surgery, i had to make a change. so i decided to go with golo and it's changed my life. when i first started golo and taking release, my cravings, they went away. and i was so surprised. you feel that your body is working and functioning the way it should be and you feel energized. golo has improved my life in so many ways. i'm able to stand and actually make dinner. i'm able to clean my house. i'm able to do just simple tasks that a lot of people call simple, but when you're extremely heavy they're not so simple. golo is real and when you take release good evening, i'm paula and follow the plan, it works.

ramos, in for ayman mohyeldin. tonight, that you test for democracy. the supreme court court that trump-stacked is notice that i fake running. three years since the capitol hill attack, trump's picks not of zone. and voters appear to have growing sympathy for those historic who stormed the capitol. where are we getting? also, new reporting on trump's companies banking millions where he was at the white house. congresswoman jasmine crockett tonight with the receipt showing who tossed that cash and the possible influence that came with. and, when you can't legislate, spoke a sideshow. that message house republicans are ascendant to voters hell-bent on impeaching the day h.'s secretary for his actions at the southern border. welcome to ayman, let's get started. on january 6th, 2021, a mob of thousands stormed through the u.s. capital. the heart and home of american democracy with a specific goal of using violence to prevent

the certification of the 2020 election. they did this specifically because they believed donald trump's big lie. just last night, nbc news obtained new dramatic video showing a confrontation between two republican membersof congress and a group of general sixth rioters, trying to preach that main door of the u.s. house chamber. hours ago, a cia agent captured three fugitives accused of participating in that capitol attack at a ranch and grove, land florida. that brings us to where we are now. this moment, on this third anniversary. as we're grappling with whether or not a man who incited an insurrection is eligible to be president again. this week, former president donald trump asked the supreme court to overturn a colorado court which ruled he's ineligible to appear on the state primary ballot because of his actions leading up to the january 6th attack. and breaking yesterday, that nation's highest court agreed to hear the case. that has huge implications for colorado.

but also for the nation as a whole. it's a reality that president biden touched on yesterday. >> america, as we began this election year, we must be clear. is on the ballot. your freedom is on the ballot. >> yes, democracy will be on the ballot. yes, freedom will be on the ballot. but will donald trump be on the ballot? that's the question. depending on how this nation's highest court rules, the former president's name may appear in some or none of this country's voting booths come november. such offices decision and the colorado case will very likely affect all the suits to follow. from maine, where the secretary of state shun pillars concluded trump's actions around january 6th disqualify him from the ballot, all the way to illinois, we are a new challenge to trump's ballot eligibility under the 14th amendment was poor on thursday. so this, yes, may be the third anniversary january 6th of, but as a country, that has barely

begun to grapple with its legacy, we have to think about this. right? we can't even get ourselves to agree on with or not an insurrection occurred today. right? we have republican primary candidates comic for coup that rioters as patriotic for political prisoners. our courts are still in the process of litigating whether or not that man who tried to overthrow the government is eligible to be commander-in-chief once again. i don't know health supreme court will rule. but if past is prologue, i don't see how america will find a true sense of closure and i hope that i am wrong. joining me now, former senator barbara boxer, we also have -- vice president immigration policy and campaigns at for not u.s., and -- former federal prosecutor and legal first columnist at politico. thanks for joining me tonight. i want to start with you, senator boxer. if you take a step back, why do you think it's been so hard for this nation, for this nation to get closure around january 6th?

to really reckon with what happened that day? >>. it's hard to get closure when you have the hit of the culture absolutely, and my view, is an insurrectionist. still out there, with his following. and still perpetrating the big lie. and the supreme court has the chance to do the right thing. and one thing i hope they don't do is leave it up to the states. because that's what they did on the abortion issue. and to do it on this would be a nightmare. we already have secretaries of states in very bright red states saying they're gonna find that joe biden is an insurrectionist because there was an invasion on the southern border. we cannot go that way. so what i hope they do is find 9 to 0 he has to go off the ballot. and if they can't get there, do something where they can all come together because you are right, this nation is in a bad

place right now. and the last thing we need is a divided court, putting their finger on the scale, here. >> really quickly, i want to ask you the same exact question. because as an immigration rights lawyer, you're on the ground constantly, having conversations with different. people again to, why has it been so hard for this country to come to terms with what happened three years ago? >> i think that the rhetoric of the current debate, whether it's around trump, whether it's about migration, there is huge amounts of polarization on both sides. people can't even agree on fundamental problems are. take the migration crisis. no one can agree on what the clothes or solution is. but republicans keep pushing for debate further to the right. and it's going to make it harder for us to come and went solutions. >> would you make of the nbc video we showed in the screen, as i was reading the introduction. i ask you this because i would love to get your reaction in terms of what you make of the

faces of this. their determination to really overturn the election? their anger? the rage? what comes to mind when you see the image? >> i think it comes, a long history of america. whether it's white nationalism, people who believe that president trump is going to erase a lot of the civil rights progress with night and this country. it's very historical. it's very concerning. it definitely invokes fear for marginalized communities. but it's frayer for all americans who really deny -- rely on our democracy, as young as it, is continue to preserve the peaceful transfer of power. it's very scary, hitting into an election year, it's more important than ever we historically claim this was an insurrection and that this is an opportunity, again, for president biden to preserve and protect democracy in this election. >> ran into, let's talk about the supreme court. and the arguments you expect

the supreme court to be hearing. if you are trump's team, what is perhaps the strongest argument that they have and then what do you think the colorado lawyers will do to push back against the argument? >> there is a number of arguments they're gonna push. therefore the focus on political questions, put that front and center, saying this issue of whether or not donald trump engaged in the insurrection is a political question. and it's beyond the reach of the court to determine, something more appropriate for the political branches. personally, i think the court is mar-a-lago to decide that particular provision of the 14th amendment, section three, is not self executing. it will coursed congress to act. that could make, potentially, a democratic congress, even if trump, one could potentially have a different determination. but i think the supreme court is looking for an out here. particularly given the makeup of the court, as you've pointed out, three of the justices were

appointed by trump, it's a republican majority. really, the state of colorado is gonna be focusing a lot on the legislative history of that amendment. if you look at actually what the debate was in congress at the time, the colorado supreme court has the bitter of the argument by a country mile. the issue is just, given the macro of the, court really don't expect a determination that donald trump is ineligible to be running for president this year. >> to that point, he talks about the neck of the court, which leads me to question how much legitimacy the supreme court has right now. we all know there is a sort of crisis of trust in the court. so i wonder, what would happen if the supreme court does end up siding with donald trump? how will all of that exacerbate the legitimacy question we're all struggling with? >> i think it would be a nightmare if they decided, you know, he had nothing to do with

the insurrection. first of all, that would be a real big lie. because anyone, you know, with a heartbeat and oppose who lived through that i saw what i saw, after serving all those many years in the house and senate. seeing these insurrectionists defecating on hallowed halls, seeing them as you are showing them now, breaking in and hearing that ridiculous comeback of some members of congress. today, there was a -- oh, it was nothing more than a tourist visit. well, since when do we have a tourist visit that opens up with you breaking the windows to get in and five police officers dying because you bettered them? so, you know, anyone who's honest in this country and even those who side with trump, and that 25%, i think, in this particular case who don't believe there really was an insurrection, they know there was. and so if this court says, oh,

there was not an insurrection, he's not an insurrectionist -- the determination on faces i think that was a very interesting question that you asked. i have seen determined faces on women after the court came down with their dobbs decision. and women recognized that we are forced back into the dark days when abortion was illegal. if they take away our democracy, if they say there was no insurrection, it's gonna be a horror. so i'm very, very -- i believe they won't do that. and i think -- and i wish that would do 9 to 0, he's all of the ballots. if they don't do that, i think request is. right we'll probably be sending this to congress to current how'd infect to apply the 14th amendment to the president. and, yes it would be retroactive. >> and renato, everyone is looking at the supreme court to

help us answer a lot of these questions. a lot of this uncertainty. maine is looking at the supreme court, illinois. do you imagine the supreme court will also try to adjust these different ballot challenges -- is that even possible? >> i believe so. senator boxer raised a good point. which is that it would be a disaster if we had, essentially, a patchwork of donald trump on the ballot and some states, not on the ballot and others. i don't think that supreme court is going to let that happen. i actually think the reason that supreme court took this case, on such an explicit schedule, essentially to put this to rest early on. given the makeup of the court, like i said, i think i can see them having some outs here. another one is to say the amendment doesn't apply to the presidency, just every other officer of the united states, but they've got a number of ballots in which they can essentially put him on the ballot everywhere. i think that's likely what they're going to do. i'm not saying it's the right

decision, necessarily, this has never been to her before. no court has decided. i think the legislative history lanes in the colorado supreme court's favor. but given the makeup off the court, my prediction is they find a way to keep him on the ballot. >> barbara boxer and renato mariotti, thanks for joining. me andrea flores, you are sticking around. before we go, we are learning more details about the hospitalization of secretary of defense lloyd austin. in official confirmed to nbc news the pentagon did not inform president biden or senior officials in the white house national security council until three days after also arrived at walter reed medical center. yesterday, the pentagon said, austin has been hospitalized since new year's day but did not release details about the procedure, nor about his condition. and a statement today, austin took responsibility for what he calls his decision on disclosure and pledged to, quote, do better in the future. but next, trump's companies made millions from foreign

governments when he was president. congresswoman jasmine crockett's house committee found the proof. and wondered what influence if any came with that cash. more next. ridays? oh sure. what's up? get fast, powerful cough relief with robitussin, and find your voice. ♪robitussin♪

a force to be reckon with. no, not you saquon. hm? you! your business bank account with quickbooks money, now earns 5% apy. 5% apy? that's new! yup, that's how you business differently.

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

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

point to a new report detailing how an american president made millions from business dealings with foreign countries but unfortunately for them, it's not joe biden. it's ex president donald trump. it's the results of a years-long investigation by democrats on the house oversight committee, cut short, once republicans took control of the house. documents show that during his presidency, donald trump's businesses received a seven point $8 million in payments from at least 24 countries, including china. the payments went to trump properties including his hotels in washington, d.c., l.a.,, vegas and new york. but here's the, thing they were not approved by congress, as is required under the constitution. congresswoman jasmine crockett

sits on the oversight committee that oversaw the report, and she joins me now. congressman -- congresswoman, thank you. thank you. >> reporter: i want you to walk us through all these different findings and help us understand exactly why this is unconstitutional. all right, i'm going to start with the why. because the part most people aren't understanding is the implications of it. so basically when we think back to the purpose of this, and where our founders stood, it's about making sure that there would not be interference from foreign countries on our democracy here and on our president. so the reason that our presidents are not allowed to accept these funds is to make sure that there isn't even the appearance, that there is some funny business that's going on. it's similar to the ethics guidelines that we lived by as members of the house, as well as when we're starting to talk about our judges. so that's -- that's why this matters. number two, there's been a lot

of talk about the fact that all, he gave the profits to the treasury. first of, all we don't know what he did because we don't have the records, and chairman comer decided, you know what, never mind. we don't want you to continue to give over records. so we don't have the full picture, number one, to determine what the profits look like. but it doesn't matter. the law itself says that you can't take it. it doesn't matter that we get the profits. none of that matters, you can't take it at all without the approval of congress. now, let's talk about it. go ahead. i was gonna stop before second because you mentioned that chairman comer did not want you all to keep digging. and i guess the question is, why? what is he so afraid of in your opinion? i think you know what he's afraid of. we all know trump is corrupt, i think we're all being too polite and politically correct. trump's, corrupt and of story. he is corrupt, so are every single republican that sits in the house that wants to go out

and pretend that he's not. and wants to coddle him and protect him. the problem is that, when we are elected, we are not elected to serve at the will of trump. we are elected to serve at the will of the people. and that's where the republicans have gotten it wrong. so, let's talk about exactly what happened and whether or not this is just the democrats being upset about the impeachment because that's what they want to throw out there. it's not. this is something that started seven years ago, and trump fought every step of the way and did not want the congress to gain access to this information. if, for whatever reason, what you're doing is on the up and up, then i don't know why you fought it. but that's what he likes to do, he'll assist in courts, he likes to fight it. so we didn't end up getting information until the end of 2022. september of 22. by january of 23, cole moore was now replaced and palmer says, never mind, stop the flow and information.

$8 million to the average american, probably sounds like a lot of money. here's the deal, there's even more money, we know more money exists, and we don't know who it came from. we don't know about his businesses in russia. we don't know if we are in the middle of these wars that were supposed to be helping our friends out and they're being precluded from getting that health because -- maybe it was paid to trump. we don't know! that's the big problem. and that's the scary problem. and it's even scarier is that this guy is trying to get back into office. scarier is tha >> reporter: i know you yourself mentioned that you don't really have a sense of what the entirety of the picture looks like. as you said, you've only -- i know congressman raskin has said this himself, what you have is just a fraction of the total for impeachment. so just to help us understand the scale of what we're talking about, approximately how much money are we talking about here? we're talking about approximately $8 million so far. >> reporter: so far.

so far, and that's on the conservative side. so the committee staff, who did a fantastic job, they skewed on the side of conservatism. so all of these numbers are downplayed. if they only had, for instance, a situation where the prc, china, did a deposit for $19,000 for stay, but we never received the records for how long the actually stayed and what the actual costs, where the only one but the 19,000 dollar deposit. they didn't do anything as we relates to the actual money because we don't have any information. any people to understand that. and out of the 8 million, approximately 8 million, approximately 5 million of it was actually from china. and we know right now, one of the things that the president has been trying to pass in the supplemental's support for taiwan. we know that china, for sure, gave over these monies and that's pretty much all we know.

we know that we can pull inside some visits to mar-a-lago with various monies that were exchanged. we also know now that he's filed his disclosures for the 20 -- the upcoming presidential election that he absolutely received some training marks out of china, while he was a sitting president. >> reporter: let me ask you this, then, was this the most alarming or concerning revelation for you? i know you keep mentioning china, was that the most alarming thing you found? what shock to personally the most? i don't, know the whole thing was bad. it was a lot. knowing that he was taking money from saudi arabia at the same time that he was ignoring the advice of his own advisers and entering into this arms deal with saudi arabia. i, mean there's a lot of scary things in this report and as people are on edge with more, there's only makes me more on edge about the possibility of him regaining access to the

white house and i honestly feel like this guy sold us out before. we know that we still don't understand fully what the secrets look like. they were sitting down at mar-a-lago, but we know that he was reckless and intentionally reckless with our secrets. and with the secrets of our friends. so for me, i'm concerned for our safety. and i want americans to understand that while i know we love to live in a bubble, we're not. the republicans are threat. what -- was making a huge issue for us for national security, trump is a walking national security threat as well as a constitutional crisis, all mixed up in one. >> reporter: congresswoman jasmine crockett, thank you so much for helping us understand all these matters and breaking down everything for us. i really appreciate it. absolutely. >> reporter: next, choosing sideshows over solutions. is the house gop way.

they want to impeach the dhs secretary over his inaction on the southern border, but what is all of this really about? ♪ ♪ ♪ he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ 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.

with nurtec odt, i can treat a migraine when it strikes and prevent migraine attacks, all in one. don't take if allergic to nurtec. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. ask about nurtec odt. ♪♪ here's to... one year bolder. ♪♪

♪boost♪ nutrition for now. here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi

and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today. your best defense against erosion and cavities is strong enamel- nothing beats it. new pronamel active shield actively shields the enamel to defend against erosion and cavities. i think that this product is a gamechanger for my patients- it really works. as the world keeps moving, help prevent covid-19 from breaking your momentum. you may have already been vaccinated against the flu, but don't forget this season's updated covid-19 shot too. ♪ ♪ ♪

>> reporter: house republicans will advance and effort next week to impeach homeland security -- mayorkas. a hearing will be held -- on the impeachment allegations. with witnesses to be announced in the coming days. republicans are accusing more your cause of abandoning his duty and management of the u.s. mexico border, alleging that he's participated in,quot egregious conduct and refusal to enforce the law. now the gop has a long targeted mayorkas, this isn't new. there's been repeated calling for his resignation since he was first appointed in february 2021. it's all part of a republican effort to paint the biden

administration as solely responsible for the immigration issue in this country. where more than 2 million people whose lives are heading in the balance after making asylum claims. but then after two decades of failed immigration forms in this country -- joining us as chuck, broker founder of -- he's a democratic strategist. i thank you so much for joining me today, i appreciate it. chuck, let's start with you. republicans can barely pass any legislation, they can barely govern. it's highly unlikely that they will sort of get their act together and really do this trial with mayorkas. so i guess the question, is how likely is the gop to really follow through on this impeachment, or, are we really just looking at a show? at a performance? look, it's like when your mom and dad used to take you to the movie theater when you are a little. one is just going to the movies, it's just -- it's the act tricks, it's all these things. we're moving into an election

year, the republicans aren't ever, ever going to want to do anything about fixing the problem. they love this chaos narrative, they love talking about the border but they don't want to do anything about it. there is been legislation, after legislation talking about making how a asylum system can be better, let's do the things that most common sense folks want done. but they just live in this world of chaos, and they wanted to be that way so they can go back to the base holders in states and say, democrats aren't doing and nothing. people are flooding in the country, all these false narratives are untrue. so it's good day for them when they're trying to motivate folks to shop for them because they want to make the brown folks, the bogeyman. and it's not gonna happen this. here i've been talking to focus groups, and talking to people around the culture country. folks are sick and tired of being sick and tired about an issue that hasn't gotten any better while republicans run their mouth. >> reporter: let's talk about this movie, this is a movie that's compelling, right, because people are paying attention to this immigration

movie, because the gop's talking points are you know, very fearful. it's full of fearmongering. but obviously, we do know that this immigration crisis, this humanitarian crisis, isn't. you if you are just squarely listening and hearing these republicans, you would never know that this has been a problem for many, many years. on both sides. so help us sort of fact check some of the most obvious problems with the gop's talking points right now. sure, as you just said, this has been an upward trend in migration numbers to our border for, we're going on ten years now. for ten years, congress has failed to give any administration, but there that was from obama, trump, to have the tools they need to change the conditions that you're seeing on the screen. because right now, the u.s. has been relying on its asylum system to bring in most of the people coming in from our hemisphere. that is why it's a crisis. the asylum system was never supposed to be the front door of our immigration system.

it was supposed to be for emergencies. now the reason it is being overwhelmed is because in congress, the republicans have been obstructing this entire time. they know that only the creation of new legal options for these migrants is going to actually get the border numbers down. there was talking about getting the border numbers down. but if they were serious about that, you see them put up very different policies right now in this border debate. they'd be talking about things like the presidents own parole policies and actually decreased migration in some of the biggest percentage decreases we've ever seen in the last ten years, okay? but they're still talking about new title 42, they are talking about a nationwide bedyk's removal, they are talking about mass detention again. that doesn't solve the problem, and we know that because it's been tried and it hasn't gotten the numbers, down to keep going out. >> reporter: they're not putting forward policy solutions, you noted, that they're putting photo ops. on -- on the southern border

recently. there were photo ops, you, know there were instagram photos. how effective is that strategy? it's effective in the sense that when people see a sort of chaos, disorder, they want to know what is the solution. so this is actually, once again, an opportunity, both for president biden and democrats to be really clear about the fact that they have better policies to change those images that americans are nervous about. take what's happening in cities right now. the biden administration can take mayorkas response and help make sure the new asylum seekers are getting to communities that can welcome them so they can do something on their own. there is much they can't do without congresses help. that's why democrats have to be as aggressive and talking about the fact that the republican policies, they want to now shut down the government over, are not going to change these conditions. so it's like chuck said, it's hiring immigration judges, it's building legal pathways, it's more humane options.

that's where the debate needs to go. but as long as they can do the photo ops, i think voters are gonna start to see through it because they are not coming up with solutions either. so democrats have to get more aggressive about talking about the policies that will fix this. >> reporter: so, andrea, you led me to the next question, to you, chuck, are democrats being serious enough? are they doing enough to not simply be on defense, not just simply react as andrea said, chuck, are they putting forward a cohesive message and strategy that is resonating with voters? what do you think? this is a super complicated issue but, paulo, you've known me a long time and i am as aggressive as democratic consultants can be sometimes. my mouth and my anger gets me in trouble because i think we should be doing more to protect our community. and really, the most vulnerable folks are risking their lives to get here. there's a right way to do, this even republicans under reagan can figure it out how to do this. and it's really important for viewers to understand this. there is not a simple solution, democrats are gonna have to

make some tough decisions and make sure we can get some things done that aren't going to make any of us happy. that's what negotiations are about. but what makes me most worried is republicans aren't showing up at the table in good faith. i'm a democrat, i would like to see democrats act a certain, by and i know i'm not gonna get everything i want, but i want compassion, i want to be a land of laws and a land of immigrants, all at the same time. and we can pull it. off but you have to come to the table, ready to negotiate. no, it's not gonna get everything that you want. and i think republicans are never going to give us that in the house because they want to continue to use this issue to try to drive out their base voters, and that's what's wrong with the system as a whole. >> reporter: andrea, really quickly, we don't have any time, but i do want to ask, you who is president biden listening to right now? right? he's not only being attacked by republicans, he's also being attacked by progressives, he's being attacked by voters, by progressive coalitions. who is he listening, to who should he listen to? and i, know very briefly. and as chuck, said it's a

complicated issue. but i want you to answer. he should be listening to the democrats, his party, who has been putting forward solutions. whether it's congresswoman escobar, she put forward a bipartisan bill up on the table. and also the fact that, you know, i think he has to keep listening to secretary mayorkas. and it's no secret that secretary mayorkas has the most qualified secretary of homeland security the agencies ever had. he's showing up in person every day with republicans right now to try to reach a deal. and it's very concerning that republicans would rather impeach him then work with the presidents liaison on this issue who, i have not seen since 2013 a secretary so the dedicated to reach a compromise. that is significant. but the president needs republican party willing to solve this problem with him. it's really gonna be on them if the border looks the exact same way months from now and going into the election. >> reporter: andrea, chuck, thank you so much, as usual, for helping us understand this issue. we have an update on the israel-hamas war and the ongoing quest for peace and accountability.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ but don't forget this season's updated covid-19 shot too. ♪ today, my friend you did it, you did it, you did it... ♪ centrum silver is now clinically shown to support cognitive health in older adults. it's one more step towards taking charge of your health. so every day, you can say, ♪ youuu did it! ♪ with centrum silver. i've made the preservation of american democracy the central issue of my presidency.

i believe in free and fair elections and the right to vote fairly and have your vote counted. there's something dangerous happening in america. there's an extremist movement that does not share the basic beliefs in our democracy. all of us are being asked right now: what will we do to maintain our democracy? history is watching. the world is watching. and most important our children and grandchildren will hold us responsible. the vice president and i have supported voting rights since day one of this administration, and i ask every american to join me in this cause. america is still a place of possibilities where the power resides with we, the people. that's our soul. we are the united states of america. there is nothing beyond our capacity when we act together. i'm joe biden and i approve this message.

liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, i've bee telling everyone. baby: liberty. oh! baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪ with nurtec odt, i can treat a migraine when it strikes and prevent migraine attacks, all in one. don't take if allergic to nurtec. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. ask about nurtec odt. >> reporter: south africa has

launched a case at the international court of justice arguing that israel's military options and gaza constitute genocide. some say it's a dramatic move, but perhaps not as dramatic as israel steps we candecion to reverse a decades old policy of boycotting the u.n.'s top court to announce it willfend itself against charges. on tuesday, anoffial in the israeli prime minister's office claimed south africa's, quote, giving political and legal cover to hamas's october 7th attack. and he confirmed that israel would send a legal team to the haake, to quote, dispel south africa's blood libel. so israel is expected to defend itself against the war crime accusations by pointing to hamas's alleged war crimes, like the brutal sexual violence that occurred on october 7th, as documented in an investigation by the new york times this week.

it's impossible to say how this high stakes courtroom drama will play out. but now, for the first time in the conflicts between israel when hamas, the debate about which side is in the right will not only have moral and political implications, but also legal implications. so what happens when you take a step back and we purely look at this conflict through a legal lens, to help us do exactly that is gabor rhona, a professor at them -- at columbia law school. he's the son of a holocaust survivor and -- as a human rights advocate, he has worked with several palestinian rights groups. professor, thank you very much for joining me tonight. i was very much looking forward to talking to you, i think it's very, very important to take a step back and look at this through a legal lens. but i want to start with your reaction to south africa arguing that the actions of the israeli military constitute genocide. what is your reaction? i think a pretty measured approach to this.

i have to say that despite israel's reactions and israel's horror that south africa has filed this claim, the claim is far from frivolous. on the other hand, it's hardly clear cut. and the reason it's neither frivolous nor clear-cut is because the law of genocide is extremely complex. it's not the same as on concerning war crimes, or on the law concerning crimes against humanity. in order to make a finding of genocide, there has to be, first, a factual determination that a.d. -- and identifiable group has been threatened with, or there's a process of destruction of the group, in whole or in part. but there also has to be, and this is where it gets more

complicated, of finding that the intention is to destroy the group. now if you have an armed conflict and, by virtue of that armed conflict, people are being killed even if it's people within a particular ethnic, racial, or religious group, that doesn't necessarily mean genocide. on the other hand, israeli officials have made some really damaging statements. statements that i think they will regret. because they may well come into evidence to tie the vast number of deaths and gaza to this question of genocidal intent. statements such as, we want to clear out gaza. statements such as, there are no innocent palestinians. these are all aspects of possibly israeli policy, possibly rogue statements. that will have to be

determined. but, if they are representative of israeli policy, they may well be important to establishing this specific intent of genocide. >> reporter: so, sir, for those of us who are unfortunately not lawyers, is there are a simple way, and i'm sorry to make you do this because i know this is a terrible thing to ask you, but is there is simple way to define exactly what constitutes a war crime under international humanitarian law? what is a simple, accurate way to understand that term? there is a simple way, nobody's going to be satisfied with it. with the simple way is that war crimes are violations of the law of armed conflict that have been rendered criminal. >> reporter: understood. these were reflected in the geneva conventions, they were reflected in the international criminal court statute. there are a lot of rules governing war, governing armed

conflict. some of them have criminal consequences, some of them don't. the geneva conventions, for example, requires that where president years of war are concerned, the detaining authorities are required to provide them with musical instruments. now, if there is a violation of that requirement, it's not a war crime. i'm not aware of any country that criminalized that. on the other hand, the geneva conventions and the international criminal court require criminalization and have criminalization of serious violations of the law of armed conflict, such as, targeting civilians, sexual assault, using human shields, taking hostages, failing to take precautionary measures to minimize civilian harm, or even conducting attacks against legitimate military objectives where the consequence is in

disproportionate civilian harm. >> reporter: so by your -- sorry to jump in, but just from your definition, is it fair to say that both parties, both israel and hamas, or in direct violation of the, law or is that two of us -- too simplistic way of looking at this conflict? is it fair to say that they're both in violation? i think there's ample evidence that both hamas and israel have been engaged in violations of the law of armed conflict. i think it's also fair to say that a number of those violations rise to the level of war crimes. it's easy to say in relationship to the events of october 7th and, in connection with indiscriminate hamas rocket attacks in israel, these are violations of principles of armed conflict that require attacks to be limited to

targeting military objectives, to targeting enemy combatants that prohibit sexual violence, that prohibit hostage taking. on the other hand, in connection with israel's military action in gaza, the, while siege warfare is not per se on lawful, when the effects of siege warfare result in the absolute breakdown of society, starvation, disease, israel has an obligation to either provide or to permit the provision of humanitarian assistance into gaza. israel has not been fulfilling that requirement to the extent that would be necessary. i think there are also concerns about israel's attacks. they may well be targeting illegitimate military objectives, but when you use a 2000 unguided barham to kill a

single hamas operative and that resulted in what very well had to be expected to be massive amounts of civilian death, injury, and destruction of infrastructure, i think that raises serious questions about whether or not israel is complying with its law of more obligations to maintain a tax that do not disproportionately harm civilians. >> reporter: right, we certainly don't have time to talk about even the concept of proportionality in this context, but i do want to get to reaction, professor, too the new york times investigation, or the brutal footage and images that were captured, right? evidence that shows proof of sexual assault, of rape, what was your reaction when you saw those images? was your reaction when y hors many others have said, returning us to a time before

there were international understandings about what the limits of war should be. one of the fantastic things about recent human civilization, and this is only happened very recently in the last couple of generations,, the international community has established legal limits on how wars are to be fought. has it established mechanisms for holding accountable people who violate those principles and rules. it started in large with nuremberg, after the second world war, it has continued to date with the establishment of the international criminal court, the international criminal court, by the, way has jurisdiction over what war crimes may have been committed and connection with this conflict. and for certain, the crimes of sexual violence, as well as other aspects of violations

committed by both hamas and by israel in this conflict will certainly be investigated by the international criminal of court. >> reporter: professor gabor rona, thank you very much, i wish i could talk to you for another two hours. i really appreciate your time with us tonight. another time, maybe. thank you so much. >> reporter: next, a new battle against reproductive freedom, the situation can get worse in texas? thank again. ♪ ♪ ♪ every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting the kibble. and kicking the cans.

and feeding their dogs dog food that's actually well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. get 50% off your first box at thefarmersdog.com/realfood

as the world keeps moving, help prevent covid-19 from breaking your momentum. you may have already been vaccinated against the flu, but don't forget this season's updated covid-19 shot too. >> reporter: we want to close

the hour with an update on the state of abortion access in this country. yesterday, the supreme court allowed idaho to enforce provisions of a new abortion ban that could penalize doctors from performing the procedure in emergency situations. the court -- putting on hold a federal judge's ruling that said the provisions conflict with the federal law. that law requires doctors to care for any person who comes into an emergency room, and according to the biden admistration, this includes women with complicated pregs. the high court said would heal oral arguments in ril, and issue a ruling by the end of june. this, week in a similar case in texas,alcourt ruled thestate can also ban erncy abortions even though the department of heal human services says the law takes priority over state laws banning the procedure. instead, the conservative fifth circuit court of appeals affirmed a district court

ruling that cited what state attorney general ken paxton. paxton had sued to block it itch as guidance that said, medical providers should offer abortions in emergency tuations, even in states like texas where the procedure is banned. a federal judge ruled to barr hhs from enforcing that guidance saying the department would, quote, went beyond the text of the law. the fifth circuit agreed. now this comes less than a month after the texas supreme court denied a request for an emergency court order allowing kate cox to have an abortion in the state. she learned that her fig fetus had a fatal condition which could affect her ability to have more children in the future. cox had already left the state to get an abortion when the court ruled against, or say she did not qualify for a medical exception to the ban. the texas decision demonstrates the dangerous reality for women forced to navigate very complicated pregnancies in this post roe america that we live in.

as -- in response to the fifth circuit ruling, everyone who goes to an emergency room in texas is entitled to stabilize and care, unless they happen to be a pregnant person who needs an emergency abortion. is likely already inside you. don't wait. ask your doctor about shingles. ♪ ♪ every day can be extraordinary with rich, creamy, delicious fage total yogurt. with nurtec odt i can treat and prevent my migraine attacks all in one. don't take if allergic to nurtec. allergic reactions can occur even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion and stomach pain. talk to your doctor about nurtec today.