t in the region? >> first of all, i want to express my thoughts and prayers for the service members who were killed in this horrible attack. yes, i've had to do this a few times with president trump. i think what you should present is a range of options that begin with striking iranian targets outside iran and escalating up a ladder toward targets within iran. my view at this point the starting point is attacking irgc

personnel and sites in iraq and syria. and i would start there. because i do think that this demands a tough response directly targeted at iran which is supporting and funding all the attacks throughout the region. as the report certified, there have been over 150 attacks against u.s. forces and we've only responded fewer than 10 times. so regrettably that incident was inevitable. >> you mentioned you've dealt with similar circumstances, you were defense secretary when two u.s. troops were killed in iraq in 2020. and in terms of how things are at the moment, who you would you compare now the environment now versus back then? >> i think it is more complex now and more tense given what has happened war to gaza, you have israel standoff with

hezbollah in southern leb thon. and of course the houthi attacks against shipping in the red sea. so i think it is more dangerous and complex. but if you look at the hot spots, it goes back to tehran. tehran is supplying arms and training, all these elements. so you have to go back to where it is all coming from. it is tehran. and we've reached a point now we have to attack them directly. and frankly, i think that our response the last few months has not been sufficient. and i've said that several times. >> yeah, you have. on this show as well. there are some in the republican party that -- and this is not a new position, some lawmakers want to go even further than what you are suggesting. is a direct strike within iran something that should be on the table right now? >> i would not take those options off the table, but that is not where i would begin. i'd begin against like i said irgc forces.

they are the iranian force that supplies, trains, helps plan these attacks. i would start with them, target their nernl and their sites in iraq and syria. hit them fairly hard and see how that works. if the attacks continue, then eventually work your way into striking targets within iran. at the same time you have to balance that with diplomacy. you have to begin getting your allies on board in the region to include europeans and the arab states. look, everybody will watch very closely what we're doing. and they will see what the united states will respond. and so this also affects how the arab states view it. because they know that iran has been sponsoring the behavior for four plus decades. >> and this is not in a vacuum. and i want to play something heard before the attack.

but the point i think probably stands for the administration. take a listen. >> as we think about the approach we take, we want to ensure that we take away capability while we protect our forces, at the same time not have this broaden into a much wire wider conflict. >> and i think this is a point that you were making. how do you thread that needle in this moment in time given complexity of all the dynamics at play here? do you think it is possible? >> yes, i think it is possible. general brown made a very thought 238 reasoned statement there. we don't wanta -- a wired war, at least not now.war, at least not now.238 reasoned s there. we don't want a -- a wiredwar, at least not now.38 reasoned st there. we don't want a -- a wiredwar, at least not now.8 reasoned sta there. we don't want a -- a wiredwar, at least not now. reasoned stat there. we don't want a -- a wiredwar, at least not now. but otherwise look the proxy militia groups don't care. they are not deterred in the sense that they like this conflict. it was notable that the islamic

resistance in iraq quickly took credit for these attacks. but iran likes to keep it at arm's length. so they don't want a broader war. so that is why i think at this point starting with the irgc and working your way up the escalation ladder to include targets in iran if necessary, i think that is the way we need to go. >> mark heesper, appreciate you expertise. and president biden calling donald trump a loser and unamerican. congressman ro khanna was with president biden on the trail and he will join us next. and just in, princess kate has returned home after her recent abdominal surgery. what we're learning about her recovery that is ahead.

president biden taking his 2024 campaign message to south carolina over the weekd as he works to shore up support especially among black voters ahead of the democratic primary there. the president ratcheted up his attacks on his likely november opponent donald trump with a series of harsh criticism.

she here is a sampling. >> you are the reason doeason d trump is a loser. and you are the reason we are going to win and beat him again. donald trump when he was commander in chief refused to visit a u.s. cemetery outside of paris for fallen american soldiers. and referred to those and i quote as suckers and losers. he actually said that. how dare he say that. how dare he talk about my son and all of those like that. look, i call them patriots and heros. only loser i see is donald trump. how can anyone especially a former president wish for an economic crash that would devastate millions of americans? there are only two presidents in american history who left office with fewer jobs than they took office. herbert hoover and, yet, donald

herbert hoover trump. have you noticed he is a little confused these days. he apparently can't tell the difference between nikki haley and nancy pelosi. >> well, you heard it there. joining us is ro khanna, democrat from california. he of course campaigned with the president this weekend. a real change in tone, really stepping it up against the former president. let's start with one of his goals there, the state obviously to increase support where he is seeing softness this time around among black voters. i don't have to repeat the numbers for you. especially softness with younger black voters. what should he do differently to try to ensure that that critical base is behind him? >> frail the president brought the house down saturday night. this is the first time he's drawn a contrast with donald trump and it was very effective to say that he has delivered for working and middle class

americans. donald trump's economy and lost jobs, tax cuts for the very wealthy. and jim clyburn made the case of what he has down for student loans and funding for infrastructure. >> and we did see once again protestors interrupting the president at times. their opposition to how easy really is handling the war against hamas, the palestinian civilian victims and the president's refusal to call for a ceasefire. i thought it was really interesting, "new york times" talked to a number of black pastor, and they are reporting more than 1,000 are calling on biden to push for a ceasefire. i can read you some of the reasoning. reverend says what they are witnessing from the administration is a declaring contradiction to what we thought the president and his administration was about. another reverend from georgia

says we see palestinians as part of us, they are oppressed people, we are oppressed people. are you concerned? you've been calling for a ceasefire since november. are you concerned that this will hurt the president's chances? >> first of all, i think that we have to look at the morality and substance. and i appreciate the young people who are speaking out for a ceasefire and release of all hostages. i appreciate faith leaders speaking out for that. my heart today goes out to our three service members who were killed and of course the president needs to take appropriate action to bring the perpetrators to justice. but we also need to deescalate in that region and having a ceasefire and release of all hostages would do that. and i spoke to that candidly and i said that i'm information a ceasefire and release of all hostages but this president is our best chance to get two states and peace.

>> and you've said you've been blunt calling for a ceasefire and we're isolating ourselves from the moral leadership of the world. we see that really at almost most if not every event that he is speaking at. do you get a sense from the administration maybe the president from private made that he is more open to a ceasefire now or do you not think this happens? >> i certainly don't want to speak to the president in terms of his policy, but in my conversations with him and the when y white house, he understands the pain and anger of young underst taking place in gaza and the humanitarian crisis. and he is committed to trying to bring peace in the region. and look, i applaud young people, some people in my party say why are they coming out. it is a political event. you have the right in this country to speak your mind.

and i think we have to listen to them, i think we have to engage them and make the case for why we need to unify around this president and why that is the best for peace and for the economy. >> you mentioned the three u.s. service members that were killed in that drone attack over the weekend in jordan. and more than 34 injured. a handful of republicans especially in the senate are saying it is time for this administration to strike iran, not just the proxies. john cornyn and others like lindsey graham not mincing words. what do you think an appropriate response is? are those republican senators wrong or is it time to hit iran? >> they are wrong. you know who hasn't said that is donald trump because this country doesn't want us in another middle east war. i can't imagine that that would be a upon you 00 lar popular platform to run on. this country is weary after 20 yeefrs afghanistan.

my view is that the president will be judicious. he has said clearly that the people who killed our service members need to be brought to justice and he will take appropriate action without escalating this into a long middle east war. >> and he is also clearancing a reporter last twheek so far the strikes have not been deterrent. so what can you do differently is the question. i do want to get you on the immigration deal. chris murphy told dana bash yesterday that we may be able to see the legislative text of a bipartisan border security bill this week. a couple things that sources tell us that it would do, give the president a lot more authority to shut down the border if border crossings hit a certain threshold, it would reform the asylum process. speaker mike johnson says it is dead on arrival in the house. do you think this thing is dead on arrival in the house if it can get through the senate? >> i have concerns. look, we need border security, but that means putting more

agents there, having more immigration judges, having more lawyers. and the fact that the hispanic caucus has not been involved in the conversations, the fact that even made of the democratic caucus haven't been involved, again this gives me concern and what i will tell you is is that -- >> concern meaning you don't support it? >> well, i don't know what is in the deal. but from what the public reporting is, i have concerns that it is not going to be effective. ap-i would want to make sure that the house democratic caucus gets involved. i think it would be a mistake to assume that we would just rubber stamp it. this is very different than infrastructure and other things coming out of the senate and i would encourage hispanic caucus, latino senators, progressive caucus, others in the who us to be involved in the conversation. >> ro khanna, thanks for your time this morning. >> thank you. donald trump staying quiet for once after a jury ruled he must pay e. jean carroll more than $83 million in damages.

she'll join us live next hour to discuss the verdict. and k3x banning taylor swif sarnlgs after ai generated photos of her went viral. why the man front and center in the ai world sounding the alarm on deep p fakes.

this is a technology clearly

very powerful and we don't -- we cannot say with certainty what will happen. it could go very wrong. the technological direction that we've been trying to push it this is one that we think we can make safe. >> sam altman arguably the face of intelligence expressing concerns about the technology that has the power to impact the economy, politic and of course now pop culture. platforms like x are taking action after an explicit ai generated images of taylor swift spread across social media. they were viewed tens of millions of times before they were removed. x writing "we have a zero tolerance policy toward such content, our teams are actively removing all identified images and taking appropriate actions against the accounts responsible for them. the biden administration calls the circulation of these images

alarming. >> and it is not just that, it is politics too. remember? new hampshire voters targeted that deep fake technology ahead of the state's primary, people got a fake robocall claiming to be from president biden telling them not to votes. >> it is important that you save your vote for the november election. voting this tuesday only enables the republicans in their quest to elect donald trump again. >> that actually wasn't the president an authorities in new hampshire are investigating where the call came from and ha how. the damage is already done, right? not all voters in new hampshire would have seen the report saying by the way that is not real. the damage to taylor swift and countless others is already done. you talk about the fact that there is a significant gap in preparedness. there is no regulation yet, not much.

>> i think that that is what is most alarming. i hope nobody is surprised because these capabilities have existed when it comes to deep fake audio for over a year, but the fake pornography, that is in existence for years. but there is no federal ban against this type of, a and i think at the very minimum, that should be this place. and i think taylor swift fans were quite alarmed to realize that there is no federal law against this type of behavior. >> and a lawmaker just proposed it like a week ago, so we'll see if it goes anywhere. >> and i think things have been introduced, but nothing to actually move the ball enough to pass. states have kind of taken it upon themselves and there is a hodge-podge of patchwork pertaining to deep fakes, but we didn't have consistent federal legislation across the board and i think that this really highlighted that this is missing. >> to the point you are making, in the taylor swift case, this

is stuff that has been around for a long time. what does ai or this movement for ai done to turbo charge what we've seen? >> ai has essentially been a threat or risk amply fire and multiplier. it has made access to these tools incredibly easy.fire and multiplier. it has made access to these tools incredibly easy. and to have harm at scale. and we expect ami's ii capabilio improve. so a lot of good but also the ability to cause harm. >> and on the flip side of that, you talk about how it is an a ampli amplifier. can it also be slolutions ca amplifier if used the right way? >> yes, a lot of platforms use ai to try to flag certain things that are inappropriate. and they use ai for content moderation. and i think that that is

actually essential. we don't have the human capacity to be able to go through just the pure volume of posts that happen on social media. but i don't think that that is sufficient. i think that we need to make sure that there are legislative changes that are made both at a platform level and in terms of what we can do with these ai tools to begin with. >> short of that before the november election, what happened in new hampshire was jarring. you listen to the call, you realize how close to the actual day of voting it was happening and you thought, oh, wow, this will be a mess in november. is it basically just up to the campaigns a independent their supporters to find this stuff and flag it or some other universe in which this can be stopped, locked, handled? >> and i think we were lucky that it caught because they included a lot of lawmakers or democrats numbers. other than that, i don't think that we would have caught it. but there is no step arredondoized procedure for what do. it does seem to be up to voters which i think is largely unacceptable. so i think if there is federal legislation mandating that any sort of ai for the use case of manipulating elections or

voting, that should be completely banned. there is no win in making that not banned or keeping that behavior allowed. >> one of the issues now is that it is so much easier for the average person to usement a i in florida fin fair nefarious ways. and a bipartisan deal could be ready to go on the senate florida. but could republicans tank it. and speculation continues, will joe manchin run for president? new rereporting abouout t that more.

this just in, princess kate

of wales has returned home from the hospital after undergoing abdominal surgery. this comes from kensington palace. max foster has more. details on how she is doing this morning? >> we do, we haven't been told still what the surgery was exactly for, but she was in hospital for 13 days. so quite a recovery process. it was just on her abdomen as far as we know. this statement from the palace, princess of wales has returned home to continue recover fry fr surgery and making good palace. they wanted to thanks hospital and well wishes. and a source says she's recuperating at home. her official return to duties will depend on medical advice closer to the time. sole there be a period of recuperation at home.

and prince william will be at home as well with her supporting her. he won't return to work until she is ready to pick up the child care duties effectively. i have to say quite an amazing job that they managed to get out of hospital without all the photographers noticing. because they are surroundings hospital. it is the same one where the king is recuperating as well after his procedure on friday. he has been in for three days now, so hoping to get an update about him as well. >> glad she's recovering well and home with her family. thank you, max. senator joe manchin no stranger to flirting with the idea of a third party presidential run, but now condition reporting reveals that this time around it could involve blowing up a shaky effort by the bipartisan group no labels. and joining us with the new reporting is isaac duvair. when it comes to joe manchin and no labels and the ability of

them to connect, what is the plausibility of that and who would have the power dynamic there? >> well, look, it is a lot of questions about this to say the least. you have spoken with him. we know joe manchin tends to say that he will do things and get people to talk about him, that is what he is doing here. he's saying privately maybe if donald trump is convicted, if joe biden has a health scare there is an opening for a third party centrist option. but he would be looking to do it on the ballot line that is being secured in states all around the country by the group called no labels. that said, no labels is not necessarily committed to having him be the person on the top of the ticket. and has been really unclear even with members of their own unit how they will decide who they would put on the balance hot, wl a republican or a democrat, who would get to influence the decision, how they would decide not to be a spoiler and all

these questions out there. manchin saying to me that he does not want to be part of any kind of spoiler effort. he thinks that donald trump was bad for the country. he thinks that joe biden is a decent man but has gone too far to the left. so we are going into a period here where manchin is deciding what do, no labels has said mid march which when they will decide. and yet another question mark as we get into 2024 here in this election year. >> and what do we know about what is going on right now with no labels? you mentioned it is not a surety that they would want him at the top of the ticket for example. what else do we need to know? because i think people are hearing no labels, no labels. >> yeah, and i spent a lot of time talking to members of the no labels leadership, i said do you know who is on the list of people that you are considering. do you know how you will decide which one of those people will be the candidate. do you know who will decide. do you know how you will decide who will decide.

none of those things i could get a clear answer on. joe lieberman, had been a democrat and then an independent, he said to me eventually this will crystallize into a process. but they have set mid march as their deadline for deciding this. we're not that far from mid march and still a lot of them don't know what the plan is at all. >> do you think they have a plan or are they just -- and they are being coy with you, or are they just hoping that one eventually comes to fruition? >> well, the plan has changed a lot of times. at one point they were going to have a big convention in dallas they were saying. that fell apart. so we don't know what is going on here. and again, manchin is going forward on his own. he has started his own group called americans together. and a lot of what he is doing here is trying to get the donors who have been donating to no labels to start donating to them instead and try to essentially usurp the role no labels has had the last ten years. >> and we urge everyone to read

your reporting on cnn.com. really interesting stuff. more on the developing story, three u.s. troops have been killed, more than 34 injured in that drone attack in jordan. white house national security council spokokesman john kirirb wiwith us nextxt.

we had a tough day. last night we lost three brave souls in an attack on one of our bases. and we shall respond. >> significant escalation in the middle east over the weekend, president biden vowing to

respond after a drone attack on the u.s. outpost in jordan killed three and injured more than 30 service members. it is the first time the u.s. troops have been killed by enemy fire in the region since the war this gaza began. officials say iran backed militants are behind the attack and appear to come from syria. although military leaders have not specified which group is responsible, iran has denied any role. let's turn now to john kirby. appreciate your time. to start there, do you have a specific attribution in terms of who is responsible and do you believe that it was an intentional effort to escalate in the region? >> we're still working our way through attribution. what group was specifically responsible for this. although i think that we have a pretty good sense and we certainly believe that the group was supported by hezbollah, one of the main irjc groups in iraq and syria a that have been conducting so many of these attacks on our troops and facilities. as for response honests, the president is working his way

through that. had a good meeting yesterday and he still has decisions based ahead of him and i won't certainly get in front of that. as you heard him say, we will respond. we'll do it in a time and manner of our choosing, but we know the serious consequences here of this particular attack. last thing i'll say here before i stop this long answer with you, obviously our thoughts and prayers are with the families of all those affected and troops that are going through care, some for serious wounds. but there are three american families that got the worst possible news ever, and we want them to knee ow we're with themd we'll continue to support them. >> and is it the belief that this was an intentional escalation or was it supposed to be in line with the 100 plus attacks we've seen prior? >> there is no question for now many months that these groups are trying to threaten our troops and facilities. and that means trying to do it

in a lie that will way. and so in this particular attack, they did kill three american service members and then wounded 30 more. so this one had lethal consequence in ways that previous ones didn't. but it doesn't mean the intent of the previous attacks weren't lie th lethal, about we were able to defeat them. >> which raises the question of those who say that administration response has only invited more attacks. if that has always been the case, is that accurate that the responses thus far have not stopped this, there has been no deterrence and so therefore there have been more will. >> i can't deny the fact that there have been a series of attacks now increasingly lethal over weeks and months which is why the president will be reviewing what the appropriate response is going forward. we don't want to see the attacks continue and we want to make it clear that they are unacceptable. we also make it clear that we'll do what we have to do to protect

our troops and facilities and interests in the region. those are the options that the president is weighing. and we'll take it very seriously. >> some of your republican critics have said hit iran, hit them hard. lindsey graham. j they are hawkish. should the american people assume targets within iran are on the table? >> i certainly won't talk publicly about the options before the commander in chief and the decisions that he has it make. he will do it in a time and manner of his own choosing and we'll respond as he said and we'll respond in a very kons gwenn shalg way. but we don't seek a war with iran. we're not looking for a wider conflict in the middle east. every abc the president has taken has been designed to bring the tensions down. and obviously this attack very, very serious. certainly escalatory on behalf of the militia groups.

we have to take it seriously and well. but i won't get ahead of the president's decisions. >> and on a separate topic, bill burns was in paris meeting with his intelligence counterparts related to hostage release proposal. can you give us an update on where that stands currently? >> the talks have been sober, serious. i would go so far as to tell you they have been constructive. now, i want to be careful here. i don't want to sound too sanguine. there is a lot of work that has to be done to try to get another hostage deal in place that would result in a significant pause in the fighting which would allow not only the hostages to get out but aid to get in and bring down civilian casualties. there is a lot of promise here. and there has been very good discussions with the qatari and egyptians and israelis. but we're not over the finish line yet. so i can't tell you here this morning on monday that we have a deal that is about to be announced. but we

>> on another striking development over the weekend, the u.s. paused funding to the u.n. agency in gaza over allegations that some of the staffers were involved in the october 7th terror attacks. have you seen the dossier, the specific information that the israelis have presented, and does that lead you to believe that that pause will be long-term? >> we have seen the information that the israelis collected, and i would note that the u.n. relief brought this to our attention, and they are taking it very seriously. they're conducting an investigation. we want to let that play out. these are serious allegations against about a dozen employees that were allegedly involved in the october 7th attacks in various capacities. we're glad to see the secretary general is taking this seriously, and again, investigating it. he's going to hold anybody responsible and accountable to include criminal prosecutions potentially. as you know, we've paused our

funding pending the results of this investigation. we'll see where it goes and what our options are going forward. i want to say -- it's really important. we've got a dozen employees here with serious allegations, but we shouldn't let that impugn the work of the u.n. relief and works agency which has more than 10,000 employees across the region and certainly in gaza and have literally helped save thousands of lives. so while this is very serious, and it needs to be taken that way, we also need to remember and not to impugn the work of the entire agency. >> it's critical funding at a critical time as well. john kirby, we appreciate your time sir as always. thank you. >> yes, sir, thank you. despite the highest interest rates in decades, americans are still spending at a record with the latest commit growth record. how they're spending around the world. and the mona lisa definitely not smiling after two people hurled pumpkin soup at her. it is protected by a glass case

at the louvre. they demand sustainable food as farmers protest against low wages and overregulation. we'll be right back.

some economists this morning scratching their heads gotfollog

this new report. a lot of americans spending despite the high interest rates. we have vanessa morgan. what do you have to tell us about how the u.s. economy stacks up against the other economies in terms of growth? >> a lot of americans feel like the economy hasn't recovered quickly enough or strongly enough, but when you step back and care it to the rest of the world, we're actually doing it really well. we can look at gdp. just for the third quarter, it grew by 3.3%. that was a lot. compare that to the uk, down 2.2%. compare that to japan, down 2.9%. so when you put it into perspective, it shows that there's strong, robust growth in the u.s. compared to other countries. another way we can tell that the u.s. has really grown, we spent a lot on stimulus money during the pandemic. other countries did as well, but we spent a lot. we spent $5 trillion in stimulus. this was going -- a lot of this

was going right into americans' pockets. that brought excess savings. some were spending on rent and utilities, but a lot of americans were saving. singapore spent more, and that's the only country that spent more on their country than the u.s. did. the other thing we can feel is gas prices. that's what we spend every day going to the pump, heating costs, natural gas. the u.s. in 2023 -- so last year, here's where we started. we started right here. this was 2023 compared to 2022, just above 0%, but it was volatile this year, but we were able to make this recovery and end up right about there. if you compare that to the uk though, look where the uk started. they started nearly 120% above where they were in 2022. they had a long way to go. this was very difficult for many people in the uk. this was a difficult recovery

for people in terms of where we are now. gas prices were doing pretty well here in the u.s. if you compare that to other countries, it's a lot better. >> consumers are clearly driving this. >> yeah. >> you pointed to the stimulus slide and i think that's really interesting. >> yeah. >> is that the reason why? is it because people had more money or the u.s. response that drove this whole thing? >> i think we can see consumer spending in gdp. that drives gdp. that's where people are spending and that's why we have such strong growth. we have it because yes, there was stimulus in people's pockets, but also wages grew, and there were a lot of jobs, a lot of onptions for people to choose from. we didn't hit a recession and at the same time, we didn't fall into high unemployment. that was really good. that is what people wanted to see here in the u.s., and it bodes well for the u.s. compared to the rest of the world. >> yeah. it's a good point. see if it connects with people over the coming months. vaness