i think he's having a midlife crisis i'm not. you got us t-mobile home internet lite. after a week of streaming they knocked us down... ...to dial up speeds. like from the 90s. great times. all i can do say is that my life is pre--

i like watching the puddles gather rain. -hey, your mom and i procreated to that song. oh, ew! i think you've said enough. why don't we just switch to xfinity like everyone else? then you would know what year it was. i know what year it is.

tonight on three 60, there is breaking news. a drone commander in the terrorist group lane for killing american troops and jordan is killed by an american drone strike in baghdad. also tonight, how a tough border deal that republicans demanded and a conservative obligate negotiated finally died, today. the massively use. keeping them honest. later, the high stakes tomorrow, especially for chief justice john roberts, as the supreme court takes up the question of keeping the former president of the ballot under the 14th amendment. good evening, thank you for joining us. we begin with the breaking news. the second and what president biden has said would be ongoing reprisals for the drone attack on american forces in jordan, which wounded dozens of troops and killed three. sergeant william rivers, specialist kennedy sanders, and specialist breonna moffitt.

tonight, reprisal came in the form of a drone strike on a target and baghdad. cnn's oren liebermann is at the pentagon with the latest. what more do we know about this? >> reporter: anderson, this strike was carried out wednesday night baghdad tied -- time in the city of baghdad itself. the target, according to three u.s. officials, and here you can see the results of that strike, was with some muhammad sauber all saudi, head of logistics as well as in charge of drone operations and rocket operations, according to a source familiar with kata'ib hezbollah and the popular mobilization units, which fall under iraq's military forces, their. kata'ib hezbollah is an iran- backed militant group inside of iraq, one of the most powerful, deaf 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 strike that killed three u.s. service members and wounded more in late january, but also approximately 170 other attacks on u.s. forces that have resulted in more than 100 and, rispone of them minor, but crucially, 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, one of the u.s. carried out sweeping strikes across iraq and syria, hitting more than 85 targets. there, the u.s. went after facilities, ammunitions, weapons, here, and if we can pull up that video, and you can see how precise and accurate this was. according to a u.s. and iraqi official, this was targeted at the vehicle that all saudi was and. going after him directly. the u.s. says this is part of that response that will be more to come, suggesting the u.s. may go after other leaders they hold responsible for attacking u.s. forces. anderson, u.s. central command says, according to early indications, there were no civilian casualties or collateral damage as part of the strike, but according to iraqi police, there was at least one other person inside that vehicle. >> it is amazing they were able to track this guy too into that vehicle and killed him, there. did the u.s. i notify iraqi officials before the strike? >> reporter: not and this case.

this is operating disinfection, as we have seen before, between the iraqi government and the u.s. government. the iraqi government called this new u.s. aggression, and said it undercuts understanding between washington and baghdad. you see, some of that frustration is boiling over. some iraqi politicians have vowed to try to remove u.s. and international forces from the country, and part of it is the anger over these strikes, especially without that prior notification. it is worth pointing out here anderson, that kata'ib hezbollah, again the iran- backed militant group that the u.s. holds responsible for many of these attacks on u.s. forces, not only part of what is part of the islamic existence in iraq, which the u.s. holds directly responsible for the deadly, strike but it is also part of the popular mobilization units, and that falls under iraqi government military forces. so, there you see some of the friction created when the u.s. goes after targets and baghdad [inaudible] terrorist targets and part of organizations that have targeted u.s. forces. the iraqi government sees this

differently, and how this friction plays out, well, we are about to find out. as we see how the u.s. and the iraqi government move forward here, despite the anger you are seeing. >> oren liebermann, thank you very much. after the chaos in congress, congressional republicans managed to do in the last 44 hours was not much. in that short time, they killed tough border legislation that once commanded with the senate putting the final nail in the coffin, today. also, it failed and what they try to do, what was -- which was impeach the homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas. >> on this vote, the yays are 2:14, the nays are two 16th. the resolution is not adopted. >> republicans failed because house speaker johnson did not count on democrat al green, who is recovering from surgery, turning up and voting. this prompted fellow republican congressman, thomas massie of kentucky, to tweet date, getting rid of speaker mccarthy has officially turned into an unmitigated disaster. that, intern, drew this response from speaker johnson.

>> well, look, it was a mask, what happened here, but we are cleaning it up and massie is one of my dear friends and colleagues and i don't think this is a reflection on the leader, it is a reflection on the body itself. the closer we come in this country. >> that is the leader who calls what happened eight mass, presided over the last, but does not think that presiding over sediments is a reflection of his leadership, which is, for his members to decide, certainly not us. as for what he calls the place where we come in this country, it is worth remembering what that place looks like, even to some republicans, especially to the conservative republican who negotiated the tough border [inaudible] 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 solve problems. there is no reason for me to have this ten if we are just going to do press conferences. i can do press conferences from anywhere, but we can only make lot from this room. >> except, of course, when they can't, which also put aid for ukraine and israel on ice because house republicans demanded it be tied to a border deal before doing at one 80 when the former president told them to. they are not the only ones following the trump line on this. here is senator lankford 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 contents of the bill, any of the contents, nothing was out at that point, he 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 salt this during the presidential election. by the way, they have been faithful to their promise, and have done everything they can to destroy me. >> well, that is where we are and the country, today. a commentator telling a senator they will try and destroy him for negotiating a deal that delivered on many conservative priorities, only to be shaved, essentially, by people who claim to be conservatives and -- at the behest of the leader who never really was a conservative, donald trump. for every senator betrayed, there are all the border officers left high and dry, all the asylum seekers stuck in a process that takes years to navigate, all the families losing loved ones too -- and all the cities struggling to care for migrants bust and by many republican governors, mostly, who said they were doing it because of the need

for tougher border security, which is exactly what this deal, now dead, would have delivered, at least for more than exists currently. courtesy of republican senator lankford, who negotiated it, and a handful of other republicans who did not to the former president's bidding and supported it, including alaska republican senator elise murkowski, who said this about the process. i have got to be multiple stages of grief today, i am just paced off. texas republican congressman dan crenshaw. thank you for being with us, congressman. you heard the senator murkowski saying she is picked off -- angry, are you, to use her words, angry? >> i will be angry every day that we have almost 300 illegal people crossing our border, most of them let loose and the u.s.. i am of the opinion we need a solution on this. i am very frustrated by this process. i think the senate process was destined to feel from the beginning. you put one senator in the room who is 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're not worried about the reelection. i have said from the beginning that this is -- what we should have done as republicans this fall of the playbook we did with you that ceiling, where we put an established set of negotiations as a baseline. that is hr to, that is our border bill. we started there, we say, that is what we want to go, we go straight to the white house, because biden is the one who is actually worried about his reelection, and then we do -- where we can make a deal. what we should be doing is sending that supplemental right back with h.r.2 attached, and so we finally enter the conversation. i am not part of the senate, i am part of the house. that is what i would do to keep this going because in the end, that is what i care about, it is border security. >> it is odd to hear -- and you pointed this out -- that republicans in the house are saying, we don't need a portability, who are supporting h.r.2, which was a border bill that passed in the house by republicans, but could 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 actually changed. >> i don't know, i guess i need to talk to -- i am not one of those republican, so i do know we need h.r.2. we need changes to our asylum laws, there are too many loopholes. we need to clarify the parole authority, which is being abused massively by this administration. we need to clarify and to law remain in mexico. we do need h.r.2, immigration laws have not been updated and far too long, and they have been exploited by the cartels, by people looking for a job and exploited on the left, cutting in front of the line of millions and millions of illegal immigrants. we absolutely need -- i am not one of those republicans saying we don't need changes and what. we have a historic opportunity to get those changes and lot now. i will never stop saying that. >> but that is what conservatives and the senate -- i mean, lankford, has said, which is that h.r.2 couldn't pass and the senate, and sometimes in law making, and

you know this better than i do, you need to make compromises in order to get stuff passed. this was the most conservative bill and -- biden agreed to it, probably because of the pickle he is and. it seems this was -- according to lankford, this was as good as conservatives could possibly get to get something done and move the ball down. >> the majority and the house would disagree, with we would think we could get more. we should try to do that. like i said, this process was -- from the start on part of republicans. it was flawed from the start because you put one person and there, make it completely secret, didn't do a communications plan with everybody surrounding them, didn't tell anyone what was and, it immigration law is extremely complicated so when it comes out everybody interprets that every which way. you have got to start with h.r.2 and go from there. of course there is a negotiation, but of course h.r.2 by itself has been and the senate, but we are adding

the supplemental to it. we are talking about ukraine aid, which is a -- very unpopular with publicans. but a couple of these things, and america wins in both ways. >> but it does -- that >> that is still michael. >> i understand your focus is on what happens in the house, but i think for it said, a commentator said to him, i am 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 said 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 the former president doesn't want any deal and republicans are not going to make any deal if the former president doesn't want it? >> here is what i say to people who think that they need to let illegal immigrants and gesture to hurt biden in the polls. mike measure of trump's that, i think you can beat biden. i will help you beat biden,

that is my message. [laughter] look, biden is unpopular in so many ways. people do not trust them on border security, or the economy, or various other issues. we need to actually solve the border crisis. it is also true there are people on both sides, and mostly in the activist groups, and there have been forever, that never want this problem solved. all viewers need to know this, right? on the left and the right, they make money by perpetuating this problem. >> but you are talking about donald trump? i understand you are saying it's activist groups, but that is donald trump, making money -- >> you want me to say that. >> i don't want you to, but you are a very honest guy and people on both sides of the aisle applaud you for that. he has put his thumb on the scale on this, and i understand the activist groups have agendas and make money off this, but he is making money off this and is running an election. this is perhaps a winning issue for him, and he does not want improvement despite all the

talk of national security issues, he doesn't want a deal. >> i mean, look, you would have to ask, and you would have to pull a quote from him that i can respond to. >> right, but lots of people in the house have said that. there is a lot of republicans and the house who supported h.r. 2 who are now saying, we don't need any border deal at all, the only reason they are saying it is -- >> they aren't wrong! then i disagree with them. i disagree with him and conversations today on the floor. they are wrong! look, if we don't need water loss, i would pass h.r. 2. trump needed to borderless on he was president. heat needed lost changed. what he ended up doing, which was great, was making a deal with mexico. he did the remain in mexico policy. created the asylum cooperation agreements with northern triangle countries. that is what he ended up having to do. i know you want me to get into a fight with trump, i am not going to do it. >> i'm not trying to get you to get into a fight -- >> what is true is, we need a border deal. >> before i let you go, you are

obviously a navy seal, you served in iraq, what is your reaction to the u.s. striking back to? baghdad? >> it's great! anytime you make it more dangerous for someone to be promoted and kata'ib hezbollah, i think it is a good day. i am glad they are doing it. sounds like it was a good strike, sounds like there was no additional casualties, obviously some good intel that led up to that, and it is a good hit. i think we need to continue seeing more of it. i think we need to know the administration meant what they said when they said we will keep doing this for a period of time. i think that is important and deterrence is important. that part of the world, honestly, the entire world, only understand strikes. when you say peace through strength, you can't forget about the strength part. i have no complaints. >> great to talk to you. think you. >> thanks. >> coming up next, what political strategist james carville makes of the mess and whether it has traction with voters, given how it's -- important polling says the

border is with them. also, a preview of tomorrow's supreme court oral arguments in a case that could keep the former president off the ballot for what he did to overturn the election he lost. we will be right back.

at a fund-raiser in new york, biden took aim at the men who vote republican lawmakers

to see people wouldn't let it station that wants demanded. former president trump, when he said would, quote, rather weaponize the issue than actually solve it. this fall's remarks yesterday which seem to be a new tax for president biden in a newly explicit part of his campaign. >> every day between now and november, the american people are going to 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 a regular wednesday conversation on the stage of the campaign. james, good to see you. so, you hear president biden, does this gop chaos, the portability, failed mayorkas impeachment, does it help him? does it create a political opening for him? >> president loves historians, i would give historians the 1948 campaign. this congress can't pass gas. he needs to run against a do nothing congress, and i think that can give him some traction that he did not have before. maybe they could get rudy giuliani to be speaker and he

could pass gas, we know for sure. but this is almost comical. >> it does seem -- obviously, 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 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? >> well, from what i know about the bill, i am not an expert on the border, but they were all kinds of provisions that would have made it better. by the way, donald trump is not in the congress of the united states. he is not and house of representatives. all he needed was a few senators to go along, all the democratic senators were go for it. the idea that trump is the fault of all this -- if you saw carlos and clint shot at the mardi gras, he was shocking and

driving [laughter] he didn't say what he was really thinking, but i think the president has an opening to run against a do nothing congress. i think that is a valid observation and i think it will hold up well over a period of time. >> some would look and say, well, riot republican sinking that killing a border deal would be beneficial to the trump campaign? there is the obvious recent of not giving it any kind of victory to biden helping trump, but if voters are aware that the former president is the one saying, don't do this, i assume that would be a certain amount of outrage over that, although i guess among his core supporters, that doesn't really matter. >> well, he really -- he can't just run among his core supporters. you have to be constant. you have to talk all the time about a do nothing congress. every time the democrats are asked about this to say, look, we negotiated in good faith and it was a two nothing congress.

public understands that trump doesn't have a vote. those 49, i think, republican senators, and 221 are republican house members -- the onus should be on them, and if they want to say, well, donald trump controls your duly elected representatives, and say that. but i don't think that is a very satisfactory answer to 55% of the american people, i really don't. >> you famously have the line of, the economy is stupid. you talk about running against a do nothing congress, and obviously president biden is focusing a lot on the former president. . is the economic message -- should that be front and center? there is certainly some good economic news, i believe. >> right, but the people live in the economy and feel it. we know from the clinton and obama years that it takes -- you have to go deep into a recovery where people are feeling it, and i think you should talk about things that

have been done to help families cope with the cost of living increases, like prescription drugs or releasing the petroleum reserve, or other things they have done to clear up the supply chain. it is hard -- if you tell people that live in a good economy and they don't think they do, they think that you don't understand their lives. and i think he can talk about things he has done and the infrastructure bill, which is a real magnificent achievement, but i don't agree that this should go out -- he should go out and tell people how great this economy is. you have to let people fill the economy and they can talk about measures that they have taken to help people be able to -- 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 to you, man. >> yeah, wish i was there. all right, take care. >> thank you. >> coming up, the former president once called supreme judge bri chief justice john roberts an absolute disaster, his words. tomorrow, his legal team appears before the roberts

court, where he will need the support of the chief justice and -- and states that want to exclude him under what is known as the constitution's insurrection band. we will take a preview of that case, next.

a pivotal moment for the former president as the presidents white house aspirations tomorrow. his attorney argued before the supreme court about by the 14th amendment insurrection ban does not apply to him, and why it would be unconstitutional for states like colorado and maine to leave him off any ballot.

it is also agnostic intricate moment for chief justice john roberts who, has a reputation for trying to take a measured approach when dealing with issues of extreme partisanship. paula reid tonight has more. >> reporter: cnn today captured this, exclusive footage of former president trump's legal team wrapping up its final preparations for tomorrow's historic supreme court arguments. trump's top lawyers and advisers gathered for mark arguments, part of a more disciplined approach they are taking to this pivotal case. after turning several recent hearings and other cases and two campaign stops -- >> i want to be at every trial day. i want to watch this witch hunt myself -- >> reporter: trump is not expected to attend the supreme court arguments. arguing on trump's behalf will be jonathan mitchell, a former texas solicitor general. this will be his sixth appearance before the high court. >> supreme court justices are ultimately political appointments. >> reporter: the trump team's

come fit in 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 therefore cannot appear on the ballot. >> frankly, president trump didn't engage. he didn't carry a pitchfork to the capitol grounds, he did lead a charge. >> reporter: and the years long lead up to thursday's arguments, the anti trump opponents looked for states where they believed 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 colorado and maine taking him off the primary ballot. even california opted to include trump. trump's team insists states should not be able to deprive voters of their choice of candidates. >> this whole thing is rigged, election interference. >> reporter: this case is not just a test for trump, the justices also 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 and i'll, we do not caucus and separate rooms. we do not serve one party or one interest. we serve one nation. >> reporter: roberts, under pressure to build consensus. >> his case puts the court in a tough position anyway around. i think they would rather not be thinking about these issues. but it is what the democracy requires and what the constitution requires at this moment. we think the court will rise to that occasion. >> reporter: after tomorrow's arguments, trump's lawyers need to quickly pivot to eight another case they would like to bring before the justices. they have only until monday to signal to the high court they want to appeal yesterday's decision, saying that trump doesn't have presidential immunity to shield him from the january 6th prosecutions. anderson, it is unclear if the

justices will weigh in there, but it is just another example of how influential the supreme court is going to be throughout this 2024 campaign season. >> well, thank you so much. joining me now is jennifer rogers, a former federal prosecutor carrie cordero, former counsel to the u.s. assistant attorney general for national security. what do you expect, jennifer, to hear tomorrow? >> i expect to hear a lot because the court has not been specific about the arguments that it is willing to hear, so there are a lot of arguments at play. arguments about universal arguments about whether the supplies to trump, whether the presidents and officer, universal arguments about whether the precipitation is self executing or not. arguments about whether colorado properly handled this case under their own laws, and the arguments about whether in fact he participated in and insurrection. so, everything is on the table. it is really unusual for them not to narrow it down for them against, but that is what is happening. >> how low does it go for, to you think? >> they have given each side, i think, 40 minutes. the main two, and then 20 minutes for a couple other

participants. i think the clock will just run, they will just keep asking questions, probably a couple of hours. >> and carrie, what do you think are the former president strongest and weakest arguments in the case? >> well, 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 and insurrection. this is related to the issue that china part mentioned regarding whether or not the section three is self executing. and other parts, and colorado, the basis for the disqualification was based on the facts that were revealed through a five-day trial, and that established the record that he engaged in the insurrection. and the main case that was mentioned and policy piece, that was a secretary of state determination. the law, and in terms of section three or the colorado law, and as you hear, doesn't

play out the standards by which the court is able to make that judgment as to whether he engage the insurrection. i think the absence of the guidance on how that decision is made is something that the justices will need to take and to an order to determine whether there is a substantial basis to take the drastic step of disqualifying a candidate. >> and jennifer, i am understand the court has a supermajority of conservatives. are there just as you will be watching closely or listening to closely? >> certainly roberts because he is the center of the court, the chief, but also the most moderate of the republicans. i think he will want to have as close to a unanimous decision as he can. one person who might go with him is elaina kagan, who is very much and institutionalist. if she is thinking about the reputation of the court and giving guidance to lower courts and all of these officials

around the country, it might be something that roberts can bring along for a position that might rely on someone of these legal basis to say he can stay on the ballot. >> carrie, what do you think the chances are that the supreme court actually wrote the former president from the ballot? that seems -- what do you think? >> i think it is less likely, anderson. i think there are so many pieces that would all have to go in the same direction so 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 actually is not, based on different sections of the constitution. they would have to find he engaged, that colorado was correct in determining he engaged in the insurrection. they would have to find it is self executing. so, we have to keep in mind that colorado is the outlier in terms of all the different states that have considered this issue, and i think it's less likely the court upholds the disqualification, but we will see how the court rules.

>> jennifer, do you agree with that? >> i do, i do. i think it is very unlikely they will uphold the colorado opinion. not because that is not the way it should go, if you really are just looking at the law, i just think as a practical matter, they don't want the chaos that ensues won 50 states with 50 different standards applied them in different ways and the heat of the primary season. >> jennifer rodgers thank you so much, gary cordero, thank you as well. quick programming note, tomorrow night we will have a two hour special on those supreme court arguments. i will be joined by kaitlan collins, that starts tomorrow at eight pm eastern time. coming up tonight, we will go to the white house for more on the strikes against some of the u.s. -- someone the u.s. military says are responsible for the attack in georgia last week that killed three u.s. soldiers. we also go to the california for the latest on the u.s. had military helicopter that went missing and was found. the question is, where the five marines who were on board?

two leading candidates for senate. two very different visions for california. steve garvey, the leading republican, is too conservative for california. he voted for trump twice and supported republicans for years, including far right conservatives. adam schiff, the leading democrat, defended democracy against trump and the insurrectionists. he helped build affordable housing, lower drug costs, and bring good jobs back home. the choice is clear. i'm adam schiff, and i approve this message.

more now on breaking news that he will strike against the commander of iranian-backed militia group responsible for attacks on u.s. soldiers, including the one that killed three soldiers in jordan last week. again, new video of the aftermath of the attack, which took place in baghdad. president biden is authorized strikes in more than 80 targets in the region since that attack. earlier republican congressman dan crenshaw on our said wanted he wanted to continue the. strikes also wesley clark, cnn military analyst and former nato supreme allied commander.

what is the white house saying about the strike? >> anderson, the administration is making clear tonight that what we saw tonight is not the end but this is just a part of the retaliation that the u.s. is conducting after the deaths of those three americans. you'll recall that immediately after that attack in jordan that took the lives that those american soldiers, the president was presented with a range of options and it was early last week that he gave the greenlight 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 execution of the strike to make sure that they could avoid the loss of innocent life. of course central command so far has said no casualties that they know are, they're no civilian casualties that they know of. you can see when you're watching that video just how important that caution would be, given that you see this is an area with cars and with people going by.

but anderson, it is very clear, white house officials saying this is part of the message that the president wants to send clearly. that message is that we will not hesitate to defend our people and hold responsible any and all who seek to harm americans. so all of this has everything to do, again, with those three american soldiers that were killed. >> general clark, it is remarkable to me that they could do such seemingly pinpoint strike on a street, on a vehicle. what's your assessment on how this was carried out? >> i think we've been watching these groups for sometime. we've been collecting information on them. we know the leaders of this group. they're very familiar to us. this very group fought against ice all back in 2014. it is been in the region for a long time. we probably have a lot of technology on them, radio calls, phone numbers, and even visual recognition. there are probably people that are paid informants from these

groups. it's a variety of means, but we track it, we watch, it we wait for the opportunity to emerge and then we get permission and go through a checklist before we launch a strike like this, at very high level approval to. do it >> in general clark, to also 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're going to go after the leadership directly. when the 85 targets that were hit in the seven target areas, there was a delay. a lot of people said well, the top people got away. this particular guy may have been one of those target boxes and got away. we know who he is, where he lived and how he's moving and we took him out. and the others who were working against us could expect the same thing. >> mj, we talked to oren liebermann about this a little bit earlier in the program.

talking a bit about the challenges of u.s. launching attacks on iraqi soil. >> you're seeing that response pretty immediately from the iraqi government saying that this is new aggression by the u.s. and it breaks all understandings that stand between the u.s. and iraq. the reality is that the iran- backed groups that are based in iraq have been launching these kinds of provocations and attacks against u.s. forces on u.s. bases for a long time now, but we have seen all of that escalate since the israel-hamas war began back in october. i think it's important to keep in mind that it is with this is the backdrop that we are starting to see the beginnings of the conversations between the u.s. and iraqi governments about pulling u.s. forces permanently out of iraq. we've seen those calls grow at the strikes and retaliation. has also escalated. that sort of brings an additional urgency to these conversations that have already been urgent and sensitive.

>> general clark, how careful does the u.s. not need to be not to alienate the iraqi government? >> i think the united states has to be has to defend its forces, to maintain its precision there, and try to push deterrents against iran. so look, it's a lot in the interest of the iraqi government forces to leave. there may be some pressure. they may go through the motions of this. it's not in our interests to leave. we have an arrangement with the iraqi government. we are helping them avoid becoming a complete vassal state of iran and then being alienated from the other nations in the persian gulf. so they don't want us to leave. we are working this up and it's what you see on the surface and there is what he said. >> mj, wesley clark. the u.s. military helicopter in california and five aboard who

were missing late last night, went missing late last night. the marine corps says they have found a helicopter. stephanie yellen joins us now with the latest. what do we know about this helicopter? and where these u.s. troops are? >> unfortunately anderson we don't have information on where those five marines are. we do know that they were able to find their helicopter just after 9 am local time today. we're talking about as he age 53 e super stallion helicopter that took off from creek air force base, just north of las vegas nevada, and was fined just north of san diego to the mega marine corps station mayor in my. or the last thing they got from the aircraft was at around 11:30 pm pacific time. then around 2:20 in the morning, early this morning, that's what cal fire were sent to look for them in engines an ambulance as well and the conditions were so bad as i talked to cal fire earlier today they said it was muddy in

the visibility was really low. because of the snow coming down they actually got out of the vehicles and started searching on foot and couldn't do it any further and resume that search this morning when they found the aircraft. but what is unclear at this point is what is the condition of the five marines who were on that aircraft. that is what we don't know as of this time right now. >> when is the next update? when do you expect an update from the military? >> interestingly, there was a press conference that was scheduled earlier today. we waited for an hour to get information and then they just canceled it in said they would come back to everybody when they had more information. so we don't have any information. considering that this is so much later, going almost 12 hours later, this is odd that we haven't heard anything at this point. but 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 just don't know right now. >> stephanie elam, thank you. we're gonna take a few minutes

to talk about grief and loss and we're gonna talk to a mother and her son. who bravely faced brain cancer.

>> the final absolute podcast about grief and loss, all there is, became available today. this episode is made up of some of the thousands of voicemails i received from listeners who called talk about the people they've lost and how they walk with grief. to put together this episode

and listened to more than 1500 deeply emotional calls, more than 50 hours of calls. tonight i want you to hear from one of those colors. mary, who very much wants you to know the name of her beloved sign, ian alexander canaan. >> my name is mary. i'm calling because i want you to know my son's name. ian alexander canaan is my only child. he's 25 when diagnosed with brain cancer. we were told from the beginning it would take his life. they floated around further and number of years, but whose letters daily seizures. he is long time girlfriend left. too much for her. he planned to marry her. it was just three of us, mom dad and ian. a time of love and laughter but

also terrifying mris to see if the other shoe, is they put it, finally dropped. october of 2019 they offered to try to just keep him alive. no more talk of a cure. this meant constantly at the hospital. ian wanted to stop. i didn't want to lose him. i talked with 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 to survive, he said. i said you know what can happen? yes, he said. i said okay, i'll tell everyone to stop calling. no more appointments. no labs, no mris. my heart was breaking. you looked at me with a huge smile. mom, i'm so happy. i've every 29th, 2020, i healthy in my arms. i could feel his heart pounding in my chest. i said it's all, right ian, i've got you, i love you. and i felt his heart stop.

i was the first to hold iran when he was born and i was the last, he smiled all marries his best friend. what a gift that was. all throughout his life we were goofy powell's. ian knew that he was my favorite human. it's such a lost without him. >> i called mary back today, and i talked to her for a while. amid a lot to her the to know that people all over the world would hear her son's name, ian alexander like heinen. you can put your camera to the qr code on the screen in a link will appear on your phone to downloaded. to find the episode and others on grief and loss on the apple podcast or spotify, or wherever you may happen to listen to podcasts. grief can feel very lonely, but you're not alone in talking about it and hearing other people stories, it helps. the source, with kaitlan collins, is next.

>> >