continue -- you look like a smurf here who is just going around and all that stuff. >> a smurf. a member of congress calling another member of congress a smurf. but the most shocking and disturbing exchange today was in the senate hearing between republican senator markwayne mullin of oklahoma and former mma fighter and the president of the teamsters union, sean o'brien. senator bernie sanders was even forced to step in as referee. please watch this. >> if you want to run your mouth, we are two consenting adults, we can finish it here. >> okay, that's fine, perfect. >> you want to do it? now >> i would love to do right now. >> you stand up. >> hold on. >> no, no, sit down. you are a united states senator. >> okay, okay. >> sit down, please. >> bernie was not having it. and neither should we. i know it's funny and crazy and we laugh and we roll our eyes

at these grown men that are behaving in such a ridiculous way. but it is also deadly serious. and it should be called out for what it is, dangerous. we must demand more of our leaders. and on that note, i wish you a peaceful and a good night. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thank you for staying up late. see you again tomorrow. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> it is easy to become desensitized to the litany of outrageous things that donald trump has said over the years. but there is a reason that historians are concerned about mr. trump's latest stump speech. >> we pledge to you that we will root out the communists, marxists, fastest's, and the radical left thugs that live

like vermin within the confines of our country. the threat from outside forces is far less sinister, dangerous, and grave none the threat from within the. >> calling your political opponents vermin and the threat from within, we've heard that before. in mine collins, adolf hitler referred to jews as vermin of eradication, and benito mussolini referred his opponents as parasites and reptiles. so donald trump is following in some appalling and notorious footsteps of the most violent dangerous man of the 20th century, or at least some of them. and trump did not end there. here he was in the very same stump speech talking about the home invasion and the brutal attack on speaker nancy pelosi's husband, an attack that was carried out by a right-wing extremist. >> nancy pelosi, who is a crazed lunatic, she's a lunatic.

she is a crazed lunatic. what the hell was going on with her husband? let's not ask. let's not ask. i'll withdraw that statement. by the way, she's got a wall around her house. obviously, in that case, it didn't work very well. >> nancy pelosi is a crazed lunatic. that kind of glorification of violence, that call to abandon empathy, to stop seeing our shared humanity. that is no longer just donald trump. that rhetoric and that behavior has invaded trump's entire party. here was trump's closest rival for the republican nomination, governor ron desantis, in a radio interview today mocking former governor nikki haley for expressing grief over the killing of george floyd in 2020. >> you know, i remember when the george floyd riots were happening, i called out the national guard.

i said i'm standing with police. but she was tweeting that it needed to be personal and painful for every single person. and i'm thinking to myself, why did that need to be personal and painful for you or me? we had nothing to do with it. it just shows an example of her adopting this left-wing mindset and accepting the narrative. we need leaders who are going to fight the narrative. >> now, the narrative, to be clear here, according to a jury's verdict is that george floyd was brutally murdered as officers back the officer who press the knee into george floyd's neck for nearly nine minutes as those onlookers begged for them to stop. but according to governor desantis, any pain, any perceived pain for the public murder of an innocent american means you are somehow capitulating to the left wing and it's agenda. this is trump's effect on the republican party, a party whose worship of white male machismo

appears to be turning into something brutal and cruel, where violence isn't just an accepted outcome in american life, but a necessary outcome. know where was that more on display none in the halls of congress today. for months now, republican senator markwayne mullin has been in a feud with the head of the teamsters union, because the union president had referred to senator mullin as a greedy ceo. today, the head of that union, sean o'brien, testified before the senate health and labor committee, where senator mullin revisited sean o'brien's invitation to settle their dispute anyplace, anytime, cowboy. >> sir, this is a time, this is a, place you want to run your mouth, we can be two consenting adults, we can finish it here. >> okay, that's fine, that's perfect. >> you want to do it now? >> i would love to do it now. >> stand up and do it. >> you stand up and do it. >> no, hold on, stop. sit down. no, you're a united states senator, sit down.

>> you are a united states senator, sit down. the wheels are coming off here. a chain reaction started by donald trump now has republicans not just ready to bra with democrats, but brawl with each other. just a few hours ago, republicans, under the leadership of speaker mike johnson, could not agree on a way to fund the government. and so, they had to do what they always now have to do in this congress, which is to rely on democrats. with 209 democrat votes and 127 republican votes, the house managed to pass the resolution to fund the government for a few more months after weeks of infighting among republicans. if you are a republican right now, this is all completely embarrassing. the party ousted its last speaker for relying on democratic votes to get something done, then held the government hostage while trying to figure out who could possibly lead the republican conference. finally, electing a hard liner who once again had to rely on

democratic votes to get the thing done. if that call wasn't shameful enough for the gop, the last republican house speaker, kevin mccarthy, is reportedly lashing out at the members who cost him that job in the first place. and when i say lashing out, i mean that literally. today, npr reporter claudia rue solace was interviewing republican congressman tim burchett, when the congressman claimed former speaker of the house kevin mccarthy intentionally elbowed him in the kidney. here is the audio from that incident, captured by npr. >> why do you only me in the back, kevin? hey kevin, you got any guts? jerk. >> has he done that before? >> no. >> that's a new move. >> i'm going to go talk to him. >> hey kevin, why to walk behind an elbow me in the back? >> you've got no guts. you did so. they sat down or said it right there. what kind of chicken move is that? >> your pathetic, man.

>> kevin mccarthy later denied that he hit congressman burchett with yet in other display of embarrassing machismo. >> show me a reporter who saw that. if i elbowed someone, they would know i did it. >> he said he wasn't in pain. >> oh, come on now. >> joining me now is npr's congressional correspondent claudia car salah's, who was the reporter talking to congressman byrd should at the time of that incident. claudia, first, just tell me from your perspective what happened. did you see kevin mccarthy actually run up on the congressman as you are interviewing him? >> great to be with you alex. i was focused on brigitte. i was -- is coming up this long hallway, it was a distance from the meeting room. republicans were just meeting and he had just come over to my side of the hallway. we were speaking. so i was fully focused on him. he had maybe said one sentence

to me before he lunch towards. me rub out two feet apart. said he is about a foot towards me. and it was just such a shock. i remember burchett yelling out to mccarthy, initially joking, saying, hey, kevin, didn't mean to elbow. and then he switched and said why did you elbow me in the back, kevin. and i start to look at that, point realized, that's mccarthy, that's his detail, they walk by. and initially, i thought it was a joke, maybe a joking, shove of some, kind of a bump. but from what it looked like from my perspective, mccarthy had shoved into burchett. it appeared to be an elbow, as burchett claimed. >> you know, you think about this incident that you captured, both in audio and on social media. and we are now talking about it, with a quote from former congressman, republican adam kinzinger, who in his book, writes about once i was standing in the aisle that runs from the floor to the back of the chamber.

as mccarthy passed with his security man and some of his boys, mccarthy veered towards me, hit me with his shoulder, and then kept going. it is bodychecking a fellow republican who run afoul him a thing for speaker mccarthy? i know your congressional reporter, claudia. how much of this is something that he does? i mean, have you heard about this before? >> not before today. it is -- it has been a concern for me in terms of how high tensions have been running, especially within the house republican conference, especially since mccarthy was ousted. i have been worried about physical altercations between members. i wrote a piece last week about members in the public infighting. but as where it would build up to a mom, it was just very surreal that it happened to play out right in front of my eyes today. but in terms of mccarthy's history, no, i was not familiar with it. i heard about kinzinger's experience, just today from his book. and it's quite shocking to you both, to hear that case, and

see what i saw today. >> can you talk a little bit more about the sort of tenor, well, the temperature, actually, inside a republican conference? we are seeing, you know, the explosions of anger in the senate and the house. the -- front runner for the republican nomination is's making anger part of his brand. what has been effective in all of that in terms of the legislative body? how does a feeling congressman? >> i think we're seeing a play out. this is a perfect storm. it has been building all year. how speaker mike johnson spoke to him earlier today, before i had shared what i had seen, and he's talking about this pressure cooker in the house, and something that we had been wondering about, especially since october, when mccarthy was speaker, he canceled two weeks of recess. and the work, the struggles, the tensions, the fighting that we saw in the house republican conference go through in october, i just exacerbated a lot of sore feelings that were there earlier, from earlier in the year, they played out.

now, republicans were worried about the threats from fellow republican constituents. so, it is very worrisome. in some ways, it is not surprising to see this play out now, but in others, it's very shocking. >> claudia grisales, may i suggest elbow pads, shoulder pads, whatever you need to keep doing your job with this essential reporting. claudia grisales from npr, thank you for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> joining me now is jamelle bouie, new york times opinion columnist. his latest piece of today is titled trump wants to know that he will stop at nothing in 2025. jamele, thank you for joining me. i can think of no better person to help sort of break down what exactly has happened to the grand old party here under the tutelage, if you will, of donald trump. first of all, what did you make of the fireworks, i guess, is the most euphemistic term that we saw in congress today, in the context at the age of trump?

>> on one hand, you can attribute some of the aggression, maybe to trump. you can attribute the real anger and the stain that appears to be the republican conference. on the other hand, i remember 2010, 2012 cycle with the tea party and everything, i remember the sort of -- set to those members were up a polak and aggressive, and so forth. i think the difference between now and then right is that now, there are no, no really moderating in the conference. not to say that there were some prior, but there are none now. there is nothing to bring the temperature down, and you have a new crop of members who don't seem to be interested in governing whatsoever. so, all of that together means you have the kind of situation where you're going to have the fireworks that we saw today. >> i do wonder, totally agree with you that there is no moderating influence, but it seems like it's a step beyond the when you talk about 2010, and of course, joe wilson says you lied to president obama. a purse has been the gop thing, but this almost --

we seem to be in a moment where violence and anger and outbursts are incentivize. i'll go back to the piece he wrote today in the new york times. i'll go back to the piece he wrote today in the new york times. >> it's not there an acceleration or hyperbole to say, it looks like an awful lot like trump's planned could have been reelected. it looks awful like a supplants meant to give the former president the power and unchecked authority of a strongman. i feel like having a sort of idol who is a strongman or wants to be even more of an unchecked strongmen, almost gives license and encourages footsoldiers to be their own miniature happy meal version of strongmen.

>> one thing you see, throughout the republican party is the rejection at the idea of persuasion, rejection of doing any kind of way of attempt to speak to someone who disagrees with you on an equal basis and try to bring them to your side. within the republican party, i think we're focusing on that right now, where it's not just a rejection of anything like dialogue or persuasion with democrats, but even amongst republicans, no attempt to do anything to reach out for people to persuade people. but more broadly, the republican party nationally, there's trump, obviously, the entire notion of trying to seize power is in some sense of rejection at the idea that you're doing the work of democratic life. there are state legislatures who create these intense

gerrymanders and try to overturn and nullify the actions. again, this idea that there is no democracy to do anymore. we're just going to dominate over everyone around. does this really does seem to be the dominating ethos of so much of the republican party, and it's hard to know what to do about it, about this observant, and hope that it burns itself out. >> i will also say to the point of, like there is no working across the aisle, no democracy worth preserving. the recent that republicans are not shutting down the government, because democrats dug up and save their butts. like, the irony here, as trump vilifies the fascist left, the fastest left is actually saving your butts in congress. with asking nothing than a functioning government. i gotta ask you, jamele, this is so indicative of where the republican party's head is at today.

this is senator markwayne mullin, again, senator markwayne mullin on newsmax today, sort of making a historical reference as to why it's totally fine to come to blows in the u.s. senate. let us take a listen. >> could you guys go barnacle if you want to do? >> you know the rules, and he smelled the cane. you can remember president henry jackson challenged nine guys to a dual, and won nine times. and a guy one-time, jackson jumped up, ran across the table and knock the guy out. so, at the end of the day, there is precedence for, if that is something with someone wants to do. >> just a word on precedents, andrew jackson, if republicans are taking their cues from the presidency of andrew jackson, houston, we have a problem.

secondly, they got he was skating, i believe was abolitionists charles sumner. talk about two chapters of american history that are probably not where you want to be drawing your marching orders from, jamele? >> yeah, i don't know if i would want to -- i don't know if i'd want to compare myself to president brooks canning of charles sumner. it really was this major event in the history of congress, really galvanized a lot of forces. this glorification, this willingness to speak privately, to act properly, again, it speaks to this -- not just immaturity or aggression or rejection of the base and premise of democratic life, which is that we're going to talk to each other. persuade each other, an attempt to engage each other as equals. saying, i would burn out in congress. in a statement, indicating of

seven or, there was a statement. i don't feel any obligations, and that is just not. you can't run a legislative society like that. >> yes, i think that is the takeaway, it's not just congress. you cannot run a society like that. jamelle bouie, thank you, my friend, for your rhythm and thought. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> we have a lot to get to this evening, including president biden, who is strong a serious contrast with his predecessor, donald trump, on making the most important, the most urgent issue of our lifetimes. plus, the leaked tapes of jenna ellis and sidney powell telling georgia prosecutors what they knew about the conspiracy case and what trump knew, that is next. type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone. ♪ ♪ i got the power of 3. i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. i'm under 7. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. i'm lowering my risk. adults lost up to 14 pounds. i lost some weight. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had

medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. living with type 2 diabetes? ask about the power of 3 with ozempic®. >> amateur is not late for this

evening, but i was with my team, making sure that an emergency machine got filed. i'm not happy that it was released, and your junior colleague got to your story. >> your story that fulton county d. a. fani willis was referring to today is the washington post reporting on the proffer agreements, effectively confessions, from some of trump's codefendants to accept a plea deals in georgia's election interference case. from what we have seen and red,

there are both colorful details and substantive revelations, and the colorful category, the fact that sydney powell's first time meeting codefendant scott hall happen to be on an alligator hunt. as for substantive, president trump asked kenneth just burrow for a five questions about the matter of arizona. and chesebro described for trump's memo on the fake elector scheme. there was also a coup plot revealed to jenna ellis at a white house christmas party. this is what she told prosecutors about a conversation she had with tom's trump's top aide, dan scavino. >> he said an excited tone, we don't care, and we're not going to leave. i said, what do you mean, and he said, well, the boss, meaning president trump. the boss is not going to leave under any circumstances. we are just going to stay in power. i said to him, it is not quite work that way, relies.

he said, we don't care. >> joining us now is mimi roker, the district attorney of was county, new york, and the former district attorney in the southern district of new york. thank you for being here. let's pick up or jenna ellis left off there, this idea that dance given a told her, we're just going to stay in power, i had to read it there. we are just going to stay in power. seems like a searing indictment that can be used in court, is it hearsay, how does this qualify as a piece of evidence? >> the fact that you know to ask if it is hearsay shows that this was the plan. >> i should get a lot degree. >> first of all, i would say, yes, this is a damaging testimony if it comes in, why? because it shows that it was a

plan, not that he really believed that he won the election but rather this was the plan. i think her testimony in one a day questions was, why listened to you over some other lawyers? well, because we are telling them what they wanted to hear. >> that was sidney powell this at the. >> yes, yes. >> that would negate a sort of defense of -- >> advice of counsel. >> exactly, and sticking your head and the sand, but you can't do, all of that. slept stunted flee, this is bad for trump, 100%. but the fact that it is out is a very bad, i think, for the prosecution. >> can you talk more about the. obviously, fani willis is not happy about this. she wants a protective order, file for an emergency protective order on top of the protective order that she asked a judge for. a decision i believe will be made in two weeks about that. why is this bad for her beyond people knowing what the goods are that she has?

or is there not a beyond? >> it's mostly that, because it's not just people. now, the defense, the people that she has prosecuted have a complete preview of some of the most, as we're discussing, damaging testimony. now, maybe they already knew this, maybe they know it through discovery, the defense moved that way was given to, but now everyone knows it, and the jury poll knows it, so it's a better argument for the defense to change the jury pool. it prejudices all the arguments why in a court that trump is facing prosecution, people are arguing he should be limited in what he can say publicly, because this is the same thing. you have public statements going out there are prejudicial to him. this is the kind of thing as a prosecutor, you see this come out, and your heart starts having petitions. it is not good to have this out there, i don't think. >> does the release of it presumably from one of the

defendants who had access to it in the discovery process, does it count as a form of witness intimidation, putting this out there like the, suggesting to other witnesses, don't talk? >> i mean, her argument in her motion is that it is clearly intended to intimidate witnesses. i don't know if i uglier clearly, but you can certainly have that effect, because if you are someone who is going to cooperate, you say, wait a minute, i thought what i told you was confidential, at least until or unless there is a trial, which there may or may not be. you say that to potential witnesses, all the time as prosecutors. we say, what you tell us, we'll keep confidential, yes, we'll have to turn it over to the defense at some point, may or may not go to trial, so you may or may not have to testify. there are a lot of steps to

becoming a public, and so, the impact of that one on someone's willingness to come forward and tell you everything and, to in this particular circumstance, with the reality of the world that we're in, we know that people who support trump and follow trump and believe that this is not a prosecution with integrity, will come after people who are saying things because they're saying something bad against trump, not a surly because of anything else. >> i do have to ask you, just because, it seems like the first evidence, though leaked and problematic for valueless, the first evidence that we may have connecting trump to the fake electors plot is maybe given by kenneth chesebro, who in his agreement and the videotapes says that he has a conversation with the president

about the matter of arizona, and then described trump's memo on the fake elector scheme. how meaningful is that, setting aside the obvious concerns about witness intimidation and what does the prosecution? >> again, i think substantively, all of this is good evidence for the prosecution. does not mean that there is not a defense, does not mean that there is not evidence that trump and others are gone, but it is good evidence for the prosecution, which, again, is actually why i think the prosecution does not want it to come out ahead of time. i do think that it is

surprising that there was not a protective order in place. that was one of my first thoughts, when i heard this come out. i understand that she had asked for one. the judge had ruled on, but this is a case where -- >> obviously want one. >> you want to follow up on it. >> the a willis said about the possible timing of the trial here, i think this case will be on appeals for years, but i believe in that case, there will be a trial, take many months. i don't expect that will conclude under the winter work, the very early part of 2025. what is your reaction to that? >> i come from a school of shorter is better, so while i recognize that there are many defendants here, i think one as a just trial strategy matters streamline and, also, i am not saying that they're right, but it will give, it will give momentum to the argument that this is interfering within an election if it goes to that time period, although -- >> donald trump would like to have extended to 2025, on the hopes that he is reelected and can't do something about it. we're not quite sure. mimi rocah, thank you for helping me understand just how bad and also strong some of this is. we have a lot more to get to tonight. tens of thousands of people gathered in d. c. today to march for israel, but what that specifically means depends on who you talk to you. first, joe biden did something today that donald trump would never dare to do. what he did is coming up next.

liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. with the money i saved, i started a dog walking business. oh. [dog barks] no it's just a bunny! only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ >>you probably don't remenber

after switching to the farmer's dog we noticed so many improvements in remi's health. his allergies were going away

and he just had amazing energy. it looks like nutritious food, and it is. i'm investing in my dog's health and happiness. get started at longlivedogs.com

the detail after thanksgiving 2018. you are probably still stuffed with turkey or evading pie for breakfast or sleeping in they, or maybe you were in line on a black friday sale, who knows. that was actually at the point. because back in the day, on 2018, the day after thanksgiving, the trump administration released the fourth national climate assessment. most people, most americans probably have no recollection

of this. the timing was intentional. the report, which comes out roughly every five years, has been mandated by congress since 1990, and it serves to inform key policy decisions, from interstate emission rules to how many cooling shelters the team -- the city will need to survive a heat wave. to some degree, this is not surprising. the trump administration famously ignored scientific consensus on mandate climate change. it rolled back key environmental provisions and shouted international agreements that have thus far been earth's best shot as saving off catastrophic destruction as a result of a warming atmosphere. yes, the trump administration released a really important report on climate, when everyone was on a trip to fame on best buy. today, as we barrel towards the hottest year on record, but some things, at least, are different. this afternoon, president biden called out a major climate investment. he announced an estimated six billion dollars from the inflation reduction act and bipartisan infrastructure bill that will be used to help

bolster the electric grid, amid the growing threat of climate change. that threat was explicitly outlined in the governments fifth national climate assessment, which was also released today and not conveniently on the day after thanksgiving. hundreds of scientists across 14 federal agencies found that most aspects of american life, from our safety to our health to our economy are all invariably threatened in a hotter climate. desantis also critically connected the dots between climate change and extreme weather events. like last summer's extreme heat waves and wildfires and hurricanes. speaking today, biden called the climate change the ultimate threat to humanity, and he gave a nod to the previous occupant at the white house. >> the solutions are within reach, solutions are within reach.

it takes time for the investments to fully materialized, but we just had to keep at it, that's different from the previous administration, that tried to bury this report. they did not want to make sure that this report came to life. that lack of transparency is perhaps not a surprise come for the guy who consistently called climate change a mythical hoax. coming up, the war in gaza rages on, as hospitals turned into cemeteries, as massive crowds gather in d. c. to express solidarity with israel, that is next. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ get it with gurus. cargurus.

you know that feeling of having to rewash dishes that didn't get clean? i don't. cascade platinum plus... with double the dawn grease fighting power and double the scrubbing power. for a no rewash clean... and a cabinet ready shine. upgrade to cascade platinum plus. dare to dish differently. as americans, there's one thing we can all agree on. the promise of our constitution and the hope that liberty and justice is for all people. but here's the truth. attacks on our constitutional rights, yours and mine are greater than they've ever been. the right for all to vote. reproductive rights. the rights of immigrant families. the right to equal justice for black, brown and lgbtq+ folks. the time

to act to protect our rights is now. that's why i'm hoping you'll join me today in supporting the american civil liberties union. it's easy to make a difference. just call or go online now and become an aclu guardian of liberty. all it takes is just $19 a month. only $0.63 a day. your monthly support will make you part of the movement to protect the rights of all people, including the fundamental right to vote. states are passing laws that would suppress the right to vote. we are going backwards. but the aclu can't do this important work without the support of people like you. you can help ensure liberty and justice for all and make sure that every vote is counted. so please call the aclu now or go to my aclu.org and join us. when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special we the people t-shirt and much more. to show you're a part of the movement to protect the rights guaranteed to all of us by the us constitution. we protect everyone's rights,

the freedom of religion, the freedom of expression, racial justice, lgbtq rights, the rights of the disabled. we are here for everyone. it is more important than ever to take a stand. so please join us today. because we the people means all the people, including you. so call now or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty. >> tens of thousands of

demonstrators poured onto the national mall in washington d. c. to show their support for israel. among them were high-profile u.s. lawmakers like senate majority leader chuck schumer, and elected speaker of the house, mike johnson. the rally was called the march for israel, and it was a unity event, expression of solidarity with israel. but it was very apparent today that supporting israel in this moment means very different things to different people. uniting the crowd were calls to release the over 200 israeli hostages captured by hamas and messages denouncing the rise in antisemitism. but other issues divided the crowd. particularly the issue of a cease-fire. when one of the speakers, cnn's van jones, said he prayed for peace and for an end to rockets from gaza and bombs falling on

the people of gaza, the crowd began to drown out his speech with chants of no cease fire. >> [crowd chanting] >> joining me now is peter beinart. peter, thanks for being here tonight. what do you think, i mean tell me what your impressions of this march are beyond the sort of, we can all agree on these two things. what is the sort of, what is your take away from this sort of show of solidarity with moments of fracture? >> i'll be honest, i would've loved to be at this march. it's one of the biggest marches in jewish history. there's so much pain and suffering and agony in the jewish world today. all of us, including myself, no so many people who know other people who were captured or killed. the collective sense of solidarity, i would have loved to be there.

obviously antisemitism is rising. it's a very big problem. those hostages, we can't even imagine what their families are going through. but i personally couldn't go because this was also a rally in support of israel's invasion of gaza, which has killed, now, more than 4000 children, that's more children that died in armed conflict in the entire world in all of last year. and if you're gonna justify killing all of those children, you had better have really good answers about israel strategy is to win this war, and i have not heard them. it reminds me so much of america in 2002, 2003, we're gonna win, we're gonna destroy them. okay. what are you gonna do after you deposed gaza? we all know from experience, is easy to depose a government, it's easy to go, in it's hard to get out.

it israel stays there, it will be an insurgency as far as the eye can see, a quagmire. if they try to install the palestinian authority, which is totally discredited, the palestinian authority cannot hold gaza in 2007, and they are far weaker. so they will still be there. that's where i couldn't go. i can't justify this level of killing. i'm not sure i could at all. but certainly not without good answers to hard questions. >> yeah. the washington post writes that at the rally today there were people brandishing plenty of signs in support of israel, in support of israel. but others brandished signs saying make gaza flat again. you're not the only person that thinks entering this without a strategy could be a quagmire. it could also further radicalization. the u. n. special rapporteur, friend jessica albanese, warned lastly week that israel's actions in gaza are likely to ratify radicalized more arabs, in the arab world. >> hamas values are fundamentally antithetical to mine and i think anybody who believes indecent moral values. but we also know, as you are suggesting, that hamas recruits its fighters from the families of people israel has killed. so you go in there. you have now killed more than 10,000 people. you're going to stay in gaza. you're going to have hamas or hamas two point oh is going to

have a lot more people to fight you. ultimately you need a political answer to the lack of palestinian freedom. if you don't have a strategy for that, even if you could fight hamas, you'll be fighting the next hamas. >> i do have to ask you, when you talk about the death toll here, obviously there was a staggering death toll for that initial attack. the numbers that we have today put the death toll at 11,240 killed in gaza since the start of the war. the reports from the hospitals, the al-shifa hospital, one of the largest hospitals in gaza, the director of the hospital effectively calls the hospital a cemetery. they have to bury the dead in the hospital. they can't exit the hospital because they are saying that israeli idf planes attack anybody exiting the hospital. there is no food. medical teams are surviving on biscuits and dates. there are 100 dead bodies in the hospital. we are learning at this hour that the idf is carrying out an operation inside the al-shifa hospital.

i just wonder, as we hear these varying accounts, what do you think the net effect is on israelis and jewish people across the diaspora who listen to this and want some kind of retribution but also understand that this kind of carnage may not be serving their purposes. >> look, i know what people say. people will say their human shields. hamas is embedding itself in civilian areas. that is probably true. you know what, that's the way all guerrilla movements fight. when america was fighting the vietcong, the indian, and they are betting themselves in villages. it doesn't mean the answer is to kill vast numbers of civilians in order to get a small number of the enemy because you're creating more of the enemy. the only way you can ultimately defeat the guerrilla movement is to deal with the political issue underneath it. palestinians have been fighting israel furlong before hamas and will continue fighting israel, tragically, for long after hamas, unless they have their

freedom. and life will never truly be safe for israeli jews, who i care about so deeply, unless palestinians also have freedom and safety and dignity. the two peoples are intertwined. i don't think benjamin netanyahu and his government appreciate that. >> to netanyahu, the point i'm missing now here, less than 4% of jewish israelis report that they trust netanyahu as a reliable source of information regarding the war against hamas. does that surprise you? >> not really. this is the other problem, with allowing this government to lead this high stakes effort with no answers. it's not only an extremist government. it's an incompetent government. if the same government that basically was completely asleep at the wheel on october 7th because they had put so many other soldiers in the west bank

to protect radical settlers rather than protect the people in southern israel. do we really think these guys have a good plan? i want the united states to be asking them really tough questions and not giving them a blank check to enter into a quagmire which is going to be horrifying for palestinians, ultimately not provide israelis the safety they deserve. and bad for america. >> oh god, peter, a very difficult time in a very wrenching topic. thank you so much for taking some time out of your night to talk with me about it. peter beinart, editor at large for jewish currents magazine. one more story for you tonight about whether or not defendant donald trump gets to say whatever he wants whenever he wants. that's next. and retirement savings. with voya, considering all your financial choices together... can help you be better prepared for unexpected events. voya. well planned. well invested. well protected. >> we have deranged jack smith.

have you ever heard of him? he's a lovely man. the trump aiding prosecutor in the case. his wife and family despise me much more than he does and he decides, he's about a ten.

they're about a 15 on a scale of ten. >> that is donald trump this weekend at a campaign rally making disparaging remarks about special counsel jack smith and his family while he still can. next week, the d. c. court of appeals is set to hear arguments about a gag order that judge tanya chutkan imposed on trump in this federal election interference case, the narrow gag order prohibiting trump and his attorneys for making public statements targeting special counsel smith or his staff, the court staff, and any witnesses.

but the appeals court put that ruling on pause until it decides whether it can gag trump as it might a normal criminal defendant. so for now, trump is allowed to say whatever he wants. and misty, i'm new filing today, cited trump's campaign event over the weekend as just one of the many reasons to stop him. joining me now is joyce vance, former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama and co-host of the #sistersinlaw gassed. joyce, always good to see you.

thank you for being here. my first question is, is there a question, in your mind, as to whether this gag order is going to hold up in the appeals court? >> no. there's absolutely no question. this is a very limited restraining order that preserves trump's rights to engage in political speech. the court of appeals may even go ahead and put it back in place during oral argument. that doesn't happen very often, a ruling from the bench during an oral argument. this may be the standout case because of trump's ongoing conduct. >> the fact that trump lustily undiagnosed is on the stomp, targeting the special counsel's family sort of gives rise to

the initial criticism as to why the court put a stay on the gag order as they deliberated this. >> yes. i think the administrative state as part of the course of a setting like this. you sort of preserve the status quo while you are taking just a few days to decide issues. but trump's behavior, you know, alex, we all know, it is out of bounds, it is dangerous. just the cavalier comments that he made about paul pelosi, the really trivial comments directed at jack smith, endangering his family. this is the sort of conduct that the courts need to put a stop to immediately. >> we know, joyce, as much as it seems like fairly obvious what's going to happen here, stephen miller, his group america first legal, has filed an amicus brief relating to this gag order, saying it is unconstitutional on the grounds of separation of powers. i think 18 red state attorneys

general have also filed a brief saying that the gag order should be lifted. is there anything to the argument that this is a violation of separation of powers? >> no. there really isn't. i mean, this is political theater. this is red state attorney generals continuing their allegiance to trump as opposed to engaging any sort of realistic legal analysis. it's not a separation of powers issue. the law is very clear the judge is entitled to put reasonable restrictions designed to preserve the integrity of the trial in place. >> when you talk about the integrity of the trial, there is a legal battle playing out over whether or not the federal trial should be televised. so it is pretty strong then he doesn't want cameras in the courtroom, saying trump wants to create a carnival atmosphere, and trump saying he wants people seeing all the horrible things all the horrible charges. do you have a opinion on this? do you he se