please join me in voting yes on prop e. prince william speaking out since his father's cancer diagnosis. >> i would like to say thank you for the kind messages of support for catherine and my father. it means a great deal to us all. >> the prince acknowledging his wife kate's recent abdominal surgery from which she is still recovering. those comments coming during a charity gala in london where the prince was with tom cruise. he is taking over more duties here. the future king returning to royal duties after a three-week absence. his schedule is packed. he hosted an awards ceremony

earlier in the day. thanks for joining us. anderson starts now. tonight, there's breaking news. a drone commander in the terrorist group blamed for killing american troops in juror dan is killed by an american air strike in baghdad. a deal republicans demanded and a conservative negotiation dies. the supreme court takes up the question of keeping the former president off the ballot under the 14th amendment. good evening. thanks for joining us. we begin with breaking news. the second in what would be ongoing reprisals for the drone attack on american forces in jordan, which wounded dozens of troops and killed three. tonight's reprisal came in the form of a drone strike on a target in baghdad.

what more do we know about this strike? >> it was carried out wednesday night, baghdad time, in baghdad itself. the target, according to three u.s. officials -- you can see the results of the strike -- was a head of logistics as well as in charge of drone operations and rocket operations. they are a group inside of iraq, one of the most powerful, that the u.s. holds responsible for carrying out attacks on u.s. forces in the region. this is part of the u.s. response to not only the drone strike that killed three u.s. servicewounded more but approximately 170 other attacks on u.s. forces that resulted in more than 100 injuries, but the one that killed three u.s. service members at the end of last month. this looks very different than what we saw on friday when the

u.s. carried out sweeping strikes across iraq and syria hitting more than 85 targets. the u.s. went after facilities, munitions, weapons. here, if we can pull up the video, you can see how precise this was. this was targeted at the vehicle that he was in, going after him directly. the u.s. says this is part of the response. there will be more to come, suggesting the u.s. may go after other leaders of militant groups they hold responsible. u.s. central command says according to early indications, there were no civil ian casualties. but according to iraqly police, there was at least one other person inside the vehicle. >> it's amazing they were able to track that guy into that vehicle and kill him there. did the u.s. notify iraqi officials before the strike? >> not in this case. this is leading to friction as we have seen before between the iraqi government and the u.s. government. t

the iraqi government says it undercuts understandings between washington and baghdad. you see some frustration boiling over. some iraqly politicians have vowed to try to remove u.s. and international forces from the country. part is the anger over the strikes, especially without that prior notification. it's worth pointing out that hezbollah, the iran-backed militant group they hold responsible, is not only part of what's called the islamic resistance in iraq which the u.s. holds responsible for the deadly strike, but it's also part of the popular mobilization unit. that falls under iraqi government military forces. there you see some of the friction created when the u.s. goes after targets in baghdad. the u.s. sees these as terrorist targets and part of organizations that targeted u.s. forces. the iraqi government sees this differently. how this plays out, we are about to find out. we see how the u.s. and iraqi

government move forward despite the anger. now to the chaos in congress and what congressional republicans have managed to do in the last 24 hours. in the short time, they killed top border legislation they demanded with the senate putting the final nail in the coffin today. also failed last night in trying to impeach the homeland security secretary. >> on this vote, the neas are 214, the nays are 216. the resolution is not adopted. >> republicans failed because house speaker johnson did not count on al green, who is recovering from surgery, turning up and voting. which prompted thomas massi to tweet today, getting rid of speaker mccarthy has officially turned into an unmitigated disaster. that in turn drew this response from speaker johnson. >> look, it was a mess what happened here. we are cleaning it up. he is one of my friends and

colleagues. i don't think that this is a reflection on the leader. it's a reflection on the body itself and the place where we have come in this country. >> that's the leader who calls what happened a mess, presided over the mess but doesn't think presiding over said mess is a reflection of his membership, which is for his members to decide. as for what he calls the place where we have come in this country, it's worth remembering what that place looks like. even to some republicans, especially to conservative republicans who negotiated the tough border legislation his colleagues killed today. here is langford shortly before the vote. this is where we have come in the country. >> this is the pen that i was handed at that desk when i was sworn in to the united states senate. i signed a book that was at that desk with this pen. because i was becoming a united

states senator. because the people at home sent me here to get stuff done and to solve problems. there's no reason for me to have this pen if we're just going to do press conferences. i can do press conferences from anywhere. we can only make law from this room. >> except when they can't, which put aid for ukraine and israel on ice because house republicans demanded it be tied to a border deal before doing a 180 when the former president told them to. they are not the only ones following this trump -- the trump line on this. here is senator langford again, this is the place where we have come in this country. >> i had a popular commentator four weeks ago that i talked to that told me flat out, before they knew any of the content of the bill, any of the content -- nothing was out at that point, that told me flat out, if you

try to move a bill that solves the border crisis during this presidential year, i will do whatever i can to destroy you. because i do not want you to solve this during the presidential election. by the way, they have been faithful to their promise and have done everything they can to destroy me. >> that's where we are in the country today. a commentator tellin a senator they will try to destroy him for negotiating a deal that delivered on many conservative priorities, only to be shived by people who claim to be conservatives at the behest of their leader who never was a conservative, donald trump. for every senator betrayed, there are border officers left high and dry, asylum seekers left high and dry, families losing people to fentanyl. and cities struggling with the people bussed in.

langford negotiated it and a handful of other republicans who did not do the former president's bidding and supported it, including alaska republican senator lisa murkowski who said this about the process. i have gone through the stages of grief. today i'm just pissed. joining us is dan crenshaw. you heard senator mur co murkow saying she's pissed. are you? >> i'm going to be pissed off we have almost 300,000 illegal people crossing the border. i'm of the opinion that we need a solution on this. i'm frustrated by this process. i think the senate process was destined to fail from the beginning. you put a senator in the minority, with no leverage over two other senators who are in the majority who have no incentive to make a strong deal because they are not worried about the re-election.

i said from the beginning what we should have done is follow the playbook as we did with the debt ceiling. we have negotiations baselines. that's hr2. that's our border bill. we start there. that's where we want to go. we go to the white house. biden is worried about re-election. this is an historic moment. we could make a deal. what we should do is sending that supplemental back with hr2 attached to it. that's what i would do to keep this going. in the end, that's what i care about is border security. >> it's odd to hear -- you pointed this out. to hear republicans say we don't need a border bill who were supporting hr2. it couldn't pass in the senate because of democrats. the biggest difference now is the former president has said he doesn't want it. that seems to be the one thing that has changed.

>> i don't know. i guess i need to talk to them. i'm not one of those republicans. i know we need hr2. we need changes to our asylum laws. there's too many loopholes. we need to clarify the parole authority, which is being abused massively by this administration. he would need to codify into law remain in mexico. we need hr2. immigration laws have not been updated in too long. they have been exploited by ca cartels, by people just looking for a job and exploited and cutting in front of millions of millions of legal immigrants. we need -- i'm not one of the republicans saying we don't need changes in law. we have an historic opportunity to get those changes in law now. >> isn't that -- >> i'm never going to stop saying that. >> that's what conservatives -- langford said, hr2 couldn't pass and sometimes in law making you need to make compromises to get stuff passed. this was the most conservative

bill and democrats -- biden agreed to it. probably because of the pickle he is in. it seems like this was a -- according to langford, this was as good as conservatives could get to actually get something done and move the ball down. >> we have the majority in the house. we would disagree. we think we can get more. we should try to do that. >> right. >> the process was flawed from the start on the part of republicans. you put one person in there, you make it secret, didn't do a communication plan with everybody surrounding them. they didn't tell anybody what was in it. it's complicated. when it comes out, everybody interprets it ever which way. you have to start with hr2. you go from there. there's a thnegotiations, and h is dead in the senate. we add the supplemental to it. we are talking about ukraine aid, which is unpopular with

weapons. couple these things and america wins in both ways. >> it does seem like -- i understand your focus is on happens in the house. as langford said, a commentator said to him, i'm going to go after you if you try to do anything that solves any border problem in an election year. the elephant in the room is the former president who doesn't want, it seems, anything. he says it has to be a perfect deal. no deal that can actually get through a democracy, a senate, can be a perfect deal. isn't it clear that the former president does not want any deal and republicans are not going to make any deal if the former president doesn't want it? >> look, here is what i say to people who think they need to let illegal ill grants in just to hurt biden. my message is, you can beat biden. i will help you beat biden. that's my message. biden is unpopular in so many ways. people don't trust him on border security or the economy and

various other issues. we need to actually solve the border crisis. it's also true that there are people on both sides. mostly in the activist groups. that have been forever, that never want this problem solved. all viewers need to know this. on left and right, they make money by perpetuating this problem. >> you are talking about donald trump. i understand you are saying it's activist groups. >> i'm not. >> that is donald trump makes money -- >> you want me to say that. >> i don't want -- you are an honest guy. people on both sides of the aisle applaud you for that. he put his thumb on scale on this. i understand activist groups make money off this. he is making money off this. he is running an election. this is a -- perhaps a winning issue for him. he does not want improvement despite all the talk of fentanyl, all the talk of national security issues. he doesn't want a deal. >> look, you would have to ask

him. you would have to pull a quote from him that i can respond to. >> lots of people in the house have said that. there's republicans in the house who supported hr2 who are now saying, we don't need any border deal at all, and the only reason is because -- >> they are wrong. i disagree. i disagree with them in conversations today on the floor. i said, if we didn't need new border laws, why did we pass hr2. trump needed laws changed. what he ended up doing, he made a deal with mexico. he did the remain in mexico policy. that's what he ended up having to do. i know you want me to get into a fight with trump. i'm not going to do it. >> i'm not trying to get you into a fight. >> we need a border deal. >> before i let you go, you are a navy seal. you served in iraq. what's your reaction to the strike in baghdad? >> it's great.

any time you make it more dangerous for someone to be promoted, i think it's a good day. i'm glad they're doing it. it sounds like it was a good strike. sounds like there was no additional casualties. obviously, good intel led up to that. it's a good hit. i think we need to continue seeing more of it. i think we need to know that the administration meant what they said when they said, we're going to keep doing this for a period of time. i think that's important. deterrence is important. that part of the world -- the entire world, they only understand strength. when you say peace through strength, you can't forget about the strength part. i have no complaints. >> it's good to talk to you. thank you. >> thanks. what political strategist james carville has to say about the mess. a preview of tomorrow's supreme court oral arguments in a case that could keep a former president off the ballot for what he did to overturn the

election he lost.

at a fund-raiser in new york today, president biden took aim at the man who told republican lawmakers to sink the border legislation they demanded. former president trump, who he said would rather weaponize the issue than solve it. this follows remarks yesterday which seem to be a new tack for

president biden and a new part of his campaign. >> every day between now and november, the american people will know that the only reason the border is not secure is donald trump. and his maga republican friends. >> joining us is democratic political strategist james carville for our regular wednesday conversation. good to see you. does this gop chaos, the border bill, failed mayorkas impeachment, does it help him, create a political opening for him? >> the president loves historians. this congress can't pass gas. he needs to run against a do nothing wrong. that can give him traction that he did not have before. maybe they could get rudy giuliani to be speaker. he can pass gas for sure. this is almost comical. >> it does seem -- the former

president trump does not want a border bill, because he doesn't want anything that could be perceived as a win for biden or he doesn't want the border to go away as a top issue for him. is there more that biden should be doing on the border? not just for political reasons but for national security. >> from what i know about the bill -- i'm not an expert on the border. there were all kinds of provisions in there that would have made it better. by the way, donald trump is not in the congress of the united states. he is not in the house of representatives. all they needed was a few senators to go along. all the democratic senators were for it until they tanked it. the idea that trump is the fault of this -- if you saw congressman crenshaw, he was shucking and jiving. he didn't want to say what he was thinking. i think the president has an opening to run against a do nothing congress. that's a valid observation.

i think it will hold up well over a period of time. >> i guess -- some would look at it and say, why are republicans thinking that killing a border deal would be beneficial to the trump campaign? there's the obvious reason that not giving it any kind of victory to biden would help trump. if voters are aware that the former president is the one saying, don't do this, i assume there would be a certain amount of outrage over that. i guess among his core supporters, that doesn't really matter. >> he can't just run a force. you have to talk all the time about a do nothing congress. every time the democrats are asked about this, to say, we negotiated in good faith. it was a do nothing congress. the public understands that trump doesn't have a vote. there are 49 i think republican senators. there's 220 or 21 republican house members.

the onus is on them. if they want to say, donald trump controls your duly elected representatives, then say that. i don't think that's a satisfactory answer to 55% of the american people. i really don't. >> you famously -- the line is the economy, stupid. you talk about running against a do nothing congress. president biden is focusing on the former president. is the economic message not -- shouldn't that be front and center? there's some good economic news. >> right. but people live in an economy and they feel it. we know from the clinton years and from the obama years that it takes -- you have to go deep into a recovery when people are feeling it. i think he should talk about things they have done to help families cope with cost of living increases, like prescription drugs or releasing the petroleum reserve or other things that they have done to

clear up the supply chain. it's hard, if you tell people they live in a good economy and they don't think they do, they think you don't understand their lives. he can talk about things that he has done, he can talk about the infrastructure bill, which is a real magnificent achievement. i don't agree that they should go out and tell people how great this economy is. you have to let people feel it. they can talk about measures that they have taken to help people deal with what has been a cost of living increase for families across this country. >> james carville, thank you so much. good to talk to you. >> thank you. happy mardi gras. >> i wish i was there. tomorrow, trump's legal team appears before the supreme court where he will need the support of the chief justice and more to remain on ballots. we will take a preview next.

xfinity rewards presents: '1st and 10gs.' xfinity is giving away ten grand to a new lucky winner for every first and ten during the big game. enter daily through february 9th for a chance to win 10gs. with the ultimate speed, power, and reliability the xfinity 10g network is made for streaming live sports. because it's only live once. join xfinity rewards on the xfinity app or go to xfinity1stand10gs.com for your chance to win. i'm daniel lurie and i've spent my career fighting poverty, helping people right here in san francisco. i'm also a father raising two kids in the city. deeply concerned that city hall is allowing crime and lawlessness to spread. now we can do something about it

by voting yes on prop e. a common sense solution that ensures we use community safety cameras to catch repeat offenders and hold them accountable. vote yes on e. a pivotal moment for the former president's white house aspirations tomorrow. his attorneys argue before the supreme court about why the insurrection ban doesn't apply to him and why it would be uncon s sti institutional to leave him off the ballot. john roberts has a reputation for trying to take a measured approach. paula reid has more. >> reporter: cnn today captured this exclusive footage of former president donald trump's legal team wrapping up its final preparations for tomorrow's

historic supreme court arguments. trump's top lawyers and advisers gathered for mock arguments, part of a more disciplined approach they are taking to this pivotal case, after turning several recent hearings in other cases into campaign stops -- >> i want to be at every trial date. i want to watch this witch hunt myself. >> reporter: trump is not expected to attend the supreme court arguments. arguing on his behalf is jonathan mitchell, a former texas solicitor general. this is his sixth appearance before the high court. >> supreme court justices are ultimately political appointments. >> reporter: the trump team is confident it will win the case, which started out as a long shot bid to push trump off the 2024 ballot. >> trump engaged in insurrection and cannot appear on the ballot. >> frankly, president trump didn't carry a pitch fork, he didn't lead a charge. >> reporter: in the lead-up to thursday's arguments, the

anti-trump opponents looked for states they believe they could succeed based on a constitutional provision that hasn't been tested since 1919. their efforts have been met with mixed results, with only maine and colorado taking him off the primary ballot. even california opted to include trump. trump's team insists that states should not be able to deprive voters of their choice of candidates. >> this whole thing is rigged. election interference. >> reporter: this is not just a test for trump. justices have been under intense scrutiny over questions about ethics and partisanship. for chief justice john roberts, his legacy is on the line, as someone who tries to steer the court clear of the politics that divides washington. >> we do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle. we do not caucus in separate rooms. we do not serve one party or one interest. we serve one nation. >> reporter: roberts under

pressure to build consensus. >> this case puts the court in a tough position any way around. they would rather not be thinking about these issues. but it's what the democracy requires and what the constitution requires at this moment. we think the court is going to rise to that occasion. >> reporter: after tomorrow's arguments, trump's lawyers need to quickly pivot to another case they would like to bring before the justices. they have only until monday to signal to the high court that they want to appeal yesterday's decision saying that trump doesn't have presidential immunity to shield him from the january 6 prosecutions. it's unclear if the justices will want to wade in. it's another example of how influential the supreme court is going to be throughout this 2024 campaign season. >> thanks so much. joining me, jennifer rodgers, a former federal prosecutor and carrie cordaro. >> i expect to hear a lot.

the court has not been specific about the arguments that it is willing to hear. there are a lot of arguments at play, about universal arguments about whether this applies to trump, whether the president is an officer, universal arguments about whether the provision is self-executing, whether colorado properly handled this case under their own laws. then the arguments about whether he participated in an insurrection. everything is on the table. it's unusual for them not to narrow it down for the litigants. but that's what's happening. >> how long does it go for? >> they have given each side 40 minutes, the main two and then 20 minutes for other participants. i think the clock will just run. they will keep asking questions. probably a couple of hours. >> what do you think are the strongest and weakest arguments? >> i think one of the big challenges that i see in this case and one of the big questions i have in terms of how much the justices will get into this question is the type of

record that has to be established in determining whether or not he engaged in an insurrection. this is related to the issue that jennifer mentioned regarding whether or not the section 3 is self-executing. in other words, in colorado, the basis for the disqualification was based on the facts revealed through a five-day trial. that established the record that he engaged in the insurrection. in the main case mentioned in paula's piece, that was a secretary of state determination. the law in terms of section 3 or the colorado law at issue here doesn't lay out the standards by which the court is able to make that judgement as to whether he engaged in the insurrection. i think the absence of the guidance on how that decision is made is something that the justices will need to dig into in order to determine whether there is a substantial basis to

take the drastic step of disqualifying a candidate. >> jennifer, the court has a super majority of conservatives. are there justice us you will listen to closely? >> roberts, because he is the center of the court. also the most moderate of the republicans. i think he will want to have as close to unanimous decision here as he can. one person who might go with him is kagan, who is very much an institutionalist. if she's thinking about the reputation of the court and giving guidance to lower courts and all of these officials around the country, she might be someone that roberts can bring along for a decision that relies on one of the legal basis to say that he can stay on the ballot. >> what do you think the chances are the supreme court actually removes the former president from the ballot? that seems -- what do you think? >> i think it's less likely. i think there's so many pieces of this that all would have to

go in the same direction. they would have to find that he is an officer, which is its own esoteric constitutional issue that sounds like it should be straightforward but it's not based on different sections of the constitution. they would have to find that he engaged -- colorado was correct to determine that he engaged in the insurrection. they would have to find it is self-executing. we have to keep in mind that colorado is the outlier in terms of all of the different states that have considered this issue. i think it's less likely that the court upholds the disqualification. we will see how the court rules. >> do you agree? >> i do. i think it's very unlikely they will uphold the colorado opinion. not because that's not the way it should go, if you really look at the law. i think as a practical matter, they don't want the chaos when 50 states with 50 standards apply them in different ways in the heat of the primary season. >> thank you so much.

a programming note. tomorrow at 8:00, a special on the supreme court arguments. i will be joined by kaitlan collins, tomorrow 8:00 p.m. eastern. coming up, we will go to the white house for more on the strikes on the person responsible for the attack last week that killed three u.s. soldiers. the latest on the u.s. military helicopter that went missing and was found. where are the five marines that were on board?

this ad? typical. politicians... "he's bad. i'm good." blah, blah. let's shake things up.

with katie porter. porter refuses corporate pac money. and leads the fight to ban congressional stock trading. katie porter. taking on big banks to make housing more affordable. and drug company ceos to stop their price gouging. most politicians just fight each other. while katie porter fights for you. for senate - democrat katie porter. i'm katie porter and i approve this message.

more on breaking news, a u.s. strike against a group responsible for attacks on u.s. soldiers, including the one that killed three in jordan last week. this is new video of the aftermath of the attack which took place in baghdad. president biden has authorized strikes on more than 80 targets since that attack. earlier, dan crenshaw was on our broadcast. he said he wanted to see the white house continue ordering strikes. i'm joined by mj lee at the white house and retired general wesley clark. mj, what is the white house saying about this strike? >> reporter: anderson, the administration is making clear tonight that what we saw tonight is not the end. this is just a part of the retaliation that the u.s. is conducting after the deaths of those three americans. you will recall that immediately after that attack in jordan that took the lives of the three american soldiers, the president

was very quickly presented with a range of options. it was early last week that he gave the green light on a series of actions that would be taken in the region. in terms of just the specifics of the strike, we are told that there was a lot of consideration given to the timing and the specific excuse of the strike to make sure that they could avoid the loss of innocent life. they said no casualties that they know of. no civilian casualties that they know of. you can see when the watch the video how important that caution would be given this is an area with cars and people going by. anderson, it's very clear white house officials saying this is a part of the message that the president wants to send clearly. that message is, we will not hesitate to defend our people and hold responsible any and all who seek to harm americans. all of this has everything to do with the three american soldiers killed. >> general clark, it's remarkable they can do such a

seemingly pinpoint strike on a street, on a vehicle. what's your assessment of how this was carried out? >> i think we have been watching these groups for some time. we have been collecting information on them. we know the leaders of this group. it's familiar to us. this very group fought against i.s.i.s. in 2014. it has been in the region for a long time. we probably have a lot of technology on them. radio call signs, phone numbers, maybe even a visual recognition. there are probably people that are paid informants from these groups. it's a variety of means. the point is, we tracked it. we watch it. we wait for the opportunity to emerge. then we get permission and go through the checklist before we launch a strike like this. a very high level approval to do it. >> do you anticipate additional strikes in the region? what kind of targets would remain on the list at this point? >> i think that this is a start

of a new class of targets. we will go after leadership directly. the 85 targets hit and seven target areas, there was a delay. a lot of people said, top people got away. this particular guy may have been in one of the target boxes and got away. we know who he is. we found out where he lived. how he is moving. we took him out. the others who were engaged and working against us could expect the same thing. >> mj, we talked to oren lieberman earlier. talk about the challenges of u.s. launching attacks on iraqi soil. >> reporter: you are seeing that response pretty immediately from the iraqi government saying that this is a new aggression by the u.s. and it breaks all sort of understandings that stand between the u.s. and iraq. the reality is that the iran-backed groups in iraq have

been launching these provocations and attacks against u.s. forces and us bases for a long time now. we have seen all of that really escalate since the israel-hamas war in october. i think it's important to keep in mind that it is this -- with this as the backdrop that we are starting to see the beginnings of the conversation between the u.s. and iraqi forces about pulling forces out of iraq. that sort of brings an additional urgency to the conversations that are sensitive. >> how careful does the u.s. need to be not to i'll nature t -- alienate the iraqi government? >> the united states has do what it has to do to maintain its position and to try to push deterrence against iran. it's not in the interest of the iraqi government to force us to

leave. there may be pressure. they may go through the motions. it's not in our interest to leave. we have an arraignment with the iraqi government. we are there at their -- helping them avoid becoming a complete state of iran and them being alienated from other nations in the persian gulf. they don't want us to leave. we are working this. there's what you see on the surface and what's said underneath. >> understandable. mj lee, thank you. retired general wesley clark as well. the mystery in southern california surrounding a u.s. military helicopter and five aboard who were missing last night. the marine corps found the helicopter. what do we know about this helicopter and where these u.s. troops are? >> reporter: unfortunately, we don't have information on where those five marines are. we do know they were able to find the helicopter just after

9:00 a.m. local time today. we are talking about a ch53 super stallion helicopter that took off just north of las vegas, nevada. it was flying to just north of san diego to the marine corps air station. the last ping they got from this aircraft was around 11:30 p.m. pacific time. then around 2:20 in the morning, early this morning, that's when cal fire was sent to go look for them. they sent out engines, an ambulance as well. the conditions were so bad, as i talked to cal fire earlier, they said it was muddy. visibility was low. because of the snow coming down, they got out of the vehicles and started searching on foot and couldn't do it any further and resumed that search this morning when they found the aircraft. what is unclear at this point is what is the condition of the five marines on that aircraft? that's what we don't know as of this time.

>> when is the next update? when do you expect an update from the military? >> reporter: there was a press conference scheduled earlier today. we waited for an hour to get information. they just canceled it and said they would come back whether they had more information. we don't have any information considering this is so much later going on 12 hours later. this is odd that we haven't heard anything at this point. still a big mystery of what could have happened to this marine aircraft and those five marines, whether or not they are dead or alive, we don't know. >> thanks so much. we will take a few minutes to talk about grief and loss and a mom's love for her son. he bravely faced brain cancer.

you can make money the hard way as a bullfighter or a human cannonball... or save money the easy way, with xfinity mobile. existing customers can get a free line of our most popular unlimited plan for a year! not only will you save hundreds but you'll also be joining millions who have connected to america's most reliable 5g network.

sure is a lot safer than becoming a stuntman for money. get a free line of unlimited intro for a year when you buy one unlimited line. plus, get the new samsung galaxy s24 on us. things have gotten better recently, but too many businesses like mine are still getting broken into. it's time our police officers have access to 21st century tools to prevent and solve more crimes. allow public safety cameras that other bay area police departments have to discourage crime, catch criminals, and increase prosecutions. prop e is a smart step our city can take right now to keep san francisco moving in the right direction. please join me in voting yes on prop e. the final episode of my podcast about grief and loss, all there is, became available

today. this episode is made up some of the thousands of voice mails i received from listeners who called to talk about the people they lost and how to walk with grief. to put together this episode i listened tomore than 1,500 deeply moving and emotional calls. more than 50 hours of calls. tonight i want you to hear one of those calls who wants you to know the name of her beloved son. >> i'm calling because i want you to know my son's name. ian -- is my only child. he was 25 when diagnosed with brain cancer. we were told from the beginning it would take his life. he was left with daily seizures. his long time girlfriend left,

too much for her. he planned to marry her. it was just the three of us, mom, dad, and ian. the time was full of love and laughter but also terrifying mris to see if the other shoe, as they put it, finally dropped. october 2019 they offered to try to just keep him alive, no more talk of a cure. ian wanted to stop, i didn't want to lose him. i talked to him for three weeks and finally on halloween i asked him to tell me what he really wanted. i want to stay home, mom. i want to live, not just survive, he said. even if you know what can happen, i ask, yes, he said. i said, okay, i'll tell everyone to stop calling, no more appointments, no labs, no mris. my heart was breaking. ian looked at me with a huge smile. oh, mom, i'm so happy. on february 209, 2020, i held ian in my arms.

i could feel his heart pounding in my chest. i said it's all right, i love you. and i felt his heart stop. i was the first to hold ian when he was born and i was the last. he smiled and told me i was his best friend, what a difficult that was. all throughout his life we were goofy pals. ian knew that he was my favorite human. i'm still lost without him. >> i called mary back today and i talked to her for a while, and it meant a lot to know people all over the world would hear her son's name. to listen to the podcast you can point your camera on the qr code on your screen and a link will appear on your phone and you can click to download it. you'll find this episode and others on grief and loss on spotify or whenever you listen

to podcasts. talking about it and hearing other peoples stories, it helps. "the source" with kaitlan collins is next.

tonight, straight from "the source" it is being called an epic fail of lossess for republicans as another critical bill goes down. nikki haley is calling it total chaos, donald trump is celebrating, president biden is saying it's time for republicans to decide who they serve. also history in the making at the supreme court. nine justices will give their first indication of where they lean-in the fight over removing trump from the ballot ahead of the election for what he did after the last one. and we have new updates for you tonight as the u.s. striking back for the deaths of three americans in the middle east. a top mulithsa commander dead tonight, and there are dramatic new images and details. i'm kaitlan collins, and this is "the source.