♪ ♪

tensions in the middle east after a drone attack own a u.s. outpost in jordan killed three american soldiers. president biden is vowing the u.s. will respond and republicans push for him to strike back. what we're learning about this response. e. jean carroll speaks out about donald trump after being awarded more than $83.3 million in damages. what she says she plans to do with the money. joe manchin still flirting for a presidential run as he travels from new hampshire to south carolina and georgia and why manchin says he shaped everything in donald trump's agenda. this is "cnn news central." ♪ ♪ for the first time in nearly a month defense secretary lloyd

austin has returned to the pentagon following his recent hospita hospitalization. we expect to hear from him. whether he'll address the deadly attack on u.s. troops in jordan is unclear. right now president biden said to be weighing options on how to respond, but there will be a response he promises. three u.s. service members were killed. dozens of others injured. the strike came from syria hitting near the living quarters at a military base known as tower 22. the u.s. hasn't named a specific group responsible for the attack. oren liebermann is following this for us. what can you tell us on the latest on the strike and the question of which group the responsible for this? >> reporter: the national security spokesperson john kirby said it looks like groups supported by hezbollah, a group that the u.s. holds responsible for carrying out the 160 attacks

on u.s. forces in the region that we've seen since the beginning of the gaza war. none of those attacks have been close to what we saw over the weekend on sunday when a drone hit a base known as tower 22 in jordan right on the meeting point essentially between jordan, iraq and syria. that drone struck near the living quarters at the base. there are approximately 350 u.s. service member there is. this attack, three of those service members, three solders, were killed at the tin the atta number of others injured. that number right now as 34, but that number could rise. eight service members had to be medevaced to germany for further trea treatment. they are in stable conditions. how did the missile get through u.s. air defenses at the site and was able to kill so many

service members. the u.s. is looking for what group is responsible and the response. president biden, defense secretary lloyd austin promising a response. the expectation is that it's bigger than the u.s. strikes in the past few months. the question is how? there's pressure from congressional republicans to strike iran itself. that's not the expectation because the biden administration is still trying to make sure that this doesn't escalate into an open, wider regional war and trying to contain the con flight to gaza itself. clearly the u.s. needs to make a point, send a message, carry out strikes. the question, iraq or syria or both? weapons facilities, going after leadership, these are all on the table. biden was briefed over the weekend by the defense secretary and others. the question is where, how and how big at this point. >> that's the question everyone in the region is asking. especially after the strikes in

iraq, jordan and the red sea. we'll be watching this closely. thank you for your reporting. john? with me now national security analyst, jim sciudo. you've been speaking to administration officials. what are they telling you? >> reporter: i spoke to a senior administration official last now. the question is how did this get through defenses? one answer is a lucky hit, but they're investigating that it's more significant, that it had the capability to evade air defenses put in lace for this reason, to protect against attacks like this. if you look at another battlefield in ukraine where drones have been used by both sides, you've seen enormous

progress over the course of this war in terms of the drone's capability, but also in terms of air defenses. john, that's a constant battle with constant adjustment over time, allowing drones that a month ago weren't able to evade defenses to do so the next time around. the concern is here is was there a step along those lines or was this an outlier? that has implications going forward. force protection at a number of bases, not just in syria, is the priority at this point and you can imagine going forward to avoid this being repeat. >> if this is more than a fluke, there's a lot of u.s. troops in the region who could be at risk. thousands and thousands if you inc include qatar, saudi arabia and other places. if this was an iranian proxy, do

you attack that proxy in syria or iraq or inside iran? what are the consideration? >> reporter: when i spoke to the senior u.s. official, this is what they're wrestling with. they will respond. they have to respond and they have to respond to a greater degree. the outlier here is to strike iranian targets. that's what the u.s. directly -- not necessarily a war, but shooting at each other directly and that poses a risk in terms of escalation. you have options short of that and beyond what you've seen so far. this is a judgment, john, that goes into it. when you attack the base of an iranian-backed militia, are you aiming at facilities or people or both? do you intend to kill iranian fighters? this is a judgment they made in

the past -- by the way, every attack has the risk of doing that. do you attempt to avoid that or do you make that part of the plan? that would be a step up, even if you don't strike iranian territory per se. there are iranian fighters and commanders based in those places and that could be your strike. you go to the soleimani strike when the trump administration ordered his assassination, that was not in iran. it was in iraq, but an iranian target, a senior leader. the trump administration had a similar question there, whether that would lead to escalation. there was a whole host of concerns about how iran would strike back after the soleimani assassination, none of which met the worst concerns at that point. doesn't mean that's repeated. these attacks have been carried out before.

the administration now has a choice as to how far they go. >> these are discussions taking place and have been taking place before the u.s. service members were killed. they had a sense something like that, sadly, was inevitable. jim, great to get your insight. thank you. just ahead, a retired judge in illinois says donald trump engaged in insurrection on january 6th, but should say on the state's ballot. details on his recommendations. also e. jean carroll speaking to cnn this morning, after a jury awarded her more than $83 million in her defamation lawsuit against donald trump. that's ahead as well.

it's been three days since the jury awarded e. jean carroll $83.3 million for donald trump defaming her. the former president has stayed mostly silent about that verdict. e. jean carroll spoke to cnn about the trial and what it was like being in the same room as trump for the first time since he was accused of sexually abusing her. >> what was it like to be with donald trump in that courtroom? he did not attend your first trial. he was there when it came down to the money and what it would cost him. you hadn't seen him since 1996. >> i hadn't seen him since he assaulted me in the dressing room, and preparing to see him was terrifying.

the days leading up, robby brought me around stronger and stronger. it was so -- i hadn't slept. i hadn't eaten. i couldn't think. i lost my language when she was trying to prepare me to do testimony in front of the donald trump. then when we were in the courtroom and robby went to the lecturn, she said, good morning e. jean. please state your name and spell it for the court, and there he was. he was nothing. just no power. he had -- he was zero. that was -- i was flabbergasted. then we sailed through it. she brought me in and said, say your name.

i looked at robby, saw he was nothing and it came out from there. >> did you make that eye contact with him? >> many times. >> what was that like? >> it was -- he's an emperor without clothes. it's like looking at nothing. it was like nothing. >> were you surprised by that? the environment in that courtroom was very different, very volatile, very heated environment in terms of donald trump's attorney and donald trump. for it to end up like that, were you surprised? >> yes. yes, i had been prepared for the worse force on the earth today, the most powerful, the most af effective, the most money, the ric richest. he's nothing. he's the emperor without

clothes, it's the fairytale. people gave him clothes when he wasn't wearing any. remember the fairytale? that's donald trump. >> robby, you're giving your closing argument and donald trump gets up and walks out. not sure if you could see him, i think your back was to him. what did you think when you learned he walked out? >> it was true, i didn't see him. i was facing the jury. the judge said something. he told the courtroom he had gotten up and walked out. i thought to myself, whoa. in a case about whether you can follow the rules or not and not be a bully, not following the rules and acting like a bully is not a good move. i thought that was going to give us more money. >> you got over $83 million from this jury. trump is appealing. he has the right to do that. is he going to get a bond for that $83 million? if he doesn't, when could your

client get the money? >> he either has to post a bond which requires him to put down 20% or he has to deposit the entire amount with the court so 83 plus 9%. if he can't do either, we can collect right now, and we will for sure. >> do you believe he can do either of those? >> i don't know. i don't know. he didn't get a bond last time. maybe he'll deposit the funds. i don't know what he'll do. >> joining me now is a federal defense attorney. that was the first question in my head. a lot of tiechls these cases come up and there are big awards and it's years and years, sometimes decades, before the person who won the award gets it. what does it look like if he doesn't pay? they talk about seizing things. how does that work? >> trump has already appealed the first case. he's posted the full $5 million

she was awarded in the first verdict. as robby kaplan noted, trump has a decision within the next two weeks. he said he'll file an appeal. in order to do that, he has to post either a bond for 20% of the total amount or the total amount plus interest. it's about 9%. there will be interest on this. it goes up to about $89 million. he posted the full amount in the first case. he has about two weeks, but as kaplan noted, if he doesn't do that, she can go after his assets. $89 million is a lot different than $5 million. it could be a different story. >> when they talk about going after assets, does that mean things like go into his apartment taking art, that sort of thing where there's the investigator with you and they go in? >> it could. attaching his assets, things of that nature. throwing another wrench is the

fact that donald trump is a monitorship with the trump organization. many of his properties are being monitored by a federal judge, barbara jones, who has to approve any transfer of assets. it's a complicated web. >> very complicated. all right. this is another wrinkle. this has nothing to do with e. jean carroll. it's now about reporting and about smart-matic a company that says they were defamed by donald trump. one american news, oan, sent an explosive email to the trump campaign lawyer, sidney powell, with a spreadsheet claiming to have the -- contain the passwords of employees from the voting technology company smart-matic. is this criminal? what could happen in this case? >> we don't know if it's criminal. the details are murky.

the court hasn't noted who was actually emailing those things. we know the timeframe is concurrent with -- remember, sidney powell, we know her because she pleaded guilty to fani willis' reco claims. that had to do with yoallegatio she was spewing about dominion, their machines turning trump votes to biden. it all sort of adds up when you look at those facts. those are all circumstantial. we have a lot to go in this case. it seems like it could be an explosive finding. >> we saw what happened with dominion. do you see that same thing may happen where they come to an agreement? it was a huge number fox news has to pay. >> most cases like this end up

settling. you know, dominion really -- it hurt dominion when it came to the discovery process. they didn't want a lot of those internal emails exposed. smartmatic may feel the same. >> we were talking earlier that the retired state judge, a republican, recommended that former president donald trump be allowed to be on the ballot, even though it was determined he was part of the insurrection. what do you make of this? >> it's a good example of why the supreme court has chosen to take this case. the reasoning there is specific to illinois state law. the retired judge said, yes, i find he engaged in insurrection, i don't think his due process rights are covered so that the voting council can actually do this. it would have to be voted on by a court in illinois. it shows, even though he came to

the same conclusion as colorado and maine, it shows we could have just complete chaos reigning if the supreme court doesn't step in and say a blanket statement once and for all whether states can make these decisions. i don't see them leaving that choice up to the states. i think we'll get an answer from the supreme court that is all or nothing. >> too many different decisions where the supreme court needs to weigh in. thanks so much for coming in. next, how senator joe manchin could upend prescribe's re-election bid. does he want to? the new reporting on why senator manchin says he shaped everything in president biden's agenda.

not just any whiteboard... ...katie porter's whiteboard is one way she's: [news anchor] ...often seen grilling top executives of banks, big pharma, even top administration officials. katie porter. never taken corporate pac money - never will. leading the fight to ban congressional stock trading. and the only democrat who opposed wasteful “earmarks” that fund politicians' pet projects. katie porter. focused on your challenges - from lowering housing costs to fighting climate change. shake up the senate - with democrat katie porter. i'm katie porter and i approve this message.

new this morning, mitch mcconnell is one of several republicans calling for a quick and forceful response to the attack in jordan that left three u.s. service members dead. he says, quote, there needs to be serious costs to iran, not only frontline terrorists proxies, but on the iranian sponsors who wear american blood as a badge of honor. with me now is press secretary karine jean-pierre. what's the white house's response to that? >> let me say, john, thank you for having me on today.

let me first say that we are mourning with americans across the country today who are mourning the deaths of three souls, three service members who lost their lives yesterday. yesterday was a very dark day. today is a very difficult day for americans. our deepest condolences go out to the families, friends and the units who lost three friends, three colleagues. let me say that first. look, the president -- you heard from the president yesterday. you've been showing the clip of what the president said in south carolina. he said, we shall respond. i'll let the president -- i'm not going to infringe on the president's decision. he has always been very clear as commander in chief, one of the things he focuses is on making sure we protect our troops. >> has the president spoken to the families of those lost? >> don't have anything to share at this time, john, any conversation that the president has had or may have had with the

family members, we send our deepest condolences and prayers to the friends and families of the three service members that we lost yesterday. >> the u.s. has suspended funding for unra after allegations in israel that several employees participated in the october 7th terror attacks. what would it take for the u.s. to reinstate that funding? >> look, we're obviously deeply troubled by that, obviously by our action by pausing funding, we want to make sure they look into what happened, investigate, get to the bottom of it. don't have anything else to share on what the next steps of that will be. investigation needs to happen. they need to look into it. we're deeply troubled by what we heard. we're in touch with the u.n. we're in touch with israel and others. that's -- going to continue to have those discussion. >> former house speaker nancy

pelosi suggested that some of the protests in the united states against the israel/hamas war are supported by or connected to in some way russia and vladimir putin. what evidence has the white house seen of anything along those lines? >> so i'm going to let the speaker speak for herself, the former speaker speak for herself. i don't have anything to add to what the speaker laid out. we've been clear on where we stand with israel in making sure they're able to defend themselves obviously after the horrible attacks on october 7th by hamas, that terrorist organization who have said -- leaders in that organization said they would do october 7th over and over and over again. we want to make sure they protect innocent lives in gaza, palestinian lives. one life lost is too many. we'll continue to have those conversations. i don't have anything to say as it relates to protests.

the president has been clear, we've been clear at the white house, we believe that americans have the right to peacefully protest, to voice their concerns. i'll leave it there. >> you don't have any evidence that putin's behind it? >> i don't have anything else to add. i'll let the former speaker speak for herself. >> there are negotiations, the bipartisan senators, who may have a bill on the border. the president said this bill would shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed and if given that authority i would use it the day i signed that bill into law. is the border overwhelmed now? >> here's the thing, john, on the first day of his administration the president took this seriously when it came to immigration and border security, he put forth a piece of legislation. that was three years. if house republicans didn't get in the way and took action, we

would be in a different place today. now what we're seeing in the congress -- senate, republicans and democrats are working together for a bipartisan deal. 75% of americans want us to take action on immigration and secure the border. you saw the president's statement friday. he said give him the new enforcement authorities, new authorities, and he'll use it. he will use it to secure the border. here's the thing, you have speaker johnson saying that the president has this authority, but that's not what he said not too long ago during the trump administration when he said presidents need legal authority in order to secure the border. so he lifted that up during the trump administration. he was very clear then as congressman. we're agreeing with him, the congressman who said that, yes,

we need those new authorities in order to secure the border. the president said he will use that. look, we're making progress with a bipartisan agreement in the senate and, you know, speaker johnson should not get in the way of that. he should work with us on actually doing something that 75% of americans want us to do, deal with a broken immigration system and secure the border. >> the senator from oklahoma who was the republican leading these negotiations, has been sanctioned by the oklahoma republican party for his efforts. what does that tell you about the prospects of achieving a compromise? >> we've heard from democrats and republicans even yesterday saying how this deal is important. this deal is a fair deal. it would be a fair deal, comprehensive deal, an historic piece of legislation to deal with an immigration system that was broken in the last

administration and for decades. we're seeing a bipartisan c congl conglomerate, people coming together on the senate side saying let's work on getting something done for the american people. that's what the president wants. he wants to get something done for the american people. he's not playing political games. this is something americans want to see. the majority of americans want us to do the job in d.c. and get things done. congress must act. we're very grateful to senators, both republican and democrat, who have been having these conversations with us for the past two months. >> with your permission, "the new york times" wrote an article about the president's re-election campaign. i counted four paragraphs inside that article about efforts to get taylor swift involved in the president's re-election. i said with your permission. one sentence said one idea

that's been tossed around, sending the president to a stop on swift's era tour. what would swift support give the president? any plans to go on tour? >> so, let me first say, i have to be mindful. i'm a federal employee. there's something called the hatch act. can't speak to anything related to 2024 and upcoming elections. obviously there are a lot of -- i know in my shop in the press shop there are a lot of swifties, if you will, fans of taylor swift. i'm going to leave it there. i'm not going to get into the president's schedule at all from here as it relates to the 2024 election. >> the first time the hatch act has been invoked in regards to taylor swift. karine jean-pierre, thank you for your time. >> thanks, john. we heard from defense secretary lloyd austin. let's listen to what he's said. this is the first time we've

heard from him since his absence. >> good morning, everybody. let me start with my outrage and sorrow on the death of three brave u.s. troops in jordan. and for the other troops who were wounded. the president and i will not tolerate attack on u.s. forces. we'll take all neglicessary acts to defend the u.s. and our troops. at this important time i'm glad to be back at the pentagon. i feel good and recovering well, but still recovering. i appreciate all the good wishes that i've received thus far. welcome back, mr. secretary general. >> thank you. >> great to see you. it's a pleasure to get you here today. the past three years we worked closely together. i want to thank you for your leadership. you heard me say that a number

of times. it is heart felt. i have really watched you lead the alliance through some very challenging times. you've kept nato united and resolute to the most serious attacks on u.s. security since the end of the cold war. nato has grown stronger and more united than ever. nato became more capable last year when finland joined. i'm very pleased that the turkish parliament voted for sweden to join nato as well. we're looking forward to welcoming sweden to nato soon. we'll talk about ways to strengthen transatlantic security as we look forward to the 75th anniversary summit we'll host in washington later this year.

defense will always be job number one for nato. we've made progress on implementing the decisions our leaders have made. with our approved regional plans we're ensuring a theaterwide deterrent and any adversary that challenges that deterrent, the alliance is ready to fight and win. >> that is defense secretary lloyd austin there meeting at the pentagon with the nato secretary general. this is the first time we've seen the defense secretary since his absence and surgery. he said he's feeling well, still recovering and he made no comment on the kerfuffle over how the white house and country was informed of his absence from the job. we'll keep monitoring this and let you know if news develops there. much more, stay with us.

this morning democratic senator joe manchin of west virginia says he could absolutely see himself as president. manchin has spent months teasing the possibility of launching a third-party bid this year, but the ticket would lean on support from the no labels group which is experiencing turmoil. we are joined now by isaac to share reporting. can you give us an idea what's

going on with the no label group? >> reporter: that group put itself forward as the third alternative, thinking about a unity ticket and they've been getting ballot lines across the country on states for a ticket. they've set their own deadline as mid march to decide what they're doing. i asked a number of leaders of no label how this would work, who would be involved, how you pick the people who make the decision and couldn't get clear answers on any of that. it's also as joe manchin, as you said, is going around the country, starting to talk about how he might go forward with a presidential run, telling people privately he sees a path if donald trump gets convicted and joe biden has a health scare. very much not wanting to be a spoiler or what leads to donald trump being back in the white house. these are all coming together when there's a lot going on as this campaign starts to take

shape. it looks like as a likely biden/trump rematch. >> it's interesting to see how it's playing out. march seems late in the game. you never know what's going to happen. isaac, thank you for your reporting. appreciate it. kate? john avalon and sofia nelson join us now. joe manchin getting in this race, maybe, maybe, does what? >> it is one of the many x factors that could change the outcome of the race. take joe manchin at his word. his intention is not to be a spoiler that reelecting donald trump, that's the x factor. we don't know how that ball's going to bounce. he sees himself -- he's trying to be the net beneath the election. if a bunch of x factors occur through court or health scares, this can occur.

this is no ordinary time. if these independent third-party candidates are opening the door to potentially electing donald trump running on an autocratic platform, that's a step too far at the wrong time. >> sofia, reading through isaac's reporting this morning and yesterday, i was sitting there wondering is this more than a thorn in the side of president biden and his campaign? it's just something i'm wondering. having this lingering out there, even though he says he doesn't want to be a spoiler, saying he's set the agenda, he's behind president biden's agenda. >> listen, kate, i think what dean phillips is doing and what joe manchin and others in this third-party context are doing it's dangerous. it's dangerous to democracy in this moment. as john said, trump's running on an openly hostile, autocratic

platform. president biden needs to keep a coalition together. this is not the time to be breaking off. 4%, 5% of the vote could tip the election in a different direction. i think the majority of the country doesn't want to go there. i think it's more than a thorn, i think it's a problem if they follow through on these third-party candidacies. >> let's talk about some of these policies, like border policy. you have a deal -- they say the deal is done. they need to write the text. democrats and republicans coming together in the senate to try to work out this border deal that's linked to ukraine funding. some republicans now balking in the senate, the house republicans definitely balking and this is after donald trump spoke out against it. he said a border deal would be a gift to the radical left, maybe

exposing his intentions. i want to play what nikki haley said this morning about the border deal in the works. >> secure that border. i don't care what political chance it has, do the right thing. this is not the right time to wait until november. >> is the senate doing the right thing? >> that's not what donald trump said. what do you think, >> these right. if you think it is a crisis, you have the urgency to solve it. the senate acting like they should. finding the middle 60 votes to get something done and of course ukraine and israeli aid also tied to this. what donald trump is doing is trying to destroy a deal because he doesn't want bipartisanship and joe biden to get credit for solving a problem. that is just -- that is so bizarro world cynical but yet we've come to expect. he is putting himself before the

country. s if himself, then party and then country. and so the fact he is playing his supporters who care about the border for fools by saying he'd rather have it fester for a year so he could get the political benefit. that is what is wrong in our politics and bpeople trying to solve problems is what could be right. so the message is do your job. >> and so as we talk pure politics in the presidential, is it a zero sum game if they reach a deal that democrats would get the credit, joe biden would get the gain, and not republicans? can't -- am i being pollyanna? because that is rare if i am if they could all get credit for doing something here? >> i think it depends on what network you are watching. and i'm being serious. for example if you have a news outlet that will say no matter what that this was not a bipartisan deal, that it is a bad deal and that it isn't

interest for the border and country and that is drummed in day and day, that is one perspective. but if we're frooit tellers and we know the senate is so tight that nothing can get done without bipartisanship and that there has to be a deal where the president agrees to sign it and it has to be passed by both chambers of the congress, house seems to be obstructionist here and that is the real challenge. the senate and president will work together, so is it a zero sum game? no, because reality is nothing gets done in this washington, d.c. without bipartisanship because the margins are too tight. but if people don't understand that, then they buy into the trump crazy and you saw what oklahoma does to senator lankford. he was slapped with a censure because he dhe can't bow down t trump.

>> and so there is a lot of credit for working really hard to get something done, get it across the line, which would be good for everyone when you are staring at what is going on at the border. thank you both so much. and new video as king charles returns home. just two of the senior royals, and i'm talking the most senior royals, released from the hospital this morning.

bold. daring. expressive. contra costa college allows me to be whoever and whatever i want to be, providing the stage, the canvas, the tools to use my voice and write my story. find your passion and create your future at contra costa college. start today at contracosta.edu just this morning two senior british royals were released from the hospital within hours of each other. king charles waved as he left tmenfor an enlarged prostate, that came hours after the princess of

wales went home who had abdominal surgery and spent 13 days in the hospital. max foster is in london with the very latest. what do we know? >> two very different exits. king charles coming out the front door with the cameras. looking well. i think the message is that the head of state is well and everything went as planned correspond to a statement from buckingham palace, the king was discharged from hospital following planned medical treatment. and has rescheduled forthcoming public engagements to allow for a period of private recuperation. so he is off work as it were. we're not being told where he is going to recuperate. they want the media to leave him alone. kate left earlier in the day without anyone noticing, which is remarkable considering that hospital they were both this was surrounded by cameras. she had been in for 13 days, but she now has a period of recuperation in windsor where

they stay when the kids are in school. and so both are coming out of hospital at the same time but looking pretty well. so positive news. >> max foster, we obviously wish them both the best in their recoveries. thank you very much. much more straight ahead .