you will love migrating... the sun... the sand... [ thunder clap ] we're not gonna make it. are we? uncle dan! we're trying to get to jamaica. stay close and... everything will be all right. [ gulps ] very good to be with you, i'm alex witt. we begin with the growing catastrophe at the southern border, disrupting commerce, and andcongress.or president b we know in the coming days the president will send a delegation of top u.s. officials to mexico

to lead talks on how to stem the surge in illegal border crossings. those crossings reaching historic proportions with authorities routinely reporting 10,000 encounter a day. the influx is in border authorities, 10,000 in custody right now. so stretched are resources, customs and border patrol had to close two major railway crossings and other ports of entry so they can shuffle agents to busier points along the border. $43 billion in trailed a year are carried on those two rail lines alone. no telling how politically costly an extended closure could be. with congress on holiday, talks for a comprehensive border package have installed, and with them, hopes for ukraine and israel aid. republicans say funding for those embattled nations must be paired with measures to secure the u.s. mexico border. it's a quid pro quo triggering a

backlash who fear an asylum and refugee crackdown could hurt the party among latino voters. joining us now, nbc news correspondent guad venegas who's in eagle pass, texas, and nbc news political reporter, sahil kapur, and "politico" deputy manager, paul stein. you're there at one of the busiest crossings, what are you seeing? >> reporter: we have been here all week. we saw large crowds in the field behind us where customs and border protection had to create a waiting area where thousands were sleeping, waiting for a very long time until they could be taken to the prosing centers. we saw the records earlier this woke, monday, tuesday, wednesday. crossing the southern border, but the new numbers today indicate these coming from thursday, that is, indicate that they saw 11,000 migrants cross the southern border. it's a slight dip, and we have seen smaller crowd today.

if you look in the field behind me, when we first arrived, we had 2,000, 2,500 migrants, and today we have a couple hundred. and customs and border protection has been moving very fast to process as many as they can, and the groups arriving today have been smaller. that's good news for the sysm that has been overwhelmed. we know that here in the del rio sector, where eagle pass is located. customs and border protection said they were at three times capacity. i spoke to some of the migrants that went through the process and they were at a shelter just down the road, after they were released to continue their asylum seeking process. they said these places were cramped. they said it look like it was going collapse. the food and water was scarce at the shelters because there was so many individuals crossing, but with these numbers, it could indicate that maybe we'll have smaller numbers crossing and also with the news there's been a meeting with the president, changes could be happening in

mexico, which could be news for the border communities. >> 100%. thank you for that. we're going to pick up on that. sam, i welcome you. secretary of state blinken and dhs officials are going to be meeting with the president of mexico in the coming days, according to the white house. what do you expect the message from the u.s. to be? >> well, it's probably going to be long lines of give us some help, right. the u.s. is entertaining changes to asylum laws, changes to parole laws, more or less an effort to make sure that anyone who is seeking asylum or migrating through mexico, for instance, would have to apply force on the countries they're seeking first. they're going to need some help from those countries along the way to get these measures in place. obviously a lot is contingent on congress, and congress has to pass the likely legislation, and agree to it. but as this conversation underscores, there's a real humanitarian clock ticking here. there's not just a political

game. there are people at the border, unsanitary conditions. food is scarce. medical conditions are scarce. there's a crisis. i imagine when blinken goes overseas, when other biden officials go to mexico and elsewhere they're going to be talking about a holistic approach. not just the policy changes but what you can do to solve a genuine humanitarian crisis at hand. >> you're making the point that mexico has to step up. what do you make of the president appealing to the president of mexico. is it a sign that the white house has no faith congress can get a deal done? you would think he'd go to congress first as he has, but the expectations for a deal, pretty shaky. >> yeah, i mean, anyone who's covered immigration policy on the hill will tell you there's not a long or lengthy history of success in crafting immigration. especially when you're talking

about the current partisan rancor of congress. i would expect something not happening. there has been numerous attempts to crack immigration that has failed. in the absence of legislative solution, what we've seen is the president has taken executive authority or used whatever executive authority to solve the situation. more recently, some has been caught up in the court system with appeals. biden has to think of contingency plans, should these negotiations around border reform fall because the likelihood is even if they were to get through the senate, they have to get it through the republican-run house, and they're going to demand much more stringent decisions. >> sahil, you have new reporting on discussions about the president's party, and immigration reform.

what can you tell us? >> it's been a very tense couple of months for the white house, and democrats trying to navigate internal and growing party divisions on the issue of immigration. many democrats do favor an agreement with republicans for tougher border and asylum laws whereas others in the party, progressives and hispanic caucus leaders want democrats to walk away. they think this is a bad idea. we've reported on a private meeting. a tense private meeting within the white house, where one senior official brushed back on the notion that such a deal would hurt the president with latino voters. this official said latinos like other groups do want a secure border. we reported on a meeting that senator chuck schumer had with senators. he was going to endorse the negotiations being led by the democratic senator, chris murphy, even though none of the liberal priorities, including a path for legalization for

dreamers were on the table. that's how far politics have shifted to the right. i spoke to a texas democrat who represents a competitive district along the border, pleading with his party for a long tim to support stricter asylum laws. let's show what he told me. he argued, he told the white house that they're losing hispanic voters. don't you see the same polls we're seeing. the white house is afraid to anger folks within the party, he goes on to say that people are using asylum to come into the country when they don't qualify for asylum. he wants that bar to be raised higher for the initial screening so they can't come in as they await their date. he goes on to say they're using that because they can get to first place, which means across the border we need to calibrate that, and goes on to say, we are going to lose people, hispanics and democrats on the politics of not securing the border. that's the backdrop.

president biden's priority of getting ukraine aid through hangs in the balance. he wants as a major foreign policy goal to stop ambitions, and senior members say literally the fate of the world hinges on these talks. >> sam, you mentioned executive action. that's something that house speaker mike johnson is calling on the president to do, right, relative to the border. is this something that this administration is inclined to do. were we talking about the trump administration, it would be a yes. what about the biden administration? >> to a degree they have. you recall a lot of the authorities that they were using were challenging the court, and then put through a myriad of hard to follow court challenges and decisions. yes, they've shown a desire to use executive action, i think the problem here is there are reactions to it. the administration does have to

deal with, and not just the progressive community but mainstream democrats who say the solutions you're trying to contemplate, harsher asylum laws, more stringent check points at the border, that won't impact directly the root of the problem. it could worsen them. a senior official on immigration policy made this point to us, we're actually not fixing the problem. the solution is under consideration. so when biden and his aides contemplate executive action, it's not being done in a vacuum. there are a number of people on both sides of the policy who say every action you take could potentially worsen the situation, not alleviate it. >> sam stein, sahil kapur, gentlemen, thank you very much for the conversation. >> coming up, after four delays, the today the u.n. security

counsel passed a resolution for aide to gaza. what happens next and is it enough to make a difference. what ron desantis is saying about donald trump's indictments and their impact on the republican party. but first, reports of then president trump pressuring michigan canvassers not to certify the 2020 vote. the phone call he reportedly made to two of the state's election officials when we're back in 60 seconds.

so first it was georgia. now it's looking like michigan. there is reportedly new phone audio of donald trump meddling in state elections after his 2020 loss. recordings reviewed by the detroit news claim the former president pressured two republican canvassers in wayne county, michigan, not to certify the local election results days after the election. quote, we've got to fight for our country, trump told the two officials on a phone call. we can't let these people take

our country away from us. trump warned the pair that they would look, quote, terrible if they okay'd the county's results after initial any opposing them. nbc news has not heard or independently verified the audio records. joining us now is former u.s. attorney, and nbc legal analyst, barbara mcquade. nbc news has not heard these recordings, if they do exist, how damming are they? does anything stand out compared to the georgia call with brad raffensperger. >> in jack smith's indictment alleging election interference, he alleges trump was pushing in a number of states to pressure election officials to push the election his way. there's the recording in georgia which itself is very powerful evidence. standing alone it can be explain away. when you have a similar call occurring in a another state as part of the scheme, the two

corroborate each other. this is excellent evidence for jack smith. it's excellent evidence for fani willis because it could be admissible under 404 b that allows evidence of other bad acts to prove a person's motive, intent or modus operandi. i think it's relevant there. i think there's a possibility that the individuals involved may themselves face criminal exposure which would make them valuable witnesses for jack smith, and others. >> a couple of points, intent to knowledge, they seem to be hard things to prove when it comes to donald trump becsef his constant denial, his blame game tactics. but these recordings prove he had knowledge that what he was doing was legal. they were promised legal representation as long as they did not sign to certify. why would they need legal representation if they weren't doing something illegal? >> what she points out is what

prosecutors refer to as consciousness of guilt. it's not dispositive but certainly some evidence that they know what they're doing is wrong. one of the things they did was file affidavits that they had been pressured to vote in favor of certification. it could be those affidavits end up being consciousness of guilt, that they filed false statements being pressured the other way. i hope this adds to the amount of evidence that donald trump knew he was doing something wrong. >> it's establishing a pattern of conduct, right, is that what this leads to? >> yes. this could be stand alone conduct that gets charged in the state of michigan or elsewhere. more importantly, it adds to the conspiracy evidence on january 6th. this kind of pressure was occurring in a number of states. we have rusty bauers in arizona talking about getting these sorts of calls. when you put this pattern

together, it becomes very persuasive for a jury to understand this is part of a conspiracy to steal the full election. >> you mentioned ronna mcdaniel, is she in trouble here? her name is not one we have heard a whole lot of when it comes to the election interference of trump in d.c. or fulton county. but now, michigan? >> yes, her name has come up a few times before in the january 6th hearings. she testified that she papered in a call with donald trump and john eastman about fake electors. here she is participating in this call and urging canvassers not to fulfill their duties of office. that's a misdemeanor in the state of michigan to interfere with the performance of an official's duties. it's a misdemeanor but draws her

into the larger conspiracy. >> you have to wonder if she may be a witness, at least called upon to be one. barbara mcquade, thank you so much as all. i'll be speaking with the detroit news reporter who broke the story and heard the trump reportings. and 4:00 p.m. eastern, michigan secretary of state will be joining chris hayes live on msnbc. but up next, from israel and hamas to ukraine and russia, a world at war. richard engel has a look at what's next for those regions. g. (mom) please forgive him. (carolers) ♪ it's all good - just a little awkward. ♪ (soloist) think we'll wrap this up. (vo) it's your last chance to turn any iphone in any condition into a new iphone 15 pro with titanium and ipad and apple watch se - all on us. that's up to $1700 in value. only on verizon.

(man) mm, hey, honey. looks like my to-do list grew. "paint the bathroom, give baxter a bath, get life insurance," hm. i have a few minutes. i can do that now. oh, that fast? remember that colonial penn ad? i called and i got information. they sent the simple form i need to apply. all i do is fill it out and send it back. well, that sounds too easy! (man) give a little information, check a few boxes, sign my name, done. they don't ask about your health?

(man) no health questions. -physical exam? -don't need one. it's colonial penn guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance. if you're between the ages of 50 and 85, your acceptance is guaranteed in most states, even if you're not in the best health. options start at $9.95 a month, 35 cents a day. once insured, your rate will never increase. a lifetime rate lock guarantees it. keep in mind, this is lifetime protection. as long as you pay your premiums, it's yours to keep. call for more information and the simple form you need to apply today. there's no obligation, and you'll receive a free beneficiary planner just for calling. ugh, this guy again... pops! ay son!

ya got a little somethin' on yuh face. needed a quick shave. quick shave? respect the process! it ain't my dad's razor, dad, it's from gillettelabs. gillette...labs? gillette's ultimate shaving experience. this green bar releases trapped hairs from my face. gamechanga! while the flexdisc contours to it. lookin' smooth. feelin' even smoother. how 'bout hookin' me up with some gillettelabs? check your texts. you're the best. nah, you're the best. the best a man can get keeps getting bettuh. i was the born ten weeks earlyhaving is gillettelabs. without my left arm. with my polio, i have tough days and my pain just pops out, out of nowhere. there's nothing to be afraid of because all the doctors are all so nice. when somebody sees these commercials there'll be a phone number on a screen and all they have to do is call and make a donation to help kids like me. thanks to a generous donor, every dollar you give can help twice as many kids like me and have double the impact.

when you join with us, we'll send you one of these adorable blankets as a thank you and reminder of all the abilities you are helping make possible. merry christmas! please call the number on your screen and give just $19 a month, only $0.63 a day or whatever you can to help kids like us this christmas. and when you do, your gift will have two times the impact.

united nations security council has adopted resolution calling for enhanced aid to palestinians in gaza. it was delayed four times this week over u.s. objections to the original wording which called for an immediate cease fire and condemned military attacks on civilians. after that language was removed, it passed with 13 votes in favor, no votes against, and 2 abstentions from russia and the u.s. so the resolution comes at a critical moment for gaza as the u.n. warns the entire population of gaza is at risk of famine due to catastrophic food insecurity. joining us now josh lederman. welcome. walk us through the resolution, and what happens now that it's been passed? >> reporter: it doesn't call for a cease fire as you pointed out,

alex. it does call for working to lay the ground work for conditions that could ultimately lead to the fighting stopping, and also calls for not only more humanitarian aid into gaza but a special envoy to oversee the mechanics of getting humanitarian aid into the gaza strip. linda thomas-greenfield, the ambassador for the united states says this is a positive step but not perfect. president u.s. didn't vote for it, they simply didn't veto it. that allows it to go forward. take a listen to what the ambassador to the u.n. had to say about the importance of this resolution. >> it's hard to overstate how urgent this is. yesterday, humanitarian groups released a report from the dire food security crisis in gaza, and the word famine has started to enter the vocabulary of

humanitarian leaders i've met with. surgeries are being performed without anesthesia. people are huddled in overcrowded u.n. shelters. others are sleeping in the streets. this resolution speaks to the severity of this crisis. >> reporter: even though this resolution in the eyes of many, alex, was watered down. it's a significant development, after so many delays and previously vetoed resolutions, the u.n. security council was able to speak with one voice. >> let me ask you about the israeli official in charge of gaza who said there's no food shortage in gaza, denying the heartbreaking images we have all seen for weeks now. there are reporters on the ground. how is israel's government reacting to this vote. >> the world food program say nine in ten gazans have gone a 24 hour period with no food.

the severity of the food crisis cannot be overstated. officials are saying they don't like the resolution is as bad as it could have been. they appreciate the fact that it calls for the immediate release of the hostages, but does not include condemnation for the attacks on october 7th. >> josh lederman in tel aviv, thank you. we began with ukraine's hopes for a successful counter offensive, and we ended with that conflict still raging, and the middle east plunged into a war of its own after the hamas attack on october 7th. richard engel with the world at war. >> reporter: ukraine faced a harsh reality check. russia fortified its grip on eastern ukraine and is refusing to let it go.

with some of the fiercest fighting taking place in the city of bakhmut. russian forces have surrounded bakhmut on three sides, and this is the only route in and out of the city that ukrainian forces can use. civilians who remained were driven into underground bunkers without power or heat. ukraine threw everything it could at russia in a long anticipated counter offensive, the united states backing president zelenskyy with weapons and money. vladimir putin turning to mercenaries from the wagner group led by his one-time caterer. the mercenaries fought or were shot and the caterer turned commando, yevgeny prigozhin, turned so powerful that he turned against the kremlin and marched on moscow before having second thoughts. he died when his plane exploded

in midair. u.s. officials believe putin had him killed. and the war continued with ukraine and russia firing so much artillery, both sides nearly ran out. zelenskyy pleading to washington for more. putin turning to north korea's kim jong un. but so far ukraine's counter offensive has accomplished little more than a stalemate. political support in the united states now in question. >> several republican presidential candidates are expressing concerns about support for ukraine. r ukraine.

>> reporter: and then israel had its 9/11. on october 7th, hamas led militants stormed israel from gaza killing more than 1,200 people, most of them civilians, and taking 240 hostages, including many women and children. the militants rained fire into israel. >> stay down, stay down. israel responded with a ferocious military assault on the gaza strip to root out hamas for good, flattened entire neighbors. president biden has insisted the u.s. must support two allies at once. >> we cannot let terrorist like hamas and putin win. >> reporter: the long meld pain and anger, with massive

propalestinian protests calling for a cease fire, and pro israel raising their voices against rising anti-semitism. a week long cease fire wean israel and hamas brought a brief moment of calm, and saw more than 100 hostages freed in exchange for palestinian prisoners. but negotiations collapsed. each side blaming the other. more than 20,000 people have died in gaza so far. about 70% of them women and children according to the health ministry run by hamas. aid agencies say the 2.3 million people in gaza are suffering a humanitarian collapse as pressure is mounting on israel to bring the war to an end. but there's no agreement on who will run gaza if or when hamas is defeated. richard engel, msnbc news. joining us now retired four

star general, barry mccaffrey. i'm trying to see if you feel like many do that 2023 is different. the kinds of things that we are seeing in these different theaters, they are powerful. they're tragic. heartbreaking, and they're ongoing with seemingly no end in sight. from a 30,000 feet in the air view, how do you see this year? >> it's certainly a tragic way to roll into the new year. no question. the u.s. has enormous interests at stake, and particularly if ukraine. if putin's criminal aggression is allowed to reach its culmination, and by that, i don't mean retaining the eastern donbas and crimea, but essentially subjecting ukraine, it will inevitably place nato at risk. u.s. humanitarian, economic and military support for ukraine,

seems to me is vital to our own interests. you've got this tragic war, hamas, brutalizing, murdering, torturing, raping hundreds of civilian, which had an ongoing response of fighters who are in civilian clothes, using their own population to protect themselves and holding hostages. it's a dismal picture, and one that will not be resolved anytime soon. in particular, israel's condition. there is no way they so you would or will accept a cease fire leaving hamas in control of a devastated palestinian population. >> something we have observed in ukraine and gaza is a return to urban warfare. are there some lessons to be learned from the past year that could potentially change the trajectory in either conflict? >> sadly, i think that's a future a lot of these conflicts, you're quite right to point that

out. urban warfare -- by the way, oddly nuch, the israeli defense forces are doing well in ground combat. partially because they're using 155 millimeter artillery and aerial bombs to collapse tunnel structures. they have had a little over 150 killed in action as far as i can tell, 500 wounded. many thought it was potentially 10,000 casualties for the idf. urban warfare is devastating, even more so on the civilian population. and by the way, it's less damaging once you get empty on the ground than when you're using aerial bombardment. so it's a pause for thought how can you defend your interest if you're forced into tragic situations with masses of civilians. >> you mentioned that it's a different way to round the corner in 2024, given that there

is no end in sight in either of these conflicts, what is your biggest concern as we go into 2024 for each of them? >> well, with israel, the central concern is where is a pan era military, political and economic support to grab gaza and govern it and rehabilitate it. not a word. the hypocrisy is simply astonishing, and israel will not leave hamas in charge of a devastated gaza. looking forward to the new year, we should be very possess miss tick -- pessimistic about the process for peace. if the u.s. withdraws support, it will put ukraine in a different situation.

russia has a million more people. i think russia is in a perilous position, though, and with continued u.s. and european support, ukraine will at a minimum hold out and eventually the russians, i think, will collapse. >> general barry mccaffrey, i appreciate your insights, thank you so much. for all of you, we are getting word of breaking news. this coming from the supreme court. there may some word on donald trump and whether or not he can be held responsible for actions. i think we're going to take a quick break and get these words straightened out for you and we'll figure it out and be right back.

the first time you connected your godaddy website and your store was also the first time you realized... well, we can do anything. cheesecake cookies? the chookie! manage all your sales from one place with a partner that always puts you first. (we did it) start today at godaddy.com are you still struggling with your bra? it's time for you to try knix. makers of the world's comfiest wireless bras. for revolutionary support without underwires, and sizes up to a g-cup, find your new favorite bra today at knix.com woman: who's that, who is that? cole: this is my puppy! woman: cancer. it's different in a child. because your child is still growing. charlie: i had 14 rounds of chemo. there's thousands and thousands of kids all over the world who need help. girl: it is my first time having cancer. and it's the very worst. spokesman: saint jude children's research hospital works day after day to find cures and save

the lives of children with cancer and other life threatening diseases. woman: it's scary to watch your kid battle and fight for their lives. spokesman: 1 in 5 children diagnosed with cancer in the us will not survive. woman: childhood cancer is hard. it's a long road. you just have to give. you have to give someone that hope. and especially with them being so young. spokesman: please, call, go on line, or scan the qr code for only $19 a month. families never receive a bill from saint jude for treatment, travel, housing, or food, so they can focus on helping their child live. man: she grew up in this. so when we go to st. jude, she's happy, because that's her home. every time i take her to the doctor, she's excited because she gets to play. and that's all because of saint jude.

spokesman: when you call or go online with your credit or debit card right now, we'll send you this saint jude t-shirt you can wear to show your support to help saint jude save the lives of these children. woman: [non-english speech] spokesman: let's cure childhood cancer together.

let's get to that breaking news, everybody, we have got this, it's from the supreme court. where special counsel jack smith's request to immediately settle donald trump's immunity claim in the election interference probe, it has been denied, essential shuttling that which jack smith wanted, the fast track, if you will to decide presidential immunity. donald trump, of course, has asked the supreme court to take this case up as well. so there's a lot to get to right now because the interpretation of this could greatly sideline upcoming cases and potentially affect the 2024 election. joining us now, we have nbc justice and intelligence

correspondent ken dilanian, and attorney and u.s. legal analyst barbara mcquade. what's your interpretation of this? how much does this set back jack smith? >> this is definitely a setback for jack smith who had hoped to leapfrog the court of appeals and go straight to the supreme court. he will have to first litigate the matter in the d.c. circuit court of appeals. in the meantime, since he filed this request with the supreme court, the d.c. circuit said they would hear the question on an expedited basis. they have set oral argument in the case for january 9th. if they decide fairly quickly, then we could be back at the supreme court maybe in a month or so, if the court acts quickly or it could be that they take their time and we don't decide the case until june, in which case, the trial will be delayed by that amount. i think the march 4th trial date is in some trouble now. that doesn't mean it can't be tried before the election. we're looking more at a summer trial instead of a spring trial.

>> which potentially affects the elector, barbara. i mean, how long would a trial like this take? >> i have assumed it would take about two months, there are five different schemes here, each of which would take the government a week to try. and then make a week for closing arguments and deliberations. i think at the closest, eight weeks, you're right, the primaries will have been settled likely by june. the conventions will be beginning in august, and so this would have to occur kind of simultaneously with a lot of campaign activity. >> ken, presidential immunity was bantered about on two tracks legally. with regard to the u.s. district court of appeals, january 9th, being when that particular case goes and gets decided or at least begins with the oral arguments, give me a sense of how this potentially affects that, if at all.

is that completely separate? or could there be influence in some way here. >> well, there's two arguments about immunity going on. one is in civil cases where donald trump is being sued, for example, by capitol police officers over january 6th. the appeals court, the d.c. circuit has ruled that he is not subject to presidential immunity because he was not acting as the president. and that was an important ruling because it interpreted the same conduct that the court of appeals is now going to have to interpret in the criminal context, and potentially the supreme court. and what the judges found is that the things that donald trump was doing to try to overturn the election, calling local officials, getting his lawyers to file lawsuits, a scheme to create false electors. none of that had anything to do with the role of president. the president of the united states does not have an official or statutory role in state-by state elections to elect the president. he was acting as a candidate and

a politician, and not as a president. that may be relevant for what the court of appeals has to decide here, and ultimately the supreme court. they may not have to get to the question of whether a sitting president, now former president can be charged for presidential acts while in office, because they may decide that what this was was not presidential acts, and right now, there's a doctrine, the supreme court has ruled that a president is immune from civil lawsuits while in office but has never ruled on the question of whether a president can be prosecuted. the justice department does have a long standing legal opinion that a president can't be dieted or prosecuted or tried while in office. alex. >> but then again, no president has actually been accused of doing the things that this particular one, which is why this is all so first time and really not tried in the courts before. let me read something. that was the argument that jack

smith made, and he said in asking the court on an expedited basis to do so, it presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy, that being whether a former president is immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office. barb, people were heralding the move by jack smith as being kind of brilliant. as it turns out, it has not worked for him. is it something that was a very risky move or is it something that should have dually been tried because of the unprecedented nature of what we're dealing with big picture? >> i think asking for the relief was appropriate. the court denied it and he's in no worse situation than he would have been otherwise. this is a rare step to leapfrog the court of appeals, in the past 100 years, it's been done 45 times, and 25 times in the

past five years. it is something that gets done in cases of presidential power or matters of public interest. good try, the court said no thanks, and i think one of the things that probably influenced the court's decision was the speed with which the court of appeals set oral argument. i think that might not have happened if he had not filed that motion directly to the supreme court. maybe in some ways he got a little bit of speed out of it anyway. >> i know we're joined right now by msnbc legal analyst, lisa rubin. we welcome you to the conversation, lisa. what's your interpretation of this? its effect potentially on the election? >> well, certainly this makes it more likely, alex, that the trial of president trump and the federal election interference case will happen much closer to november or not at all because unless the d.c. circuit rules expeditiously and this supreme

court agrees to hear it on yet another expedited time frame, the amount of time judge cut chan would have to try to case on a calendar that allows the former president to campaign, for example, by september, which is the window by which the department of justice typically believes that it's not appropriate for them to take any investigative or prosecutorial steps before an election would happen. so first, it makes it less likely that that trial is going to happen. one of the things i'm struck by in seeing this is what we can't make out of it. usually where you've got a situation like this, a very high stakes petition for certify, either certiorari for judgment, where the court either agrees or doesn't agree, the people who are on the other side often write to tell you what their thinking and why they would have done something else. here we have no indication of what anyone was thinking. all we see is a one line denial of the petition for certiorari

be ever judgment and no insight into how we got to that place, and how many votes were for or against because whoever dissented here and would have granted cert isn't saying why or who they are. >> which begs this question, and this is a side bar, lisa, but it is relative to colorado, and the fact that the supreme court has been petitioned as well by donald trump to overturn what the state supreme court in colorado did, you're not going to be allowed on to the primary ballots. if it's my understanding, jena griswold has until the 5th of january. things have to go to print, and that's when they will get going, whether establish donald trump is a candidate for the primaries in the state of colorado. but if they're not going to take this up, what's your sense? >> my sense is a little bit messed right now. the only thing that went according to my predictions is we got an up and down decision today. let me go back to your question

about jena griswold, the colorado supreme court's decision is stayed through the 4th, and if donald trump submits a petition for review by the supreme court, it will be indefinitely stayed. the impact of that is that it will allow jena griswold to go to print on the 5th, if he petitions the supreme court with his name on the ballot, not without his name on the ballot. that's the impact there. in terms of whether or not the court is going to take that case, i still think there's a strong likelihood the court will take the case because they don't have to have a patch work, frame work of states making decisions of whether donald trump can or cannot be on the ballot. you're seeing efforts in new york and california to disqualify him based on what's happened in colorado. there are a number of other states where litigation is pending. if the court, for example, were to affirm the colorado supreme court, what i expect would happen is that you would get copy cat litigation all over the

country. but not necessarily in timing that allows those states to react. it would be a logistical nightmare for the administration of elections, and that's why i think the supreme court will take that case and likely reverse the colorado supreme court on very technical, legal grounds about the operation of the 14th amendment. >> joining us now in the conversation, nbc news correspondent dasha burns, here in studio with me, as well as msnbc political analyst and former republican congressman, david jolly, no longer affiliated with the republican party. with donald trump's legal problems far from over, this was something that was a punch by the supreme court and maybe sets back a little bit jack smith and what is intended and hoped for expectations were. as this continues to play out, you have spoken with votrs, is this something that's going to buffet him and put the wind at

his back, and have supporters say, look, he got this. or do you think your sense is they're going to tire of this constant fracture, i mean, when you have lisa rubin saying her brain is messed up by all of this, how is this playing out? >> everyone is maybe exhausted by this, but i will tell you every time voters think someone's coming after donald trump, his base rallies. on the colorado ruling, that has a different flavor that has more than just his base rallying around him, voters that were tired of hearing about the indictments, weren't paying attention, were tuning those out. there's too many legal battles to keep track of. when it came to colorado, that they really felt like, you're talking about the ballot here, talking about more of what felt to voters, republican voters in particular, like a direct affront to their vote, and so

when i talk to especially other campaigns that are trying their hardest to get air time, attention, in early states like iowa and new hampshire, they feel like this is completely making their chances more difficult because he's taken out the oxygen. >> desantis has been saying that specifically. >> exactly. and the strategy that they're deploying in the primary but really testing it out for the general is to try to expand their electorate. they're trying to get first time voters to turn out, and what even our polling has shown is that trump has a real hold on first time voters. he does very well with those folks, and this is the exact kind of thing that could get that kind of enthusiasm from people that might not typically turn out to the polls. maybe not changing minds but could be engaging people that might not otherwise be engaged. >> is this a big win for trump the candidate? >> i mean, how do you think it

could affect the 2024 race? >> it is an important win. the question of whether it's a big win ultimately is determined by when this does go to trial. he's achieved a bit of a delay in his own mind. his legal strategy is his political strategy. donald trump's legal strategy in everything, including civil, personal suits in new york, and criminal cases is delay delay delay delay delay delay. the longer he can delay it, that has always been a strategy, and in this case, for very untoward reasons because he think he can reach the presidency and absolve himself of any criminal culpability or liability. but the legal strategy of delay mirrors perfectly his political strategy. consider what dasha just side. even the documents have not sunk donald trump politically. so the longer he can keep this out without a conviction, because that would be an unknown, a criminal conviction is an unknown. the longer he can delay ultimate trial and judgment, the safer he is politically. he's leading joe biden in many

polls in a head-to-head matchup. does this postpone the trial to the summer as barb suggested or does it happen after november? donald trump should have the nomination shored up by late march. the actual republican national convention is in mid july where the delegates will affirm he's our guy. is he on trial then? is he on trial after then? or is there no trial. all of this delay including this decision helps donald trump right now. >> the way lisa pointed it out, one sentence, there was no attribution as to which justices ruled which way. we know we have the 6-3 in favor of conservative split on the court, but what does that tell you about, i guess, the hot potato effect, if you will. you got the hot potato, and we're just going to put it out simply, and we're going to leave no explanation any further than this. >> it tells us that a majority of justices did not agree with

jack smith that this case was so important to american democracy that it needed to be fast tracked and that's a big deal. >> could it have been all nine, in your mind? >> it could have been. we just don't know because of the lack of transparency, and that's an unfortunate element of our supreme court. in my view as a journalist, they should be required to explain all of these momentous decisions. there's something else going on here, too, i wanted to point out, which is that the justice department is paying a price here for a pretty long delay in getting this investigation underway after january 6th, and there were decisions made at the highest levels of justice department. there was a reluctance to go after this case against donald trump in connection with trying to overturn the election. and the trump team made much of that in their briefs to the supreme court saying, you know, after this three-year delay, now they want to rush and that's an unfortunate by-product of

decisions that were made and now jack smith has to live with it and may not get this case to trial before the election, which by the way, we say, you know, jack smith is not a politician. he's not political. jack smith believes na donald trump is a felon, and guilty of crimes punishable by prison. it stands to reason that jack smith does not want donald trump to be elected president. he wants this trial to happen before the election. he thinks it's important for the country, and the supreme court denied him one avenue to try to make that possible. >> so for you, barbara, how much does this set him back? i mean, it's been said, and i believe by you in this breaking news, that it doesn't really set him back that much because he still progresses as intended. we're looking at this from march for his particular case. in terms of tenor, does this at all take the wind out of his sails and he's just got to find a different path to progress? this is a ruling in that it is not a ruling. you're not supporting what he's

trying to do. supreme court isn't. >> this is definitely a set back for jack smith, not only does it delay the trial but because of the stay that's in place, they can't do the other kinds of pretrial matters that would get the case ready for trial. once the case is decided and the stay is lifted, only then can they pick up where they left off, and that is deciding other motions, exchanging discovery, and sending out questionnaires for potential jurors. the jury selection in this case is going to take quite some time, and so even if they get a decision in june, it might be that it takes a month or so to get back to speed to where they were before that stay was imposed because that removed jurisdiction from the trial court and she said, everything must halt because when someone has a claim of immunity, it frees them from the burden of legislation. this is going to slow things down for jack smith. he has plenty of things to do in terms of preparing for the mar-.

he might get the relief from the court of appeals and the quick decision from the supreme court. he has to be prepared for a trial starting more like summer than spring. >> i want to thank you dasha burns, barbara mcquade, lisa rubin, ken dilanian, guys, thank you very much. in the next hour, much more on the breaking news, the supreme court denying the request to settle former president trump's immunity claim. we'll be right back. marlo thomas: my father founded saint jude children's research hospital because he believed no child should die in the dawn of life. in 1984, a patient named stacy arrived, and it began her family's touching story that is still going on today. vicki: childhood cancer, it's just hard. stacey passed on christmas day of 1986.

there is no pain like losing a child, but saint jude gave us more years to love on her each day. marlo thomas: you can join the battle to save lives. for just $19 a month, you'll help us continue the lifesaving research and treatment these kids need now and in the future. jessica: i remember as a child, walking the halls of saint jude, and watching my sister fight for her life. we never imagined that we would come back. and then my son charlie was diagnosed with ewing's sarcoma. vicki: i'm thinking, we already had a catastrophic disease in our family. not my grandson too. marlo thomas: st. jude has helped push the overall childhood cancer survival rate from 20% when it opened to 80% today. join with your credit or debit card for only $19 a month, and we'll send you this saint jude t-shirt that you can proudly wear to show your support. jessica: for anybody that would give,

the money is going towards research, and you are the reason my child is here today. charlie: i was declared-- this will be two years cancer free. but there's thousands and thousands of kids who need help. saint jude, how many lives they do save is just so many. marlo thomas: charlie's progress warms my heart, but memories of little angels like stacy are why we need your help. please become a saint jude partner in hope right now. [music playing]

(announcer) enough with the calorie counting, carb cutting, diet fatigue, and stress. just taking one golo release capsule with three balanced meals a day has been clinically proven to repair metabolism, optimize insulin levels, and balance the hormones that make weight loss easy. release works with your body, not against it, so you can put dieting behind you and go live your life. head to golo.com now to join the over 2 million people who have found the right way to lose weight and get healthier with golo.