plus, ask how to get up to $1000 prepaid card with qualifying internet. that does it for the weekend saturday morning. be sure to file the show on social media at the weekend msnbc, and please make sure you all come up tomorrow, because we will be speaking with the secretary of health and human services, javier becerra as a record number of americans have signed up for coverage under the affordable care act, and so much more that is tomorrow starting 80 am eastern only on msnbc. velshi starts right now. hey, ali, good to see you. how is jennifer granholm. what are you talking? about >> which talking about the idea that the federal government has decided to put a pause on the liquefied natural gas production in export

projects. it is an interesting one, because on one hand, donald trump says that day one, dictator for a day, i'm going to drill drill drill. russia producing more fossil fuels than anybody in the world by a long shot, and then antibodies ever produced. let's get down to the skin of some climate activists who say that maybe that is not the goal that we should be having. and so this is that intersection between energy dependent and being a leader in the world and guaranteeing freedom for people who don't want to buy their gas from russia, and at the same time, being conscious of the climate. it is an interesting tightrope that we are going to talk about. have a great weekend, i will see you again tomorrow morning. >> all right, take care alley. >> all right. right ♪ ♪ ♪ i'm ali velshi. we begin this morning with a blockbuster penalty that a jury has awarded the writer e. jean carroll in a defamation case against the twice impeached four times indicted ex president. yesterday, a jury held donald trump lile for defaming carroll and dered him to pay

a total of 83 point $3 million. that amount includes $11 million to repair damage to her reputation, seven point $3 million for emotional harm and other damages, and $65 million in punitive damages. this is in addition to the $5 million that a different jury in a separate trial awarded carroll last year when it held trump liable for sexually abusing her during an encounter at a bergdorf goodman department store in the 1990s and defaming her after she told her story publicly in 2019. and so now, that is a total of 88 point $3 million between carols to civil suits against trump. but in her closing argument, the la who represented carroll inboth cases spoke about how that first trial had basically no effect on curbing trump's behavior. que, typically when someone is held liable in court for spreading false inflammatory lies, they .

in this country, our justice system, that is how it is supposed to work. even if you n't like a jury's decision, you e supposed to follow it. those are the rules. this doesn't depend on your politics, it doesn't depend on who you or or whether you support a particul policy or a particular party. we all have to follow the law. donald trump, however, acts as if these rules and laws just don't applto him. after the prior jury found that his attacks on miss carroll or falls in defamatory last year, did he respect the jury verdict? no, not at all. not even for 24 hours, end quote. for nearly a decade, we've watched donald trump destroy our political institutions and make a mockery of the constitution. he has breached every tradition and norm. he's breached the peaceful transition of power that is kept his country stable from one administration to the next. he's done it all with almost complete immunity and a large part so the republican party

has protected him and integral consequences for's actions. there's still a question the back of some people's minds about whether defendant trump might barrel through the justice system the same way candidate trump has barreled through and destroyed our politics. trump continue to attack and spread lies about e. jean carroll after the first trial, and we continue to do so after the second trial, which begs th question, can anso of punishment or penalty actually stopped him? as we've heard a caplan sent to the jury doing your closing argument, quote, this trial is also about something much more profound, where the rules that apply to everyone else, to you and to me, to miss carroll and to our families and friends, whether they also apply to donald trump, end quote. carol's lawsuits are only the beginning. judge arthur engoron, who is presiding over the civil fraud trial against trump and his business, is expected to issue penalties in that case by the end of the month. new york attorney general letitia james, who brought the lawsuit and asked the judge to

consider penalizing trump upwards of 300 and $70 million in addition to permanently barring him from ever running a company in new york state again, which would be a huge blow to his company. then again, there are trumps for pending criminal trials, the first of which could begin as early as march. trump's legal situation has been conversation fodder for so long, but now it is becoming very real with very serious consequences. and yet, the republican party is almost certain to put him up as its presidential nominee and force the electorate to reckon with possibly electing a man who has been impeached twice, found liable for sexual abuse, defamation, and fraud, and could even be convicted felon by the time november rolls around. joining me now is suzanne crying, she's a pulitzer prize-winning investigative reporter for the new york times in an innocent pc contributor and probably knows more about donald trump's finances knows himself. also with us is molly jong-fast, she's a special correspondent

for vanity fair and the host of the fast politics podcast. thank you to both of you, thank you for being with both of us. molly, let me start with you. your friend of e. jean carroll's. this is been a remarkable quest by her for justice. donald trump kept implying that e. jean carroll is benefiting from this whole thing, and she's getting finished front. i don't -- that is a weird thing to say to somebody who professes that they had been sexually assaulted by someone under any circumstances, but you know e. jean carroll. tell me about her through this whole thing? >> i mean, e. jean carroll did not need donald trump to get famous. she was still a very successful and respected columnist for -- magazine. the idea, again, this is a super massage mystic idea. an idea that women will come forward with allegations with sexual assault to get famous, and by the way, he has used this defense against women before, and trump has numerous

allegations of sexual assault from numerous women and this is just the only case brought to trial because of the adult survivors act, which created more of a long statute of limitations so that she could actually have her day. i think what is so interesting about this case is that here is a woman who is donald trump's own aides who is holding him accountable. and, remember bound trump has not been married to somebody's own age for two wives. and so i think it is pretty interesting, and i think it really is an ego blow for him. >> suzanne, you and i had a conversation yesterday in which he ran it through some math, so we've 83 point $3 million plus the $5 million for the past judgment, and there is also the arthur engoron stuff, which is going to happen. the new york civil fraud trial that is going to happen in the next few months. the next few days possibly or

weeks, we are going to get a decision on that. run me through the math, because 88.3 million now, when you put these two together, versus donald trump, who in a deposition last april for the new york fraud trial said he has $400 million in cash. >> right, so it's a lot of money even for donald trump, and he has said in this deposition that he has $400 million in cash. whether or not that is true or not or how much is -- that you can pay, it we don't know. but we do have a lot of pieces about his cash situation that came from the new york attorney general civil trial into testimony. we could see, they're going to start the journal of new york, which they've got a lot of financial documents from inside of the company, he, in 2014, had $283 million, and that is an unencumbered cash or some stuff tied up at a joint venture that he has no control over whether or not he gets the cash.

so we had a lot of renovations to his properties, a couple of big properties, and that drained a lot of his cash, and then in 2015, he knows that he was running for president and he lost a lot of licensing deals when that happened, and those are just quick cash opportunities for him. so what license has his name, they write a check. so he has a meeting with ellen wisely because he's entering the white house, and this is around 2000, or even early 17 or 16, and by that point, his cash position has dwindled just two available cash from about $38 million. and now this is considered according to the attorney general a cash crunch at that time. he has come a long way since 2014 now to do hasn't 17. and in recent years, the two main events that have happened are he sold the least that he controlled at the old post office hotel in washington post and then separately he had a agreement with -- golf course where you got

around 60 million for that. but we don't know if there's more cash. i think he has enough to meet this, and he's going to have to in the short term say that he's going to put up a bond, but at some point what a civil division comes down, it could be as early as this weekend, and i'm expecting him to be north of three injured million, and you're looking at a situation where he's going to have to -- there's going to after down the road he appeals. there's going to have to be asset sales going on. it is serious. this is a lot of money, and it also hurts his ability to get loans if you wanted to, to do a lot of other things. so that is sort of where he is at as far as what pieces we know. molly, against the question is, because we're earning capital at said to the jury, what you need to do is figure out an award that is going to be big enough to make donald trump's top. he hasn't stopped. insofar as maybe he's going to have to pay it, but to suzanne's point, it will

probably make him think differently, and he hasn't taken e. jean carroll's namesake out of the courtroom last night, but he's been posting, and he's been talking about the witch hunt and the biden administration and all sorts of things that are not clear. you will do the same thing after arthur engoron comes on with his decision. what, if anything, will make donald trump stopped? there are some people who say money is the only thing that can make him stop. it doesn't seem to be affecting him at the moment. >> trump is a fundamental problem, which has he has used these court cases for his campaign, right? he has been candidate trump instead of defendant trump, and what happens now is, and that's worked for him with the base. but it's not a very effective way to be in court. so, when he has these cases, he doesn't, he tries them on his social media. he tries them on truth social, and his people watch and he says, this is not true, this is that, and his base response to that. but the problem for him is that

when a client is found guilty of defamation, which is what this is, you have to stop defaming, or else you have to keep paying. and this runs afoul with the candidate trump versus defendant trump situation. >> suzanne, let's talk about the way donald trump pays for this without getting into asset sales, as you mentioned. and one of the questions is whether he, he fund-raisers for his legal fees a lot. he goes out there and sent out messages, and i think in my division than one in the last 24 hours. again, it doesn't mention the penalty he has to pay. there is a light there. you're allowed to fund-raise for your legal fees. it's a little trickier as to whether you could fund-raise for you are penalties, which, in theory, is not allowed. there haven't been a lot of examples in life about enforcing that, because there aren't a lot of people who could actually fund-raise for their penalties. >> interesting thing, and i really am careful to give you a black and white yes no answer

here. there are work-arounds on this. for example, people have been known to, when they're facing this kind of penalty, to sell things. baseball cards, coins, i can imagine donald trump doing something like that in order to raise money. we don't know that he's at that point. it's just not a black and white answer. but for now, he's got to put up his own money for these penalties. it's not something that's coming from donors like the legal fees. but you now, i'm still trying to get to the bottom of it. with everything, there's a workaround that somebody is going to figure out. >> molly, one of the things that happened on the civil fraud trial decision came down, in other words, right, now it's just like the e. jean carroll thing. it was about the penalties. the arthur engoron thing is just about the penalties, however donald trump has committed fraud. that's been established. it's got to the core of donald trump, right? the reason that one is maybe more important than the criminal cases, in which his liberty is at stake, is it gets

to the core of that donald trump myth as this very, very successful guy. the emperor has been proved to have no clothes, because in new york court, it's been shown a lot of his empire was built on fraud. what do you think that does to him? >> i think it's very tough for him. we saw that's why he's showing up at all these court cases, too. he knows that he is the great businessman. that's how he won the presidency. this reality television businessman. , so it strikes him at the core. and i would say also, look, trump has his legacy of misogyny and racism, right? that is his presidency. so, to see him held accountable for violence towards a woman, right, and for there to be a cash number on that? that runs contrary to all of the massage in me and i think it's ultimately quite a good cultural thing, to see you cannot, the allegations, that women are believed, and, then they can have their day in court. i think it's very profound, and

i think it's quite good, ultimately. >> thank you to both of you for starting us off this morning. suzanne craig is a pulitzer players-winning investigative reporter for the new york times and msnbc contributor, and i would recommend everyone goes back to the remarkable piece she and her colleague wrote a few years ago. it's a very long piece for the new york times outlines all of the donald trump stuff as it relates to his finances and his businesses. and of course, a great friend molly jong-fast is a special correspondent for vanity fair in the coast of the fast politics podcast. this week, president biden paused the approval of new liquefied natural gas projects. coming up, i'm going to talk to the energy secretary, general and home, the effects these problems have on the climate, the economy, and national security. plus, we're nearing the second anniversary of russia's war in ukraine. yet, republicans are now playing politics when it comes to approving additional and very vital u.s. aid. i'm going to discuss that with a democratic representative jake auchincloss of massachusetts, former united states marine. retired u.s. marines.

and i'll call to order this week's meeting of the velshi banned book club on the agenda, kindred by the late octavia butler. we'll explore the legacy of the woman behind the words. you are watching velshi on msnbc.

all right, take a look at this young boy. he is mohammed elias kyi. he's the sole character of his seven siblings in southern gaza, and he's 13 years old. on october 10th, three days after hamas attacked israel, killing around 1200 people, and taking around 250 hostages, mohammed's mother went to visit their grandmother, who was not feeling well. it was meant to be a short trip. while she was gone, the father got a call that a house not far away had been bombed. it was their grandmothers house. mohammed's mother had been killed in the bombing. soon enough, their own home was bombed. the siblings were taken to be

treated at a hospital, but in the process, they were separated from their father, whom they have not seen or heard from since. when mohammed and his seven siblings first relocated to the south of gaza, they lived on the street for about three days. then, they found temporary refuge at a hospital until it was flooded with sewage water, and they were forced to live in a tent. for 113 days, mohammed and his siblings have moved from place to place, no real home, no parents, no guarantee they will have a roof over their heads when they lay them down to sleep. every day, mohammed vendors out to find food, water, and fire wood for his siblings. the youngest, six month old telling, it's struggling to eat because she has no mother to breastfeed her. since filling with our nbc crew, talin was hospitalized with gastroenteritis the multiple infectious. mohammed called her cell phone once a day and no one has ever picked up. >> [speaking in a global language]

>> a new acronym has emerged among medical and aid workers to describe children like muhammad and his siblings. wcnsf. wcnsf, wounded child, no surviving family. wcnsf. it's not one of those catchy acronyms that rolls off the tongue, and it shouldn't. it should be difficult to say. your mind should be doing gymnastics in order to comprehend so many sick, injured, and orphaned children. gaza is dwindling and overwhelmed hospital system is seeing an influx in children arriving wounded in alone, no family members. doctor taj -- of pediatric intensive care doctor effect doctors without borders, says wcnsf it's unique to the current conflict in

gaza. she held back tears as she told the bbc the acronym has quote, not been used infrequently, and quote, in recent weeks. doctors in the neonatal unit at the al-aqsa martyrs hospital in central gaza tell the australian broadcasting company they care for orphan babies without even knowing their names. it's impossible to identify them, so, they are assigned a number. in actuality, the number of orphan children in gaza has not yet been calculated. that's another impossible task. unicef says that figure is hard to determine, given the sheer number of people being killed, and a desperate situation on the ground. a consistent communication blackout and outages have added to the challenge of locating these kids parents or even relatives. the united nations has called the gaza strip a graveyard for children. so far, more than 26,200 people have been killed in gaza since the start of the war. according to the palestinian ministry of health and gaza. a spokesman for the health ministry says 70% of those killed are women and children. since october 7th, 10,000

children have been killed. that's about one child every 15 minutes. at that rate, one child in gaza will have died since the moment i started this show, seven more will die by the end of the program. that surviving children, like mohammed and his brothers and sisters, are barely living at all. we are childhoods are now stained with trauma, and with loss. wcnsf. as devastating as it is, reflects the reality of this war. that's with a 13 year old mohammed -- told our nbc news producers. he said, i wish we would get the news that the war ended. i wish my uncle would call me and tell me they had gotten in contact with that, and he's alive. even if our houses devastated, i would put this tent in our house and we can sit in it. i am tired of the war. i wish it ends. i carry a huge responsibility. i wish i could go back to school as my friend who used to sit next to me in class. i miss my neighborhood. and i hope i can return to my studies. same thing for my siblings who are very young, like first and second grade. they also keep pushing the war ends.

you may know adam schiff's work to protect the rule of law, or to build affordable housing,

or write california's patients bill of rights. but i know adam through the big brother program. we've been brothers since i was seven. he stood by my side as i graduated from yale, and i stood by his side when he married eve, the love of his life. i'm a little biased, but take it from adam's little brother. he'll make us all proud as california senator. i'm adam schiff and i approve this message. israel gaza war, i'm joined by

ben rhodes, the former deputy national security adviser and the president of barack obama. and he's also an nbc political contributor and the co-host of pod save the world. he's author of the book, after the fall, but rise of authoritarianism in the world we've made. good morning to you, ben. thank you for being with. us there's so much to discuss on this particular issue, but i want to bring it down to brass tacks for the moment, and that is a lot of innocent palestinians are dying, and probably 100 plus hostages, who are also innocence, remain held captive by hamas in gaza. those two problems need to be solved before any political problems are solved. but political problems are standing in the way of both of

those issues being solved. >> yeah, i mean, that's right. if you begin with the hostages, we all, of course, would like to see those hostages returned to their families safely. the reality, though, ali, the same thing that is putting all those palestinian civilians at risk and killing so many palestinians makes it impossible to rescue those hostages. you can't rescue a hostage with a 2000 pound bomb being dropped on gaza. that's just not possible. so, there has to be a pause in the fighting, a cease-fire, in order to both negotiate the release of those hostages and provide some aid to get into the palestinians who've suffered so greatly. and unless until the current military it's really operation stops, you can't solve either of those problems. >> there's a sort of growing frustration amongst hostage families to say, whatever your long term and otherwise valid

are important goals are for hamas for the israeli government, can we prioritize getting the hostages out? there seems to be movement on that. they're supporting that the cia director and the head of the mossad and the prime minister of cover our meeting in europe to discuss something that looks like it could actually be a deal. hamas says no deal without an absolute end to the military activity. israel has largely said it's a nonstarter. do you have some sense we might be moving towards something? >> i think the thing that has changed in israel's first of all, there's a tremendous amount of pressure politically on the already unpopular netanyahu government to do something about this hostage issue. with every day that goes by, you see hostage families become more assertive and making sure their voices are heard. again, what people are seeing is look, in a different kind of military operation, one that is not target hamas's leaders and military, when you have a situation where the hostages themselves would put at risk

with the whole scale leveling of gaza we're seeing. never mind the fact that the way in which this has grinded on does not feel like, given the nature of israel's tactics in gaza, that the recovery of those hostages is focused. it just feels like the destruction of gaza has been the focus. that includes hamas military wing infrastructure, but it also includes many of the structures and gaza where hospitals might be and obviously, so many innocent people, including children are right now. the other thing that we're beginning to see an israeli says this military objective of destroying hamas is not achievable. they've been at this for months. they're facing greater international isolation. obviously, the biden administration, with each passing day, seems more uncomfortable without israel's military is doing. , it they, only taken on a fraction of hamas's military leadership and hamas leaders are out of the country. so, i think getting to a pause is kind of in everybody's interest here. chiefly, obviously, the palestinians have suffered so much, but also israel to stop and think and consider, is this

the best approach? can we get these hostages out after the negotiation? is there something of an alternative to the type of military operation we've seen the last few months that, you know, can be brought to bear here? >> so, let's talk about best approach, because from day one, this is the one space in which there was some space between israel and america, because from day one, netanyahu had stated the objective is to destroy every last surviving, i think, netanyahu used the term member of hamas. it's not really a membership organization. it is an ideology that goes back to muslim brotherhood and the 1930s. and the u.s. had said to israel back then, the goal is not clear here. now, i understand goals and military exercises are not always crystal clear in the beginning. but the u.s. is always said, you need to change your stated goal, because the elimination of hamas is not necessarily going to be, that's going to allow an open-ended war that could go on for five or ten years. >> that's right. it's not achievable.

we should just say that. hamas is not going to come out and say okay, you won. we don't exist anymore. there will always be people that choose to identify as hamas. there are people outside the gaza strip who are leaders of hamas. how you define who is a member of hamas or a sympathizer with hamas in the gaza strip, which is 2 million people, it is not something that can be done with a manual here. there are leaders that can be identified in the military wing with capabilities that could be taken that, but it's always dangerous when you have a leadership setting a military objectives that is an achievable. i think it leads to the kind of indiscriminate use of force we have seen and gaza. so, narrowing this objective and figuring out, because ali, there's not going to be a moment where hamas says we okay, we give up, you on the. words victory for you guys. you need to be thinking about where is this all going? what is the outcome that is going to make israel secure and allow for palestinians to live with dignity and self

determination? and that has not been articulated at all by this israeli government, and as the added factor that prime minister netanyahu's only political feature is tied to the duration of this war. because a lot of people believe that when the war is over, he'll be gone, including for the failure to protect israel on october 7th. so, getting focused on this narrow objective is essential, but getting this israeli prime minister to do that is very difficult. >> it's going to be very difficult. the pressure as you say, it's growing on him from the world at american political circles. ben, great to see you. ben rhodes is a former national security adviser under president obama. he's an msnbc political contributor and the author of the book, after the fall, the rise of authoritarianism in the world we've made. all right, calling the climate crisis the quote as accidental threat of our time, the biden administration is halted approval of new liquefied natural gas terminals until a comprehensive review can take place. i want to dig into this with the energy secretary, jennifer granholm. she joins me in just a few moments.

kindred tells the story of dane, that a black writer living happily with her white husband in 1976 los angeles. suddenly, dana's take it back in time to antebellum maryland, where she discovers two of her ancestors. the spoiled son of a white slave holder and a young enslaved woman. they must fight to preserve her identity and her survival in the future of the face of violence, cruelty, and abject racism. equal parts historical fiction, science fiction, and a blistering commentary on the generational consequences of slavery, kindred by the renowned octavia butler is one of the most crucial books of the past 100 years. today on the velshi banned book club, more diving into the book and looking at the woman behind the words. octavia butler, some 20 years after her death, it's time

everyone learns about octavia butler and her remarkable story. don't miss today's meeting of the velshi banned book club, coming up in our next hour. but first, the white house is hitting pause on certain fossil fuel projects. it's considered a step in the right direction for the climate crisis. coming up next, i'll speak to the united states secretary of energy, jennifer granholm. this week, the biden

administration pasta prevails for a massive fossil fuel projects, specifically liquefied natural gas, or lng. export terminals. the pause was ordered so the department of energy could conduct a review of the economic and environmental impact of the new project. the white house put out the statement yesterday that reads, inart, quote, we will take a hard look at the impacts of lng exports on energy costs, america's energy security, and our environment. this pause on new elegy approvals sees the climate crisis for what it is, the existential threat of our time. end quote. fracked, or hydraulically fractured natural gas, is telling us there's a cleaner, greener upfront, because in his gusher state, technically does burn coal or even cooler oil. but it can't be shipped as a gas. it has to be liquefied. there is consensus among environmental scientists, including top scientist at the resource -- that liquefied natural gas on

the process of chilling, storing, and shipping it's on math by ocean liner could actually be worse for the environment than oil. the last review of liquefied natural gas projects happened in 2018, since then, the united states export capacity as more than tripled, and is set to increase even more in the next five years with projects that are currently under construction. the u.s. is now the world's top exporter of lng, providing a steady supply of it to europe and asia, which it weaned off of russian natural gas since the start of the war in ukraine. president biden has assured critics at home and abroad that this pause will not imperil national security for the united states or for our allies. that exemptions will be made for natural security purposes. the energy secretary, general granholm, has said the pause will not have an impact on already approved projects, which pushed american lng exports to record highs last year. for more on this, i am joined by jennifer granholm, the

united states secretary of energy. secretary granholm, great to see you again. thank you for being back on the show. >> you bet, ali. great to be on. >> let's talk about this. you are walking a fine line here in that there is something important about energy independence and energy security in the united states, americans believe that to be true. there's also this larger issue, energy security in the world, particularly in a world in which we have asked european allies not to buy russian natural gas. at the same time, there is growing and increasing pressure from those who are worried about the climate as your administration has said, an ex dental crisis, to produce less. in terms of philosophy. tell me about this balancing act, and how you see it unfold. it is clear that the president very much wants to make sure how american interests our center in the decision to pause, and you did a very nice job of describing what this was and why is not. it is not a ban on exports.

it is a review of those projects that are in the queue. so, just to put this into context a little bit, ali, we currently export, as you noted, the largest in the world, 14 billion cubic feet. i know that sounds like a number most people can't wrap their head around, but center on the 14 part. that is what we currently export asked the largest. we have another 12 billion cubic feet that are under construction, and already approved. this pause does not affect any of that. on top of that, ali, we have another 22 billion cubic feet that have been authorized, but haven't begun construction yet. so, that's 48 billion cubic feet, which would make us the behemoth of the entire globe multiple times over in terms of exporting. so, the question is, we need to update our assessment to see how much is going to be the global demand, how much

greenhouse gas emissions does that produce, and ali, what does that do for the prices at home for consumers of natural gas, whether they're residential or personal? we are currently producing about 100 etf per day of natural gas. if we export half of that, if we export half of that, then, what does it do to prices at home? that's a legitimate question the manufacturers are asking. so, this is why this assessment has to be done. it's done periodically. as you know, it hasn't been done for five years. important symbols while we get all the natural labs will be doing this assessment while they take into account the latest information on the ground across the world, and while we make sure that our allies are still supplied with fuel. >> let's take that last point. how do we make sure our allies are still supply fuel? this is tricky, because our allies in europe consume fuel, and everybody would like it to

come from wind and solar and things like that, and in some cases, that's the way the world is going. but in some cases, we were in a position, particularly the outbreak of the ukraine war, where we applied pressure on allies to say, please don't fund the war by buying russian fossil fuel projects. how do you sell that the people who say we need to get out of the business of making more fossil fuel products and shipping them, all at the same time, saying we need to make sure our allies have what they need to not fund russia's supply of fossil fuel or some other bad actors supply? >> yeah. and our allies have stepped up to the plate and said at the latest conference of the parties, the latest cop, that they want to wean off fossil fuels entirely, or at, least get to that zero by 2050. so, we are managing this transition, it's what the globe is really doing. we want to make sure that people can turn the lights on, obviously, and we want to make sure that we are transitioning to clean energy so we solve the

climate crisis. and balancing that is 70 biden administration has been doing this entire time. we wanted to produce enough energy to keep our gasoline prices low, but also, to make sure our allies are supplied with natural gas at the same time, as we are accelerating all of these clean technologies, so that ultimately, we do get to 100% clean electricity in the united states by 2035, and that zero by 2050, and help our allies do the same. >> all right, i want to talk. when we come, back we'll take a quick break. when we come back, let's talk about clate activism in the united states and the impact this decision will have on those who want to see more of it. secretary granholm, please stay with me. we'll continue this conversation, after the break.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ 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. united states energy secretary, jennifer granholm. secretary granholm, i just want to dig until this pause in al anti facility production to discuss what it is you are trying to get that. senator manchin of west virginia has said, quote, the administration hashe facts to prove that additional lng export capaould hurt americans. th must make that information public and clear. but if this pause is just another political ploy to pander the keep it in the ground climate activists at the expense of american workers, businesses, and allies in need,

i will do everything in my power to end this pause and mediately, and quote. what's your sense of that comment, and what do you make of it? >> i mean, he's obviously concerned about the price impacts at home. exporting all of this look at five federal gas, and this is what this accession -- assessment is set to find that. we are obligated, under the natural gas act, it -- to authorize exports based upon an assessment of the public interest. what is in the public interest? and that's why we evaluate the economics, we evaluate the global supply demand, what other countries will be needing into the future, the we evaluate our national security interests, and certainly, we evaluate environmental impacts. this is all done, we are a science agency at the department of energy. we have 17 national labs.

i like to say, in god we trust, all others bring data. in fact, this is what this assessment is. it's about getting the data to make sure we are basing authorizations on science. >> and what does that involve, in terms of getting the data? we've been studying fossil fuels for a long time, but here, you're describing sort of a few different things. you've got national security, public interest issues, and some of that is national security and international security. climate, which is obviously central and really motivating. and price. how do you weigh those things against one another, because one could say from a climate perspective, it might be better that we produce no natural gas or export no liquefied natural gas, but we have other concerns. is all science, or is there some economic and political weighing of those things? >> there's definitely economics that go into it, for sure. we have modeling at our national labs. we've got the biggest exoskeleton peters that do climate modeling, and we also

evaluate the economy of the supply and the demand to the future. what are other countries saying they are going to do? have they taken action to fulfill their pledges for example? we're also, we are leading a number of countries in global methane pledge. we know now what the technologies are to make sure there are no nothing leaks, which is what natural gas produces. so, we need to look at all of these factors to determine what's in the public interest. and ali, you will hear back from those who have a good point about the fact that coal is much more ghg producing than natural gas, and if we are exporting these liquefied natural gas to countries that are predominantly coal, relying upon coal, that will actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions. they have a point. so, we need to evaluate that as well. , so, all of these factors are going to go into the next in

determining the public interest. you have heard me say we have 14 billion cubic feet that we are exporting now, another 12 in the queue, and another 22 that are under construction. but 22 that have been authorized. we have another 12 that's in the queue, waiting for us to make a decision. , so this one, we have a pause to say, what really is going to be in the u.s.'s public interest if we authorize more? >> quick question. other going to be any public hearings involved in this, or no? >> there will be a public comment period. once the assessment is done, we will make it available for public comment. >> secretary, good to see you. thank you again. we always appreciate it. the united states secretary of energy, jennifer granholm. 83 point $3 million. that's how much donald trump has been ordered to pay e. jean carroll for defaming her, what's $83 million to a man like trump, who goes through life acting like the law doesn't apply to him? it's begs the question.

can any sort of penalty or punishment actually stopped him? another hour of velshi begins now. ♪ ♪ ♪ well, good morning to you, into saturday, the 27th. i'm ali velshi. we begin this morning with the blockbuster peddling about the jury has awarded the writer e. jean carroll in her defamation case against the twice impeached, four times indicted ex president. yesterday, a ju held that donald trump was liable for defaming carroll, and ordered him to pay a total of 83 point $3 million. that amount includes $11 million to repair damage to her reputation, seven point $3 million for emotional harm, and other damages, and $65 million in punitive damages. that's in addition to the $5 million that a different jury in a separate trial awarded carroll last year when it held trump liable for sexually abusing her during an encounter and a bergdorf goodman

department store in the 1990s and defaming her after she told her story publicly, in 2019. that's a total of 88 point $3 million between carols to civil suits against trump. but in her closing argument, roberta kaplan, the lawyer who prented carroll in both cases, spoke about how that firsthand, that first trial had basically no effect on curbing trump's behavior. quote, typically, when someone is held liable in court for spreading false and defamatory lies, they stop. in this country, our justice system, that is how it's supposed to work. even if you don't like a jury's decision, you are supposed to follow it. osare the rules. this doesn't depend on your politics, it doesn't depend on how you vote for whether you support a particular policy or particular party. we all have to follow the law. donald trump, however, access if these rules and laws just don't apply to him. after the prior jury found his attacks on miss carroll were false and defamatory last year, did he respect the jury verdict? no. not at all. not even for 24rs