many do, when your tree go down? rockefeller tree is still up. do you take it down a new? years? give it a week? two weeks? let me know on ari melber social media. on any social media use. we have x, instagram, facebook, tiktok, though harder to comment there. i guess you could comment on a video. but when do you think it is time to take a christmas tree down? you can contact connect with me, there are remembered of calm. i shared some memories of my dad's birthday and our visit to the biden white house. put in your email and you could become a free subscriber to my newsletter or just meet me back here tomorrow. good evening jason, thank you very much.

we are less than a week of nate from entering a presidential election year. and if i had to choose just one thing the republican front runner said this year, i think we should carry over to the next year, just one thing from 2023 that tells us everything we need to know about the upcoming election, well, it would probably be this. >> under normal circumstances you are promising america tonight, you would never abuse power as retribution against anybody. >> except on day one. he's going crazy. except on day one. >> meaning? >> i want to close the border and drill, drill, drill. >> that's not retribution. >> i am going to be -- he says, you are not going to be a dictator, are you? i said, no, no, no, other than day one. >> donald trump telling the world he plans to be a, quote, dictator on day one of his presidency. defenders at the former president at this missed that comment as a joke, a one-off quip that was never meant to be taken literally. trump himself has continued to promote the idea that he will be a vengeful dictator in a second trump presidency. over the holiday weekend, he

shared this image of a word cloud put together by the daily mail. the image was based on a survey of what voters said about trump's ambitions for a second term. and you can see that the most popular responses, the biggest ones represented in the middle are power, revenge and dictatorship. revenge being the most devoted. that is the image that trump himself wants to cultivate ahead of the 2024 presidential election, an image he wants to promote, even as he faces federal criminal charges for unlawfully attempting to hold on to power after the last presidential election. today in the federal case against trump for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election, special counsel jack smith asked the judge to prohibit trump from making a political arguments and spreading conspiracy theories at trial. jack smith wants the court to block trump from promoting the idea that trump's prosecution

is politically motivated, aka trump's so-called witch hunt defense. jack smith also wants the court to block trump's team from raising the baseless conspiracy theory that undercover fbi agents were somehow responsible for january six. and, jack smith also wants to prohibit trump from blaming capitol police, d. c. officials and former speaker nancy pelosi for failing to stop the january 6th attack, as he has in the pass. >> one of the big problems is that nancy pelosi, crazy nancy, as i affectionately call her -- [laughter] crazy nancy pelosi and the mayor of washington, were in charge, as you know, of security. >> they are not in charge -- >> nancy pelosi and the mayor are in charge. i assume that they were able to do their job. they weren't. >> citing those comments and others from trump, he authored this blistering response. quote, a bank robber cannot defend himself by blaming the bank security guard for failing to stop him.

a fraud defendant cannot claim to the jury that his victim should have known better than to fall for his scheme. and the defendant cannot argue that law enforcement should have prevented the violence he caused and obstruction he intended. all of this is a preview of the arguments we might see on trial, currently scheduled to begin march 4th. but whether that trial will actually start on time is anybody's guess. trump is still appealing his claim that he is immune from prosecution, a claim that will surely land before the supreme court before the trial can begin. and the supreme court may also have to decide whether or not trump can even be on the ballot in november. just today, the michigan supreme court ruled that trump should be allowed to appear on the ballot in that state. this comes just a week after the colorado supreme court ruled that trump should not appear on that ballot, because of his role in inciting the

january sixth insurrection. trump is expected to challenge that colorado ruling before the u.s. supreme court, the filing coming as soon as tonight. and just this evening, the colorado state republican party filed its own appeal, asking the supreme court to allow trump on the ballot. joining me now, a former senior adviser to the attorney general merrick garland and a msnbc legal analysts. also with me is chuck rosenberg, former u.s. attorney and senior fbi official and msnbc contributor. anthony, chuck, it's great to see both of you in person, on set. we got a lot to talk about. let's start with the colorado supreme court ruling. anthony, is it inevitable that the supreme court will get involved in this? >> it absolutely is inevitable that this goes to the supreme court. i think what struck me about this case and, in particular, the colorado ruling, is trump's response to the colorado ruling, jonathan.

he tried to make the argument that he is not an insurrectionist, despite what all of us on january six. in the months leading to january six. i remember quite well, september 2020, he was on a national debate stage, and he was pressed about, asked to condemn violent right-wing extremists, and he declined to do that. he tells the proud boys to stand back and stand by. i look ahead to december 2020 of that same year, and he sent out a tweet, come to d. c., it will be wild. people show up by the busloads, jonathan, and he addresses them on the ellipse of the capitol. he used the retort fight or fight back 20 times. they do what he told them what to do. they go down to the hill and fight like hell, until he tells them to stop. if that is not what insurrection is or aiding and abetting for those who engage

in an insurrection, i don't know what is. >> and yet, chuck, the michigan supreme court comes back and says, he has to be on the ballot. or the arguments in both cases, the michigan argument different than the colorado? >>one of the problems is, jonathan, state law is, of course, state by state. this is a paradigm example of why the united states supreme court needs to hear the case and set the standard for all of the states. the last thing you want is patchwork, one state doing one thing, another state doing another thing. it's confusing, unfair, confusing and unfair to everyone, whether you like mr. trump or dislike mr. trump, there should be one set of rules governing, whether or not he is on the ballot. i agree completely with anthony. i think the supreme court will step in in this case. >> look, can we talk about, before we move on, to the jack smith filing. actually, not the jack smith filing yet, but immunity, the question of immunity, in one of jack smith's cases. the supreme court is having to

get involved in that question. they put it earlier in the week saying, don't give this to us, jessica. but this is another question that has not been tested yet. it has not, anthony. >> that's right, it has not been tested. it's appropriate for the supreme court to weigh in on this. i think, and you are the smart lawyer here. i'll be interested in your thoughts. >> tell us, i am not wrong in thinking that the supreme court will have to settle this question of whether the president is immune from prosecution? >> you're not wrong. anthony is wrong and thinking i'm a smart lawyer. it's an unresolved question. the issue is whether or not the president is immune for official acts committed while in office. the weight of the argument is that he is not. i think he loses this case at the supreme court.

if he did something with in the official scope of his duties, then he ought to be immune, any president ought to be immune. then they wouldn't do it in fear of being sued or prosecuted, if they're acting in their official capacity. but overturning an election or trying to do so, is never within the official acts of the president, so i think the argument that he is framing ultimately loses, jonathan. but, anthony, again, it's quite right. it's something that the court will need to hear and resolve. >> the other thing i'll add quickly, as chuck noted, he's not a king. a one term president who acted outside the scope of his job. that does not immunize you from any type of criminal case. >> let me get the smart lawyer, one more thing before we turn to the latest jack smith filing news today. in section three of the 14th amendment, there are supporters of donald trump who are saying, and i think even the former president is making this argument, he is not an officer of the united states, that the

president is not an officer of the united states. i am no lawyer and i am certainly no strict, textualist, constitutionalist, but am i wrong indicate that the president of the united states is the ultimate officer of the united states? >> it seems in congress to me, jonathan, who drafted section three of the 14th amendment, what had not implied that everyone else but the most powerful officeholder in the united states. that said, the language of that section of the 14th amendment does by itself answer the question. common sense does, you can look to other usages for that. there are a bunch of questions in there. was there an insurrection? i think so. did he engage in an insurrection? i think so. we'll see an officer of the united states? i think so. again, we can think whatever we want, but we need the supreme court to tell us yay or nay. >> again, anthony, given the supreme court 6 to 3 conservative super majority, which i think so?

especially, since these are the same folks saying, that we should not read the words of the constitution that the way that the founders wrote them. >> i am not holding my breath. the hope is that they look at the facts and apply the law, but, i am not convinced that this is one of those questions that they will rule and the favor of the rule of law. my hope here, jonathan, is that they quickly decide, whether or not to move forward. that time is of the essence. >> let's talk about jack smith 's filing today, and all of the things that he wants to do to prevent trump from doing a trial, calling the charges politically motivated, blaming the police, nancy pelosi, blaming undercover fbi agents, saying they were the ones who were behind january six. how likely is it, chuck, that a judge will agree to that? >> so, what jack smith has filed is called a motion at the threshold, a motion at the outset. it's very common.

i did this many times as a federal prosecutor. you know what issues are likely to occur during trial, and are letting a judge know before the trial begins, there are a bunch of decisions that you have to make. under the rules of evidence, the information is confusing or irrelevant or prejudicial, is typically not admitted and should not be. what prosecutors are doing here is saying to the judge, i expect a whole bunch of this irrelevant, confusing, prejudicial information might induced by the former president, if you permit. it we want it to roll in advance of the trial that this is admissible. just give these kinds of motions all the time, sometimes, route in advance, sometimes they reserve judgment, but it's a common thing to do and also a smart thing for jack smith. >> i will say one quick thing here, this filing does not limit what donald trump can say outside the courtroom, and that

is important. here he can still go out and say that judge chutkan is biased or racist, even though she's not. he can still go out and say that the case is politicized, even though it's not. that does not limit what he can say in the court of public opinion. >> anthony, we got a couple of minutes left. i would not look at both of you to comment on this. but you, anthony, your former colleague, deputy attorney lisa monaco was on abc news this week and talking about the threats to law forsman, prosecutors and judges being on the rise. watch this. >> what we've seen is an unprecedented rise in threats to public officials across the board. law enforcement agents, prosecutors, judges and election officials. we are seeing that and responding to it. just this week, just this week, we've had cases involving threats to kill fbi agents, a supreme court justice, and

three presidential candidates. >> three? >> that's just this week. >> wow, lisa monaco, for those that don't know, she is essentially the chief operating officer of the justice department, with the exception of the special counsel, all of the bureaus, including the fbi and all of the components reporting to her. what the doj would tell you, jonathan, that they pursue justice aggressively without fear. that is true. chuck and i have both seen it. what is also true is the human toll that these threats have on the justice department investigators and agents. and the families, this is real. i think what you saw her talk about was a little bit of the passion behind it, and i think, if we were just talking about the special counsel and the federal election, case i think one of the main reasons he asked for the limited gag order was to protect the staff at the

bureau and their families. >> chuck, as a former senior fbi official, did you ever face, i would love your reaction to the attorney general, but did you ever face threats? >> yes, i don't think it's that uncommon, when i was a federal prosecutor. it happened on a couple of occasions. look, on the one hand, i think the fbi has the resources to address the threats. agents around the country can go out, see if threats are real or fictitious. but it means they're not doing something else, jonathan. if you take 13,000 fbi special agents and put them on task x, then they are not doing tasks y and z, and that's a problem. we need the fbi to do a whole bunch of things. this is a terrible destraction. worst-case, it comes to fruition, and people get hurt. that's a real tragedy. >> we'll have to leave it there. chuck rosenberg, anthony coley, thank you very much for coming

to alex wagner tonight. we have a whole lot more ahead tonight, including nikki haley 's trump strategy, the one where she barely acknowledges his existence. can hit elp or win over the republican electorate? but first, israel's be beaten in yahoo faces growing criticism from the families of hostages still being held by hamas. it's one of the many challenges finding a democratic resolution to the conflict ever more elusive. that is next, stay with us. to cholesterol success with leqvio. with a statin, leqvio is proven to lower bad cholesterol by 50% and keep it low with 2 doses a year. common side effects were injection site reaction, joint pain, and chest cold. ask your doctor about twice-yearly leqvio. lower. longer. leqvio®

i got this $1,000 camera for only $41 on dealdash. dealdash.com, online auctions since 2009. this playstation 5 sold for only 50 cents. this ipad pro sold for less than $34. and this nintendo switch, sold for less than $20. i got this kitchenaid stand mixer for only $56. i got this bbq

smoker for 26 bucks. and shipping is always free. go to dealdash.com right now and see how much you can save.

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.♪ loving this pay bump in our allowance. only pay for what you need. wonder where mom and dad got the extra money? maybe they won the lottery? maybe they inherited a fortune? maybe buried treasure? maybe it fell off a truck? maybe they heard that xfinity customers can save hundreds when they buy one unlimted line and get one free. now i can buy that electric scooter!

i'm starting a private-equity fund that specializes in midcap. you do you. visit xfinitymobile.com today. [crowd chanting] [speaking in a global language] >> those were family members of israeli hostages heckling israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu on wednesday, when he spoke to israel's parliament. netanyahu said that israel's military offense in gaza is not close to finishing, while relatives of hostages repeatedly shouted the word,

now, demanding netanyahu immediately strike a deal, like the involvement of a cease-fire, in exchange for the return of hostages. poll after poll has shown that israelis are not confident of his leadership in the crisis. at the same time, in gaza and the west bank, polls have shown that hamas has only grown more popular with palestinians, since the start of the war. close to 90% of palestinians want the president of the western backed palestinian authority, mahmoud abbas, to resign. finding a diplomatic solution to the war in gaza can be complicated, even with the best leadership. but with a crisis of leadership in israel and gaza, what is the path forward here? joining us now, david miller, senior fellow at the carnegie endowment, former state department middle east analysts and negotiated. thank you for being with us tonight. what do you make of netanyahu's

prerequisites for peace.as he lays them out? and the wall street journal, he wrote an op-ed or he pulled out these three prerequisites. israel will have to retain security responsibility over gaza for the foreseeable future. hamas must be destroyed, gaza demilitarized, which i mentioned, and palestinian society must be deradicalized. what do you make of those, and how likely is any of them to be achieved? >> first of all, john, thanks for having me. i think it could also be read as a campaign speech. you haveto understand benjamin netanyahu is not only trying to secure israel, but perhaps a more important objective is political future. on trial for bribery in district court before three jerusalem judges. he will be forced to testify sometime in the spring.

he's actually maneuvering in an effort to cling to power, because out of power, he faces the prospect of a conviction. and without a plea agreement, jail time. i think that the objectives here is to keep the israeli right wing coalition together. as a consequence, you're seeing them destroy militarized and deradicalize. -- demilitarize, and the day after, with a smart diplomacy and a lot of buildings go from the in that it states and international community, maybe gaza can be put on a better path. deradicalize, at a time when the israelis in an effort to degrade hamas that colocates its military assets in and around and below civilian populations, those operations have resulted in the deaths, even if you don't believe the hamas-controlled ministry of

health, thousands and thousands of palestinians, who are radical. i think these objectives are more political in nature. i don't think they are tethered to the reality that we see. >> is there any possibility that netanyahu can be removed from power before the war is even over? >> hard to imagine during this active intense campaign. likkud doesn't have a history of devouring their oaths on, as we talked about, coalition, with the two most right-wing government extremist ministers, heads of state, and bringing the government down. the problem is, there is no mechanism right now, to remove benjamin netanyahu, and yet there will be a political reckoning, as you suggested in the primary comments, both the israeli side and, i suspect, also with mr. mahmoud abbas. >> let me get your thoughts on the cease-fire proposal by the

egyptian government circulated, multi's each temporary cease-fire, as a step towards a more permanent cease-fire. how do you reach a deal for such a cease-fire, when both sides are seemingly so dug into their demands, and so far apart and what they want. >> jonathan, you broke the cold here. you have two sides, israel and hamas. the israelis are trying to kill those they will presumably negotiate with. and hamas objective is to survive. hoping that the israelis will not be able to destroy hamas or kill their leadership, and international pressure will go for a cease-fire. at the end of the day, hamas will be standing and rightly declare victory. no, right now, frankly, we are in a long dark tunnel, jonathan, and i don't see a way out right now. >> that's a very sobering assessment.

one last question for you. it seemed that the president biden has been warning israel, the prime minister, against occupying gaza, as we know. netanyahu has said that this campaign is going to go on for a long time, even talking about occupying the security situation in gaza, that's where we are headed. that is the situation. the president does not want, but reality is that it will happen, or am i reading this incorrectly? >> no, i think you got it right. the reality is, i think the israeli bomb campaign will shift to a lower intensity level, intelligence driven instead of operations, by the end of january. one thing i can predict, with great certainty, the israelis will be operating at some militarily in gaza for months to come. >> aaron david miller, thank you very much for your time tonight. >> thank you for having me, jonathan. >> more ahead, including the

impossible legal peril one ohioan woman finds yourself in after suffering a miscarriage, and she is not alone. but first, nikki haley wants to close the gap with donald trump, but with three weeks until the start of the primary voting, will her current strategy get her there? that is coming up next. while i am a paid actor, and this is not a real company, there is no way to fake how upwork can help your business. upwork is half the cost of our old recruiter and they have top-tier talent and everything from pr to project management because this is how we work now. the iowa caucuses are just

19 days away, and it appears that nikki haley, while still trailing donald trump in the polls, finds herself the best position republican candidate who has potential to close the gap with the former president, and after securing the endorsement of popular republican new hampshire governor, governor sununu earlier this month, the former south carolina governor is stumping tonight in the granite state, where she continued her apparent strategy of handling trump with acute gloves. >> i believe president trump is the right president at the right time. i support a lot of his policies. but rightly or wrongly, chaos follows him. >> these are just about the toughest words that you hear haley lob to trump and a stump speech. according to one new york times

reporter that has been following haley on the campaign trail, miss haley's apparent reluctance to attack arrival, even in the face of what would seem to be political setbacks for him has raised questions for voters and other republican competitors about whether she can win while passing up crucial opportunities to derail her most significant opponent. joining us now, former pennsylvania republican congressman charlie dent. he served six terms and the house, from 2005 to 2018. congressman dent, thank you for being here. >> great to be with you, jonathan. >> all right, the two people on the screen, you're the one person that has actually run for office. can you please explain nikki haley's strategy, how is she going to close the gap with the front runner, if she is not going to attack the front runner? there are legitimate ways to attack it. >> yeah, as a guy who won office, ran for office 13 times, and competitive districts, and

one thing that i learned is, if you are going to try to beat somebody, that come at this, caves like we're treating donald trump, you need to attack that person frontal-y and directly. i don't think there is and where -- it's very hard to run a campaign and use these rather gentle jabs against trump. she has to make the case that donald trump must be fired before she can be hired. i think she's run a very effective campaign in many ways, under a smart, should t. j., but, right now, it's the fifth like that she is running for second place. she has been very dark and aggressive with vivek ramaswamy and withdrawn desantis, but those guys don't have a chance of becoming a nominee. she does, and trump -- and she has not been as aggressive that she needs to be. chris christie called her on that. she needs to channel her inner chris christie and sharpened the stilettos. she's going to have to sharpen those.

she's got the data. it does not make sense to me, you're running for office, you have to take down the top. take down a leader. >> but charlie, is the reason why she is not sharpening those stilettos is because she is afraid of alienating trump voters? >> yes, she is running this campaign where she feels as if the non-trump, anti trump republicans feel she has not been tough enough on trump, and the pro trump republicans feel like she is too tough on trump. she's trying to thread this needle. i don't think you can really do that. i think she has to get in the lane and just take it, be aggressive and call trump out for his conduct and his behavior. i think not just nikki haley but the other candidates other than chris christie have missed opportunities to slam trump on these various indictments, when they should be calling him out on his reckless behavior and bad judgment, rather than more or less, jumping to his offense,

which empowered donald trump and protect it and. frankly, that's why so many republicans are with him, because his opponents have not really called him on this egregious areas, where trump has been a part of. i think that's the problem. she looked, luckily for her, you have the iowa caucuses, where trump is likely to prevail, but new hampshire often goes the other way. that might save her in the end. i hope it does. that could help her, because when iowa hangs, new hampshire often zags. >> let me squeeze into more questions for you before we're out of time, concerning the other candidates. should the other folks drop out, desantis, kristie, ramaswamy, whoever else is running that we have already forgotten about? >> ramaswamy, yes, he's going nowhere. i don't understand his

candidacy. desantis, his campaign has been a free-for-all for sometime, don't see a path for him, probably sparse for him to get out. does that mean that desantis voters will fall to haley. that is not how the math works. i think that's the case. christy stays into because i think he sees an opportunity if trump does falter, he wants to be the guy to pick up the pieces, and he'll run the aggressive campaign. >> okay, and on governor christie, he has been aggressive. he's been the attack dog, not shied away from the yet he's gone nowhere so is the lesson from chris christie -- is the lesson of chris christie's candidacy is that that kind of tactic will not work at the republican primary, so will all vote for nikki haley? >> it's not working for chris christie as it should. but what is clear is that a a lot of the chris christie voters, if they were to go to another candidate at this point,

it appears a significant number of them or most of them will go to nikki haley. for whatever reasons, chris christie has not been able to resonate with enough republican voters. his attacks have been perceived as too harsh and too negative. at the same time, nikki haley's strategy is not working either. she still well behind donald trump, at least nationally and closing the gap in new hampshire. i don't know it's hard to say what strategy is better but we'll find out soon enough whether the haley started it works and she continues down the path. she still has a real shot in new hampshire, though. >> that's what we are going to find out soon enough. former republican congressman charlie dent, thank you very much for coming on tonight. >> thank you, jonathan. >> still ahead, the latest post-dobbs horror story. with one grand jury might decide about the locality of a woman's traumatic pregnancy outcome and what the american public my app to say about it in 2024. that is next.

i got this $1,000 camera for only $41 on dealdash. dealdash.com, online auctions since 2009. this playstation 5 sold for only 50 cents. this ipad pro sold for less than $34. and this nintendo switch, sold for less than $20. i got this kitchenaid stand mixer for only $56. i got this bbq smoker for 26 bucks. and shipping is always free. go to dealdash.com right now and see how much you can save.

hey everybody, w. kamau bell here. they say that america is the land of the free.

but right now, people in the u.s. are seeing their freedoms taken away at an alarming rate. freedoms some of us take for granted. the right to vote. equal access to health care. book banning and other forms of censorship that threaten our right to learn and here's something truly shocking. right now in our country, hundreds of thousands of people are incarcerated simply because they couldn't afford bail. that's not free and it's not fair. but there is hope for change. it lives in people like you and in a great organization called the american civil liberties union. so please join me and other concerned americans in defending our civil liberties by joining the aclu as a guardian of liberty today. all it takes is just $19 a month. only $0.63 a day. when you're surrounded by oppressive laws. you can't just sit back and be oppressed. you get up and fight. and all of us at the aclu are fighting for you. whether it's criminal justice reform or protecting the lgbtq plus rights,

abortion rights or voting rights. the aclu is in the courts fighting for your rights, and mine and i, for one, sleep better at night knowing they're working every day in all 50 states to protect our freedoms. but these freedoms are at risk. we have to fight for them tirelessly. and with your help, we will continue to do so so please go to myaclu.org and join the fight for just $19 a month. use your credit card and get this special we the people t-shirt, aclu magazine and more to show you're helping ensure justice for all. as an individual, donating to the aclu is one of the most powerful things you can do to fight for justice. but the aclu can't do it alone. they need your support now to continue defending our democracy and the freedoms we hold dear. so please join us. call or go online to myaclu.org today. thank you.

from pep in their step to shine in their coats, when people switch their dog's food to the farmer's dog, the effects can seem like magic. but there's no magic involved. (dog bark) it's just smarter, healthier pet food. it's amazing what real food can do. >> brittany watts is overcome with emotion after learning her case is moving forward. she is charged with felony abuse of a corpse, accused of trying to plunge a toilet after having a miscarriage delivery at 22 weeks while using the restroom. >> this 33-year-old-girl with no criminal record is demonized

or something that goes on every day. >> those are just some of the details the grand jury in trumbull county, ohio, is weighing as it decides whether to indict the 33-year-old medical receptionist with felony abuse of a corpse for her actions after having a miscarriage. in september brittani watts became one of the americans suffering from miscarriage every year. but a few details made her trauma distinct. she had a rare second trimester miscarriage, and it happened 15 months after the supreme court overturned roe v. wade, allowing state after state to criminalize not only abortions but pregnancy itself and the various outcomes that come with it. for those reasons, watts's doctors spent eight hours debating the effects of

treating watts even after they -- rubbed her shoulders and told her everything would be okay after her miscarriage, well, she reported watts to the police. earlier this month, watts told the washington post, quote, i am grieving the loss of my baby. i feel anger, frustration, and at times shame. she is not alone. from kate cox to amanda zurawski, women in red states across the country are showing us how dire things can get when courts become the arbiters of whether you live, die, or face charges while pregnant. joining me now, president ceo of reproductive freedom for all formally known as -- pro-choice america. thank you for being here tonight. this watts case is beyond enraging and it's in -- >> just like her attorneys were

arguing in court, this was a woman who is going through something that hundreds of thousands of women have gone through. problems in pregnancy, miscarriages. she should be treated with compassion, with dignity, with care. but because of this climate post-dobbs, this is the america that has been locked. this is the climate we're doctors and administrators are clearly afraid to make a decision, and she's now being punished for it. >> i was about to ask, and no doctor, no lawyer, but this is strange on its face. why are prosecutors, who are supposed to have judgment and discernment, why are they bringing these cases? why is ms. watts on trial here? >> this is a case where our colleagues at the organization if win how are working closely with her attorneys, with britney watts's attorneys. they made the decision that the prosecutor has the right to drop this case. it's a big important question we're asking for our colleagues networks to weigh in for the

prosecutors office to drop the case, but president pressure on the governor's office. but there has been a history of criminalizing pregnancy in this country. since 2006 have been over 1000 cases like brittani watts, they don't get in the headlines with the tragedies across the country. just after sb8 happened in texas, there was a publicized case at the rio grande border of a young woman who was being prosecuted for a pregnancy outcome. we know that in antiabortion states, and abortion ban states, even pre roe, these climates create an interest in prosecuting pregnancies and doctors. and so this is something we have a monitoring for a long time. it's definitely a primary priority of the anti choice -- tied into the personhood movement as well. >> the fact that the nurse who is comforting ms. watts was the one who reported her to the police. why reporter to the police?

does the law say you must report this person to the police? >> now. you know. there's nothing in the law that indicates that she should be in court at all or being prosecuted, period. there's nothing clear about this case. what we do know is she's a young woman, and i'll say it, she's black. >> okay, good. because i am like -- come on. >> yes. so she is definitely in a different category. pregnancy while black, we know, you've covered it, it's been covered widely lately, thanks to some really big public cases like serena williams pregnancy. while black it's incredibly dangerous -- now we're gonna have the trauma possible prosecution and persecution of these women in a most difficult time in their lives. so we know that for cases like this, when you have a young woman who is black, she is definitely more susceptible to bias and to criminalization. we see in so many areas of black life and for people of color and for immigrant women. it's not shocking to me that is

happening in this case as well. >> is the recourse here, well, the recourses the courts trying to get the law the laws mauve knocked down. is the recourse politically for candidates who are pro reproductive rights to hammer the hell out of this issue. >> i'm glad you brought it back to the candidates. we know that the american people are adamantly opposed to prosecution of providers and doctors, to prosecution of -- criminalization of outcomes. -- so candidates to be unequivocal in clear. it's not just about fighting abortion bans. it's about fighting abortion stigma. it's also about pregnancy justice and pregnancy safe and healthy pregnancies for all americans. but we know in the cases like this, post-dobbs, women of color are the most impacted, and we have to address that and be upfront about it. the good news is, vice president kamala harris has been doing a great job of caught talking about this, i

expect or to do more in 2024 as you embarks on this reproductive freedom tour. >> yes, she is going to be doing more, starting next month. she's going on that tour. we mini timmaraju, i think you very much for coming to the show this evening. coming up, with casualties mounting, vladimir putin is privately signaling that he's willing to accept a truce to end the war in ukraine. but would ukraine and the biden administration agree? new reporting provides an answer. that's next.

the power goes out and we still have wifi to do our homework.

and that's a good thing? great in my book! who are you? no power? no problem. introducing storm-ready wifi. now you can stay reliably connected through power outages with unlimited cellular data and up to 4 hours of battery back-up to keep you online. only from xfinity. >> today the defense department home of the xfinity 10g network.

announced another 250 million dollar package of military aid to ukraine to counter russia's war on that democratic nation. the united states will send ukraine artillery, ammunition, air defense capabilities, and anti tank weapons from existing stockpiles that congress previously appropriated. but with republicans in congress balking at providing any new assistance, the biden administration may be forced to change its support for its embattled ally. last week the new york times reported that russian president vladimir putin has been quietly signaling that he is open to a cease-fire in ukraine. now with ukraine's counteroffensive stalled in the east, it appears the biden administration maybe privately thinking along the same lines. politico reports today that, quote, the biden administration is quietly shifting its focus from supporting ukraine's goal

of total victory over russia to improving its position in an eventual negotiation to end the war. but such a negotiation could result in ukraine having to give up most if not all of the roughly 20% of its territory currently under russian occupation. joining us now, michael hearst, contributing writer at politico magazine and columnist at foreign policy magazine. michael, thank you for being here. is this a change of strategy from the u.s., this top, this change in strategy that you wrote about in politico? and if so, why now? >> well, it's a shift. there's no question that the biden administration has been hinting really almost since the beginning of the conflict about eventually would have to and in some kind of negotiation. the president himself wrote that in the new york times of

and back in 2022. but now, because of the hold up in aid, not just from the u.s. congress but also the problems in terms of getting additional 50 billion or so dollars of aid from the european union, they are starting to think that they need to shift to a defensive posture that could take us through the coming months. this is also a response to the failed counteroffensive that the ukrainians launched in june, which has been largely stalemated in the east. so they are beginning to think that they need to adjust to these current circumstances by bolstering air defense systems, redeploying forces along the eastern front tomorrow of a defensive posture, and setting up defenses in the north along the border with belarus, where they can prevent any further aggression.

>> when the new york times reported its story on the front page on sunday about what putin was saying privately, i had the ukrainian ambassador to the united states on my show for her response. listen to what she had to say, when i asked her if a cease-fire would be something ukraine would agree to. >> and what ever lies mr. putin would like to spread, we should listen to his actual signals. he keeps warning ukrainian citizens on a daily basis. they want an operational pause, which they have been trying to get in order to get more weapons from the friends, from iran, and others. if they really want peace, there is a very simple solution to that. they should stop the aggressive war, get out of ukraine, in a peaceful return to ukraine the next day. he wants to destroy all ukraine and not only ukraine. let's not be fooled by whatever

rumors he would like to spread. >> michael, very tough words, very definitive words. and of course she would say that and president zelenskyy would say that publicly. but where they negotiate? >> right now they are not giving any indication they will negotiate. i asked to biden administration official about that and his response was there are no serious discussions that he is aware of. there may be hints that this may be a kind of backdoor offering from putin but there is nothing really on the record. there's no indication this going to be any negotiation anytime soon. most experts believe putin will want to wait until he sees who wins the u.s. presidential election in november, because donald trump obviously has been much more sympathetic to putin 's aims than the current president. so no one expects this to be in negotiations soon, neither is

their expectation if there is an negotiation other side is going to give him very much. obviously one sympathizes with but the ambassador says, but the idea that russia is simply gonna give up unturned hail and routine entirely from eastern ukraine is not realistic. so there's an expectation that there's going to have to be a negotiated cease-fire, a truce of some kind. it may not come for a year or so. but the point is, both sides, in particular the ukrainians, then i'm writing about this, week in politico, they're posturing themselves to be in the strongest possible position if such a negotiation. comes >> michael hirsh, thank you very much for your time tonight. and that's our show for tonight. now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening. jonathan. andrew weissmann and barbara mcquade are gonna start us off