>> good evening, i'm paula ramos, in for a man mullah dean. -- the supreme court that trump --

three years since the capitol hill attack, trump's big lie lives on. and voters appear to have growing sympathy for those who stormed the capitol. where we heading? also, new reporting on trump's companies banking millions when he was at the white house. congresswoman jasmine crockett tonight, with the receipts showing who tossed at that cash and the possible influence that came with it. and, when you can't legislate, sparked a sideshow. that's the message house republicans are really sending to voters hell-bent on impeaching the dhs secretary for his actions at the southern border. welcome to ayman, let's get started. >> on january 6th, 2021, a mob of thousands stormed the u.s. capitol. the heart and hope of american democracy, with a specific goal of using violence to prevent the certification of the 2020 election. and 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 members of congress in a group of january 6th rioters trying to breach the main door of the u.s. house chamber. hours ago, fbi agents captured three fugitives who accused of participating in the capitol attack in -- that brings us to where we are, now in this moment, on this third anniversary, as we're grappling with whether or not a man who incited an insurrection is set to overturn u.s. democracy is eligible to be president again. this week, former president donald trump asked the supreme court to overturn a colorado court that ruled he's an eligible to appear on the state primary ballot because of his actions leading up to the january 6th attack. breaking yesterday, the nation's highest court agreed to hear the case. now, 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 begin this election year, we must be clear. democracy 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 oren none of this country's voting booths come november. the justices decision in the colorado case will very likely affect all the suits to follow, from maine, where the secretary of state concluded trump's actions around january 6th disqualified him from the ballot. all the way to illinois, where a new challenge to trump's ballot eligibility under the 14th amendment was brought on thursday. so, this, yes, maybe the third anniversary of january 6th, 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 whether or not an insurrection occurred that day. we have republican primary candidates commonly referring to their rioters as patriots or as political prisoners. our courts are still in the process of litigating whether or not the men who tried to overthrow the government is eligible to be commander-in-chief once again. but, i don't know how the 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 the vice president for immigration policy and campaigns at forward a u.s., and the former federal prosecutor and legal affairs columnist at politico. thank you so much for joining me tonight. i want to start with you, senator. if you take a step back, why do you think it's been so hard 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 head of a cult who absolutely, in my view, is an insurrectionist, still out there with his following. and still perpetrating the big lie. and the supreme court has a chance to do the right thing, and one thing i hope they don't do is leave it up to the state. 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 reds states saying they're going to find that joe biden is an insurrectionist because his invasion on at the southern border. we cannot go that way. so, what i hope they do is find that he has to go off the ballot. and if they can't get there, do something where they could all come together. because, you're 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 are on the ground constantly. you're having conversations with different people, so again, to you, 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 immigration, there's huge amounts of polarization on both sides. so people can't even agree on what the fundamental problems are. take the migration crisis right now. no one can agree on what the causes or the solution is, but republicans keep pushing the debate further to the right, and that's going to make it harder for us to come and find solutions. >> what do you make of the nbc video that we showed on 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 those folks? their determination to really overturn the election, their

anger, their rage. what comes to mind when you see that image? >> i think it comes a long history of americans, whether it's white nationalism, whether it's people who believe that president trump is going to erase a lot of the civil rights progress we made in this country, it's very historical, it's very concerning. it definitely invokes fear for marginalized communities, but it's fear for all americans who really rely on our democracy, as young as it is, continuing to preserve the peaceful transfer of power. so the determination on those faces, it's very scary. heading into an election year, it's more important than ever that we historically claim that this was an insurrection, and that this is an opportunity again for president biden to preserve and protect democracy in this election. >> let's talk about the supreme court, the arguments that you'd 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 colorado's lawyers will do to push back against that argument? >> there's a number of arguments they're going to push. they've really focused on political question, kind of put that front and center, saying that this issue, whether or not donald trump engaged in an insurrection, is a political question. beyond the reach of the court to determine something more appropriate for the political branches. personally, i think the court is more likely to decide that the particular provision of the 14th amendment, section three, is not self executing. it requires congress to act. that could mean potentially a democratic caucus, even if trump won, 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 pointed out, through the justices appointed by trump, it's a republican majority. really, the state of colorado is going to 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 better argument by a country mile. the issue is just given the makeup of the court, i really don't expect a determination that donald trump is ineligible to be running for president this year. >> right. to ornato's point, he talks about the makeup of the court, which leads me to question how much legitimacy the supreme court has right now. we all know that there is a sort of crisis of trust in the court, and so i wonder what would happen if the supreme court does end up siding with donald trump, how will all of that exacerbate this legitimacy question that we are all struggling with? >> i think it would be a nightmare if they decided he had nothing to do with the insurrection. first of all, that would be a real big lie. because anyone, the heartbeat

and the pulse who lived through that day 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 the ridiculous comeback of some members of congress today who are saying, 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 battered them? so, anyone who's honest in this country, and even those who sided with trump, and that's 25%, i think, in this particular case, who don't believe the 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, they bar the door. and 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 they're 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 going to be a horror. so i am very, very -- i believe they won't do that. and i think and wish they would do -- he's off the ballot, they don't do that, i think your guest is right. they'll be saying this to congress, to figure out how to apply the 14th amendment to the president, and yes, it would be retroactive. >> renato, every one is looking at the supreme court to help us answer a lot of these questions. not a lot of this uncertainty.

maine is looking at the supreme court, illinois looking at the supreme court, do you imagine the supreme court will also try to address all of these different ballot challenges that we're seeing from other states? 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 in some states, not on the ballot in others. i don't think the supreme court is going to let that happen. i actually think that the reason the supreme court took this case on such an expedited schedule is essentially to put this to rest early on, given the makeup of the court, like i said, i think i could see them having some outs here and otherwise to say that the amendment doesn't apply to the presidency, just as it applies to every other officer of the united states. but they've got a number of outs in which they can essentially put him on the ballot anywhere. i think that's likely what they're going to do. i'm not saying that's the right decision, necessarily. obviously, this has never been decided before and no court has decided it. but the legislative history, i

guess that leans in the colorado supreme court's favor. but given the makeup of the court, my prediction is that they find a way to keep him on the ballot. >> barbara boxer and renato mariotti, thank you for joining me tonight. before we go, we're learning new details tonight about the hospitalization of secretary of defense lloyd austin. a u.s. official confirms to nbc news that the pentagon did not inform president biden, nor senior officials in the white's national security council until three days after austin 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. in a statement today, alston took responsibility for what he calls his decision on disclosure, and pledged to quote, do you better in the future. but next, trump's companies made millions from foreign governments when he was president. congresswoman jack flynn -- found the proof.

we wonder what influence, with any, came with that catch. we'll begin. we'll begin. looking for in a pad, that is always discreet. look at how it absorbs all of the liquid. and locking it right on in! you feel no wetness. - oh my gosh! - totally absorbed! i got to get some always discreet! i could've waited to tell my doctor my heart was racing just making spaghetti... but i didn't wait. i could've delayed telling my doctor i was short of breath just reading a book... but i didn't wait. they told their doctors. and found out they had... atrial fibrillation. a condition which makes it about five times more likely to have a stroke. if you have one or more of these symptoms irregular heartbeat, heart racing, chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue or lightheadedness,

contact your doctor. this is no time to wait. ♪ parodontax ♪ blood when brushing could be the start of a domino effect of gum disease. all of these signs could lead to worse. parodontax is clinically proven to reverse the signs of early gum disease. parodontax, the gum experts. hi, my name is joann, and i lost 75 pounds on golo. the other times i've lost weight, i was tired, run down. with golo, you feel great as you lose weight. i have enough energy to exercise every day.

(energetic music fades) what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com. mike had a heart attack a year ago. but he's still living in the red. with a very high risk of another attack. with his risk factors his recommended ldl-c level should be below 55. find out if you're living in the red. learn how to get a free ldl-c test. i think he's having a midlife crisis i'm not. you got us t-mobile home internet lite. after a week of streaming they knocked us down... ...to dial up speeds. like from the 90s. great times. all i can do say is that my life is pre-- i like watching the puddles gather rain. -hey, your mom and i procreated to that song. oh, ew! i think you've said enough. why don't we just switch to xfinity like everyone else? then you would know what year it was.

i know what year it is. >> the gop can finally 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 result 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 seven point $8 million in payments from at least 20 foreign countries, including china. the payments went to trump properties, including his hotels in washington d.c., las 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 released this report, and she joins me now. congresswoman, thank you so much for joining me. i want you to walk us through all of these different findings, and help us understand exactly why this isn't constitutional. >> so, i'm going to start with the why. because i think that's the part that most people are really not understanding. that's the implications of it. and so basically, when we think back to the purpose of this and where our founders stood, it was about making sure that there would not be interference from foreign countries on our democracy here, and on our

president. and so the reason that our presidents are not allowed to accept these funds is to make sure that there is not even the appearance that there is some funny business going on. it sin mueller to the ethics guidelines that we live by as members of the house, as well as one restarting to talk about our judges. so that's why this matters. number two, there has been a lot of talk about the fact that, oh, he gave 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 all records. so do we not have the full picture, number one, to determine what the profits looked 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 going to stop you for a second, because you mentioned

that chairman comer didn't 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 that trump is corrupt. i think we're all being a little too polite and politically correct. trump is corrupt, end of story. he is corrupt, and 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 are guided 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 are doing is on the up and up, then i don't know why you thought it. but that's what he likes to do. he likes to stay in courts, he likes to fight it. so we didn't end up getting information until the end of 2022. september 22, by january of 23, cole moreau was now in place and comer says, never mind, stop the flow of information. so $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, but 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 help because of some money that was maybe paid to trump. we don't know. and that's the big problem, and that's the scary problem. and what's even scarier is that this guy is trying to get back into office. >> i knew that you yourself mentioned that you don't really

have a sense of what the entirety of the picture looks like. as you've said, i know that congressman raskin has said this himself. what you have is just a fraction of the total foreign payments. so just to help us understand the scale of what we are talking about, approximately how much money are we talking about here? >> we're talking about approximately $8 million, so far. >> so far. >> so far. and this is 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 now played. if they only had, say, for instance, a situation where the prc, china, did -- for $19,000 for a day, but we never received the records for how long they actually stayed, and what the costs, were the only went with a 19,000 dollar deposit. they didn't do anything as in relation to the actual money, because we didn't have that

information. so we need you to understand that. and of the 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 coincide some visits to mar-a-lago with various monies that were exchanged. we also know now that he's filed his disclosures for the upcoming presidential election, that he absolutely received some trademarks out of china, while he was a sitting president. >> let me ask you this, the. was that the most alarming or concerning revelation for you? i know you keep mentioning china, was that the most sort of alarming thing that you found? or what shocked you, 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 war, you know, this 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, we know that he was reckless and intentionally reckless with our secrets, and with the secrets of our friends, and so for me, i am concerned for our safety. and i want americans to understand that while i know we love to live in a bubble, we are not. the republicans are a threat to our will, with 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. >> congresswoman jasmine crockett, thank you so much for helping us understand all of these matters and for breaking down everything for us. i really appreciate it. >> absolutely. >> next, choosing sideshows over solutions. is the house gop way. they want to impeach the dhs secretary over his actions at the southern border. but what's really all of this about? >> woman: what's my safelite story? i'm a photographer. and when i'm driving, i see inspiration right through my glass. so when my windshield cracked, it had to be fixed right. i scheduled with safelite autoglass. their experts replaced my windshield and recalibrated my car's advanced safety system. ♪ acoustic rock music ♪ >> woman: safelite is the one i trust. they focus on safety so i can focus on this view. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

some migraine attacks catch you off guard, but for me a stressful day can trigger migraine attacks too. that's why my go to is nurtec odt. it's the only migraine medication that can treat and prevent my 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. now i'm in control. with nurtec odt i can treat a migraine attack and prevent one. talk to your doctor about nurtec today.

♪ i'm gonna hold you forever... ♪ ♪ i'll be there... ♪ ♪ you don't... ♪ ♪ you don't have to worry... ♪ i'm adding downy unstopables to my wash. now i'll be smelling fresh all day long. [sniff] still fresh. ♪♪ get 6x longer-lasting freshness, plus odor protection. try for under $5! when you shop wayfair, plus odor protection. you get big deals for your home - every day. so big, we'll have you saying... am i a big deal? yeah you are, because it's a big deal, when you get a big deal. wayfair deals so big that you might get a big head. because with savings so real - you can get your dream sofa for half the price. wayfair. it's always a big deal. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪

i love that my daughter still needs me. but sometimes i can't help due to burning and stabbing pain in my hands, so i use nervive. nervive's clinical dose of ala reduces nerve discomfort in as little as 14 days. now i can help again. feel the difference with nervive. right now get a free footlong at subway. like the new deli heroes. buy one footlong in the app, get one free. it's a pretty big deal. kinda like me. order in the subway app today. >> house republicans will advance an effort next week to impeach the homeland security secretary -- a hearing will be held next wednesday by the house homeland security committee on the impeachment allegations, with witnesses to be announced in the coming days. republicans are accusing him of abandoning his duty in his

management of the u.s. mexico border, alleging that he has participated in quote, egregious conduct, and refusal to enforce the law. now, the gop has long targeted him, this isn't new. there have 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 hanging in the balance after making asylum claims. but then there are -- and it -- is back with me to discuss, and joining me is chuck rocha, founder of solidarity strategies. he's also a democratic strategist, thank you for joining, us i really 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 follow through on this impeachment, or are we really just looking at a show, this sort of performance? >> look, it's like when your mom and dad used to take you to the movie theater when you are little boy. it's just going to the movies, it's just the metrics. that's all this is. and it's politics. we're moving into an election year, the republicans are never going to want to do anything about actually 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's been legislation after legislation talking about making sure our asylum system can be better, let's do the things that most common folks want done, but they live in this world of chaos and they want to be like that so they can go to their base voters in states and say -- aren't doing anything, people are flooding into the country, all of these false narratives aren't true. but it's good p.a.s for them when they're trying to motivate white folks to show up for them because they want to make the

brown folks the bogeyman, and it's not going to happen this year. i've been talking to focus groups around the country, folks and -- an issue that has not gotten any better while republicans just run their mouth. >> let's talk about this movie, this is a movie that is compelling. right? because people are paying attention to this immigration movie, because the gop's talking points are very fearful, it's full of fearmongering. but obviously we do know that this immigration crisis, this humanitarian crisis, isn't new. you were just squarely listening and hearing these republicans, you would never know that this has been a problem for many years, on both sides. and so help us sort of fact-checked some of the most obvious problems with the gop's talking points right now. >> sure, so as you just said, this has been an upward trend in migration numbers to our border for going on ten years now. and for ten years congress has failed to actually give any

administration, whether that was from obama, trump, to right now have the terms they need to change the conditions 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's 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. they're always 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 would be talking about things like the presidents own parole policies that actually decreased migration in some of the biggest percentage decreases we've ever seen in the last ten years. but they're interested in

talking about new title 42, they're talking about nationwide expedited removal, they're talking about mass detention again. those don't solve the problem, and we know that because they've been tried and they've never gotten the numbers down. they keep going up. >> they are putting forward policy solutions, you're right about that. but they are putting forward photo ops. speaker johnson was at the southern border recently, there were photo ops, and there were sort of instagram photos. how effective is that strategy? >> it's effective in the sense that when people see any sort of chaos, disorder, they want to know what is the solution? and so this is once again an opportunity for both 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 could take a more aggressive response in helping to make sure that new asylum seekers are actually getting to communities that can welcome them, so they can do something on their own.

there's much they can't do without congress's help, so that's why democrats have to be as aggressive in talking about the fact that the republican policies that they want to now shut down the government over are not going to change these conditions. and so it's like chuck said. it's hiring immigration judges, it's building legal pathways, it's more humane options. and that's where the debate needs to go, but as long as we do the photo ops, i think voters are going to start to see through it because they're not coming up with solutions either. so democrats have to get more aggressive about talking about the policies that will fix this. >> okay, you just let me do the next question to you, jack. are democrats being serious enough? are they doing enough to not simply be on defense, to not simply react? are they putting forward the sort of cohesive message and strategy that is resonating with voters? what do you think? >> this is a super complicated issue, but you've known me for a long time, and i'm aggressive

as democratic consultants could be. sometimes my mouth and anger gets me in trouble because i think we should be doing more to protect our community and really the most vulnerable folks are was being their lives to get here. there's a right way to do, this even republicans under reagan could figure at hundred do this. it's really important for viewers to understand this. there's not a simple solution, and democrats are going to have to make some tough decisions and make sure that 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'd like to see things a certain way, and i know that i'm not gonna get everything that i want. but i want compassion, i want this to be a land of laws and a land of immigrants all at the same time. and we can pull that off, but you have to come to the table ready to negotiate, knowing that you're not going to 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. >> really quickly, we don't

have any time. but i do want to ask you, who is president biden listening to right now? because he's not just being attacked by republicans, he's also being attacked by progressives, he's being attacked by voters, he's being attacked by progressive coalitions. who was he listening to? who should he listen to, and again, very briefly, i know this is a very complicated issue but i do want you to answer. >> he should be listening to the democrats as a party that have been putting forward solutions. so whether it's congresswoman escobar, she put forward a bipartisan bill up on the table, and also the fact that i think he needs to keep listening to secretary mayorkas. and it's no secret that he is the most qualified secretary of homeland security the agencies ever had, and 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 than work with the presidents liaison on this issue, who i have not seen since 2013 a secretary be so dedicated to try to reach a compromise.

that's significant. but they need a republican party willing to solve the issue with him, and it's really going to be on them if the border looks the exact same way months from now and going into the election. >> 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. for peace an accountability accountability my frequent heartburn had me taking antacid after antacid all day long but with prilosec otc just one pill a day blocks heartburn for a full 24 hours. for one and done heartburn relief, prilosec otc. one pill a day, 24 hours, zero heartburn.

have heart failure with unresolved symptoms? it may be time to see the bigger picture. heart failure and seemingly unrelated symptoms like carpal tunnel syndrome, shortness of breath, and irregular heartbeat could mean something more serious, called attr-cm a rare, underdiagnosed disease that worsens over time.

sound like you? call your cardiologist and ask about attr-cm. it's time to feed the dogs real food, not highly processed pellets. the farmer's dog is fresh food made with whole meat and veggies. it's not dry food. it's not wet food. it's just real food. it's an idea whose time has come. >> south africa has launched a my name is caron and i'm from brooklyn. i work for the city of new york as a police administrator. i oversee approximately 20 people and my memory just has to be sharp. i always hear people say, you know, when you get older, you know, people lose memory. i didn't want to be that person. i decided to give prevagen a try. my memory became much sharper. i remembered more! i've been taking prevagen for four years now. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription.

case that the international court of justice,rguing that israel's military actions in gaza constitute genocide. some say it's a dramatic move, but perhaps not as dramatic as israel's decision to reverse a decades old policy of boycotting the u.n.'s top course -- on tuesday, an official inhe israeli prime minister's office claimed soutafca is quote, giving political and legal cover to hamas's october 7th attack. and he confirmed that israel would send a legal team to

quote, dispel south africa's absurd blood libel. now, 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 conflict between israel and hamas, mid debate about which side is in the right will not only have moral and political implications, but also legal implications. so, what happens, if we take a step back, and we purely look at this conflict through a legal lens? to help us do exactly that is corona, a professor at cordoba law school and columbia law school. he's the son of a holocaust survivor, and his family in israel. as a human rights advocate, he's worked with several palestinian rights groups. professor, thanks very much for joining me tonight. i was very much looking forward to talking to you, because i

think it's very important to sort of take a step back and just look at this through a legal lens. i want to start with your reaction to south africa, arguing that the actions of the israeli military constitute genocide. what's your reaction? >> i take 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 the law concerning war crimes, it's not the same as the law concerning crimes against humanity. in order to make a finding of genocide, there has to be first a factual determination that a

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. a finding that the intention it's 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 in 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. >> so, sir, for those of us that are unfortunately not lawyers, is there 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? just for our viewers. what's the more sort of simple, accurate way to understand that term? >> there is a simple way, nobody is going to be satisfied with it. the simple way is that war

crimes are violations of the law of armed conflict, that have been rendered criminal. >> understood. >> these were enacted in the geneva conventions, the 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 prisoners 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 criminalizes 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 disproportionate civilian harm. >> so, by your -- sorry to jump in. but from your definition, then, is it fair to say that both parties, both israel and hamas are indirect violation of the law, or is that too much of a simplistic way of looking at this conflict? is it fair to say that there are both in violation? >> i think that 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 the 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 -- wall siege warfare is not, per se, unlawful, 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 legitimate military objectives. but when you use a 2000 unguided bombs to kill a single hamas operative, and that results 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 war allegations to maintain a tax that do not disproportionately harm civilians. >> right. we certainly don't have time to talk about even just the concept of proportionality in this context. but i do want to get your reaction, professor, to the new york times investigation and sort of the real footage and images that were captured.

evidence that shows proof of sexual assault, of rape, what was your reaction when you saw those images? >> horrific. and i think as 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, i think, fantastic things about recent human civilization, and this has 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 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 whatever war crimes may have been committed in 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 court. >> professor, thank you so much. i wish i could talk to you for another two hours, i really appreciate your time. >> another time, maybe. thank you so much. >> another time, sir. next, a new battle against reproductive freedom. you thought it could not get any worse in texas? think again. exas think again. think again. ♪♪ vicks vapostick provides soothing, non-medicated vicks vapors. easy to apply for the whole family. vicks vapostick. and try vicks vaposhower for steamy vicks vapors.

i could've waited to tell my doctor my heart was racing just making spaghetti... but i didn't wait. i could've delayed telling my doctor i was short of breath just reading a book... but i didn't wait. they told their doctors. and found out they had... atrial fibrillation. a condition which makes it about five times more likely to have a stroke. if you have one or more of these symptoms irregular heartbeat, heart racing, chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue or lightheadedness, contact your doctor. this is no time to wait. [city ambience sounds] [car screech] [car door slam] [camera shutter sfx] introducing ned's plaque psoriasis. [camera shutter sfx] he thinks his flaky, red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. [ned?] it can help you get clearer skin and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing it for nearly a decade. otezla is also approved

to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. [crowd gasp] ♪♪ with clearer skin, movie night is a groovy night. [ting] ♪♪ live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. she found it. the feeling of finding the psoriasis treatment she's been looking for. sotyktu is the first-of-its-kind, once-daily pill for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis... for the chance at clear or almost clear skin. it's like the feeling of finding that outfit psoriasis tried to hide from you. or finding your swimsuit is ready for primetime. dad! once-daily sotyktu is proven to get more people clearer skin than the leading pill. don't take if you're allergic to sotyktu; serious reactions can occur.

sotyktu can lower your ability to fight infections including tb. serious infections, cancers including lymphoma, muscle problems, and changes in certain labs have occurred. tell your doctor if you have an infection, liver or kidney problems, high triglycerides, or had a vaccine or plan to. sotyktu is a tyk2 inhibitor. tyk2 is part of the jak family. it's not known if sotyktu has the same risks as jak inhibitors. find what plaque psoriasis has been hiding. ask your dermatologist about sotyktu for clearer skin. so clearly you. sotyktu. oh... stuffed up again? so congested! you need sinex saline from vicks. just sinex, breathe, ahhhh! what is — wow! sinex. breathe. ahhhhhh! >> 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 granted requests followed by state officials, putting on a 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, according to the biden administration, this includes women with complicated pregnancies. the high court said it will hear oral arguments on the issue in april, and issue a ruling by the end of june. this, week in a similar case in texas, an appeals court ruled the state could also ban emergency abortions, even though the department of health and 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 sided with state attorney general ken paxton. paxton had -- guidance that set medical providers should offer abortions in emergency situations, even in states like texas, where the procedure is banned. the federal judge ruled to barr hhs from enforcing that guidance, saying the department would quote, well beyond the text of the law. the fifth circuit agreed. now, this all comes less than a month after the texas supreme court denied a request for an emergency court order, allowing kate cox to -- now she had learned that her 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 it, saying she did not qualify for a medical exception to the ban. the texas decision demonstrates a dangerous reality for women forced to navigate very complicated pregnancies in this post roe america that we live

in. -- said in response to the fifth circuit ruling, everyone who goes to an emergency room in texas is entitled to stabilizing care, unless they happen to be a pregnant person who needs an emergency abortion. abortion. themelp. it's the only medication that can treat a migraine when it strikes and prevent migraine attacks. treat and prevent, 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. relief is possible. talk to a doctor about nurtec odt. ♪oh♪ ♪then you take me by the hand♪ ♪i feel better again♪ ♪oh i feel better now♪

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.

my little family is me, aria, and jade. just the three of us girls. i never thought twice about feeding her kibble. but about two years ago, i realized she was overweight. she was always out of breath. that's when i decided to introduce the farmer's dog to her diet. it's just so fresh that she literally gets bubbles in her mouth. now she's a lot more active, she's able to join us on our adventures. and we're all able to do things as a family. ♪ get started at betterforthem.com hey, you should try new robitussin honey medi-soothers for long-lasting cough and sore throat relief. try new robitussin lozenges with real medicine and find your voice. you know? we really need to work on your people skills.

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. home of the xfinity 10g network. this is the katie phang show. live from miami, florida. we've got lots of news to cover and lots of questioo