that came about it wasn't like, you know, let's go out on a canoe on a pond and here's a black box with an engagement ring on it. it was honey, i'm pregnant, okay, let's get married and i was the result of that. in thinking about that, it gave me some perspective on why our relationship was just so tangled. >> yeah, the new book is entitled "dear mom and dad: a letter about family, memory, and the america we once knew," absolutely fascinating and revealing. patti davis, thank you so much for coming on the show this morning. we appreciate it. congratulations on the book. >> thanks so much. >> take care. and that does it for us this morning, ana cabrera picks up the coverage right now. >> right now on "aa cabrera reports," chaos and dysfunction on capitol hill. a series of stunning setbacks for house republicans who failed to impeach the secretary of

homeland security. republicans defecting but the failure was really sealed by a democrat who rushed from the hospital to cast the deciding vote, that congressman al green will join us from the hospital in just moments. this as gop divisions threaten to doom that bipartisan border bill. donald trump's legal battles converging on the supreme court. justices hearing the colorado ballot case tomorrow, but could they soon have another trump case on their hands? and later, a guilty verdict for the mother of the michigan shooter. the foreperson of that jury talking about their decision that made history. ♪♪ hello and thank you for being here. it is 10:00 eastern. i'm ana cabrera reporting from new york. we begin on capitol hill where republicans are in disarray

after an embarrassing series of setbacks. the bid to impeach alejandro mayorkas failed dramatically late yesterday as democrat al green, a widely expected no-show rushed straight from the hospital to the house floor without even shoes on his feet to sink the bill. it marked a stunning and significant setback for house speaker mike johnson with just enough republicans joining all democrats to vote no. now, minutes later, speaker johnson's stand-alone bill for aid to israel also failed, and today gop divisions still threaten to sink a broader bipartisan senate deal for that aid paired with sweeping immigration reform. the first votes expected in just a matter of hours. let's get right to capitol hill and nbc's julie tsirkin. also with us former republican congressman from florida david jolly and former democratic congresswoman from maryland, donna edwards. so julie, this certainly wasn't your typical tuesday. how did this all go so wrong for

house leadership? >> i'd argue we haven't had a typical tuesday or any day of the week this entire congress, but certainly this was an embarrassing moment, a stunning moment on the house floor where they thought they were going to get the votes to impeach alejandro mayorkas, a historic move? and of itself, the first time this effort has happened in 150 years for a cabinet secretary. but then on the floor as you mentioned, al green coming in his hospital garb, i know you'll speak to him later about this moment, but certainly republicans who sponsored this resolution initially like congresswoman marjorie taylor greene was not happy about it. here's what she had to say. >> they hid one of their members waiting nol the last minute watching to see our votes trying to throw us off on the numbers we had versus the numbers they had, so yeah, that was a strategy at play tonight. >> reporter: so you hear her there saying that they hid one of their members. of course i could point to countless examples of votes, ana, where republicans,

democrats do what they need to do, they show up to vote. and certainly that was a priority for him. it's not just house republican leadership that had some losses. senate republican leadership also had losses, a big blow to that bipartisan border security bill, one in which leader mcconnell championed. he also championed the idea to tie ukraine and border aid after then house speaker kevin mccarthy tied the two items, speaker mike johnson endorsing that after the fact. twha is leader schumer going to do moving forward? he has a backup plan. when that vote on the bipartisan national security supplemental including the border security provision fails after republicans are expected to block it this afternoon. schumer is going to put another bill on the floor, a clean bill with israel, ukraine and taiwan, and we'll see if republicans push it through or kill that effort too. >> julie, stand by. everybody stay with me.

joining us by the phone from the hospital democratic congressman al green of texas who made that stunning appearance to cast a crucial vote in the house yesterday. congressman, first, thanks for joining us. first, your health, are you doing okay? i understand you're still in the hospital. >> thank you for having me. i'm in recovery. i have excellent health care providers and i will recover, and i'm grateful you will give me the opportunity to speak on this subject. >> thank you for taking the time. walk us through how this came about with you rushing from the hospital just after surgery to cast your vote yesterday. >> i think it's important to start with how i got to the hospital. i was trying to get back to texas. i had a full docket of things to do, and as i was trying to get to the airport, i went over to the attending physician, dr. monahan, who is excellent, absolutely excellent, and they concluded that i needed to get

an x-ray and then i went to the emergency room, the x-ray revealed that i needed surgery and i needed it immediately because i had a blockage in my intestines. i had the surgery. and i was always going to vote on this piece of legislation. there was never any doubt because i've always had strong opinions about mr. mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, i believe him to be a good, decent man, and i don't want his reputation besmirched in this way. i was looking at the news in my hospital bed and i saw that the vote was going to take place. i was a little bit surprised, and when i saw this, i communicated with my chief surgeon, the hospital staff, the administrators and we had a meeting to talk about whether i could have a furlough, and in the process of going through that, i called mr. jefferson -- not mr. jefferson, mr. jeffries

and i explained to him that i intended to make this vote, so i never had any kind of secret plan. i was doing my best to get from the hospital bed over to the floor to cast my vote. i got to the house, and when i got there, dr. monahan had medical professionals to take me to a bed. they were monitoring my blood pressure, my temperature, my heart rate the entirety of the time i was there. i had nurse there is, health care professionals, so when the vote occurred, i only came for that vote to be quite honest, so other votes, while they are important, they weren't as important as this one because i know this man, and when the vote came up, i left the area where i was. by the way, speaker pelosi saw me in that area. she is and i passed each other. i went up to cast my vote. there was no timing in terms of let's try to get in at a certain

point of time. they pushed me in, i cast my vote, and as i'm sitting there, david was seated next to me, congressman, and he said, al, the vote just tied with your vote. that means that they can't impeach him. well, that was news to me. >> really? >> i was there to make sure i had my voice heard because secretary mayorkas saved a child's life, young boy, undocumented, didn't come here on his own volition. at texas children's hospital, the hospital told me this kid is dying in mexico. they caught him near the border with his mom, and he's in a place where he can't get any dialysis. he was a dialysis patient. they said we need him back here, and i got in touch, and he got that baby back. and i'll never forget it. >> let me just jump in here for a second because what you have just talked about is truly remarkable that you had an

emergency surgery yesterday. obviously that wasn't planned, even though you had planned to be there. >> not yesterday -- >> the surgery wasn't yesterday, got it, so that you just clarified. >> the surgery was friday night, friday night. >> got you. so you were still in the hospital following that surgery. >> yes, oh, yes, believe me. >> and you went to give your vote because you felt passionately about making sure your vote counted to not impeach alejandro mayorkas, but you didn't realize at the time yours could be the deciding vote? were you asked by democratic leadership to try to rush there, or was this part of a broader strategy by democrats to get you there? >> mr. -- mr. jeffries, hakeem jeffries was the consummate professional. when i called him, his first concern was my health, and he said to me, al, your health comes first. i called him, quite frankly, to

let him know that i was about to uber over to the capitol, and that was going to be my mode of transportation, and he said, well, al, if you're going to come, we can get transportation for you. so i got the transportation. i never went to his office. i didn't secret myself in some place. i went to the area that dr. monahan had set aside for me so that i could continue my health care, and i assured these physicians here that i was going to do this because they were concerned as i would want them to be about my leaving the hospital. >> sure, absolutely. >> nothing planned, no trickery. just a person wanting to be sure my voice was heard, my vote was counted because i understand who secretary mayorkas is. a good, decent person. >> congressman green, thank you very much for taking the time with us. we wish you a swift and full recovery. >> thank you. and our panel is now joining us so let me start with you,

congressman jolly. just on everything that has gone down in the past 24 hours. your thoughts? >> look, a remarkable moment, and kudos to al green for working on behalf of his constituents and their interest in this. look, this is a humiliaing leak not just for speaker mike johnson, but also for mitch mcconnell, someone who is so seasoned in republican leadership you rarely see a strategic mistake the size of which mitch mcconnell has made, which is why josh hawley and mike lee and so forth are starting to question mcconnell's tenure in leadership. the two failed votes yesterday are very embarrassing for mike johnson and house republicans. i think they will recover and ultimately have the votes to impeach secretary mayorkas, and that might be a fight that the biden administration wants to continue because biden has house republicans on the ropes on immigration. but on the question of aid to israel, to ukraine, and frankly, ana, keeping the government

open, there's only four more weeks before the next government shutdown deadline. all of that, it would be kind to call this sausage making because the differences are so wide, but all of those issues really must be resolved, and there's not a clear path forward. >> congresswoman edwards, this dysfunction comes after months of the bipartisan negotiations over foreign aid and immigration, so what does it say about the broader state of politics that this all seems to have unraveled just so quickly? >> well, it isn't the broader state of politics, it's the broader state of republican politics. i mean, the failures on the house side coupled with the failure on the senate -- on the senate side in bringing forward this immigration and foreign aid package. i think the dysfunction is rampant. it's hard to see how it is recoverable. we're talking about a republican caucus in the house that is just more interested in stunts and trickery than it is in

governing, and in hypocrisy, given that almost all of the demands that they wanted in this immigration package are in there. even some democrats were going to hold their noses to vote for this package, but republicans rebuked it, and so, you know there, is dysfunction all through the republican party, and it's really being driven by the craziness at the top of their ticket in donald trump, and you can't separate what's happening on the house floor yesterday from what's going on with donald trump. he demanded this, and then you have the chaos. >> so julie, house leaders say they may try to bring the mayorkas impeachment back for another vote. will they try again, do you know, and is there reason to believe the results would be different? >> well, the spokesperson for speaker johnson posted on x very quickly after this vote failed yesterday saying they will trying to bring this up again when they have the votes. here's the thing, majority

leader steve scalise, the republican leader in the house, he's been out for cancer treatment. he's battling his own disease. he's going to come back at some point in february, according to his office. we don't know exactly what date that will be, but in theory, that should give republicans the votes to actually impeach alejandro mayorkas on these two articles. the issue is, though, next week is the special election to replace former congressman george santos's seat. he was ousted at the end of last year. in that race, you have tom swasey. this district in long island used to be democrat. it went for biden in 2020. george santos managed to flip that seat so a lot of people think democrats might have a chance to flip that seat once again and bring another democratic vote on their side of the aisle, which will, again, mess all of these numbers up once again. this is a day by day attendance issue. we'll see if they have the

votes. >> lots of twists and turns. thank you, i appreciate you as well. and tune in to msnbc at noon when andrea mitchell will talk to speaker emerita nancy pelosi about this gop-fueled chaos on capitol hill. meantime, we have some breaking news right now out of california where marines are desperately searching for a missing military helicopter that had been carrying five marines, and as of now, no debris has been located according to the marines. the helicopter was flying from creech air force base in nevada to miramar in san diego when it went missing. search efforts are being coordinated. we'll bring you more information as soon as we get it. and when we're back in just 60 seconds, donald trump vowing to appeal a d.c. court's decision that presidential immunity does not apply to his election interference case. as the former president's 2024

ballot battle rockets to the supreme court tomorrow, i'll talk to the lawyer whose case sparked this legal fight. plus, nikki haley didn't run against donald trump in a nevada primary, and she still lost. we'll explain the result that headlines are calling embarrassing. also ahead, a historic guilty verdict, how the conviction of a school shooter's mother could impact future legal fights. ould impact future legal fights 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!

♪♪ whoo! ♪♪ light work! ♪♪ next victims. ♪♪ you ready for this? ♪pump up the jam pump it up♪ this time tomorrow, the nation's top court will take up the most consequential election case since bush v. gore. the nine justices set to hear arguments on whether donald trump is eligible to be on the ballot after the colorado supreme court ruled trump is not eligible because he participated in an insurrection after the last election. the top court's trump docket could get even longer, the former president already vowing to appeal his latest legal loss

after the d.c. appeals court ruled yesterday that he does not have immunity in the 2020 election interference case. nbc's vaughn hillyard joins us now from las vegas, and also with us, msnbc legal analyst, lisa rubin and former federal prosecutor, kristy greenberg. so vaughn, how is trump's team preparing for tomorrow? and how consequential is this case with the election already underway? >> reporter: unlike in other court cases that donald trump has been a part of here in recent months, he does not intend to go and actually attend these oral arguments here at the u.s. supreme court. the attorneys representing him will have 40 minutes to present their case to those justices who will determine whether or not to affirm the colorado supreme court's decision. of course, the stakes for donald trump are as high as they could be. if the supreme court were to affirm the colorado secretary of state's decision, it could have far-reaching impacts well beyond colorado. it could potentially lead to his removal in states around the

country in putting not only his political future on the line, but also in the case of if he were to be convicted of federal charges, potentially his inability to self-pardon himself after november. and so for donald trump and his team, there is a lot at stake in those 40 minutes in which they will be going before the supreme court tomorrow morning. >> thanks so much, vaughn hillyard, for setting the stage for us. lisa, what do you see as the keys for this case, for either side and just how complicated could it all again? >> well, i mean, there are a number of interpretive issues constitutionally that will come up tomorrow, but there are also some more fundamental issues too. for example, whether or not former president trump engaged in an insurrection is one part on interpretive issue, right? because it's in the constitutional text. it also involves a wing of facts. traditionally, the supreme court is deferential to the fact finder. they only reverse factual

findings if they are clearly erroneous. >> that would be a fact that the colorado supreme court already found. >> the colorado district court found, and so this is a case that has enormous reverberations but could all come down in some respects to the factual findings after a week-long trial of a single colorado trial court judge, and so the supreme court might be less deferential given what the consequences are because, again, a ruling to uphold colorado wouldn't necessarily bind other states, but it would have other states perhaps making a decision based on that ruling if they uphold, other states could say they'll uphold me as well. or you could see litigation started in red states by people who say that they're necessarily bound. >> right, and so this has an impact or ripple effect that could impact not just colorado but states around the country. prominent conservative legal

scholar and former judge michael luttig called the colorado supreme court decision, quote, a masterful judicial opinion, that is unassailable in every single respect under the constitution of the united states. and he says he believes the supreme court will affirm the colorado court's decision. do you share that confidence? >> i don't. i don't think there's any world in which this supreme court with a conservative majority is going to disqualify donald trump from the ballot. how they get there is less clear, but i just don't see them taking that step. i think they will view it as a drastic step. i'm not saying i agree with that, but that's at least my prediction of what they would do. >> do you see off-ramps here? >> i think there are a number of different off-ramps. i don't see them getting into the merits of the fact finding relating to the insurrection. they may touch on the procedure and whether or not donald trump was afforded the proper process in the lower court in colorado, but i don't see them getting

into the facts of whether or not he engaged in insurrection. you'll see is he an officer of the united states under section 3 of the 14th amendment? is he somebody who's running for office as opposed to holding office? in the text of the 14th amendment. i think you're going to see a lot of parsing of text and a lot of discussion of history of what that text means, but i think they will find an off-ramp. >> let's pivot to the other big legal news, the d.c. appeals court during this show yesterday releasing their opinion saying tr does not have presidential immunity when it comes to the 2020 election interference case, the federal case specifically, and his campaign spokesman has already said they will appeal. lisa, do you see any gray area left in this one? >> i don't personally see a lot of gray area. that doesn't mean that this court won't see it, and i think it's particularly interesting that the d.c. circuit released its opinion yesterday because now the shadow of the immunity

decision and what it means for the court going forward sort of hanging over tomorrow. i think many legal observers and i think kristy and i would count ourselves among these, don't see a situation in which this court disqualifies donald trump and agrees with the colorado supreme court, but do see a universe in which they also hold that he's not immune from prosecution, and that sort of tradeoff might be looming over tomorrow's argument. >> and i guess, kristy, if one of the goals of the trump campaign is to delay, delay, delay until after the election for this case to work its way through the court system, for him to go to trial for a verdict to be reached, does that look likely at this point? >> look, he's certainly going to try. he has until monday to make his -- make his appeal for a stay so that this gets put on hold and it does not go back to judge chutkan, pending his application for the whole

supreme court to review it. look, i think there's a chance the supreme court takes this up. it is a question of national significance. it's a question of first impression, and they may want to have the last word on this. i don't think that they will overturn the d.c. circuit opinion. it is a strong opinion. they really methodically went through all of donald trump's arguments and soundly rejected those, so i don't think they're going to find fault with it. they may have some different language, some of the language was pretty strong in terms of how the d.c. circuit characterized donald trump's alleged acts under the indictment. they may not be as strong in their language, but i think they will get to the same result. it just may take time and it will play into donald trump's strategy and delay, delay, delay. >> so very quickly then, what's best case, worst-case scenario when it comes to the timing? >> i mean, look, i think if this goes back to judge chutkan and they don't -- the supreme court does not take this up, i mean, we could be looking at a late spring trial. if the supreme court does take this up, i think you're looking at sometime later in the summer,

possibly even early fall. >> which then of course is right before the general election. kristy greenberg, and lisa rubin, thank you ladies, so brilliant. always appreciate you on my show to help parse all of this. we are awaying the imminent release of a long awaited report into president biden's handling of classified documents. special counsel robert hur has spent the last year investigating how classified documents ended up in biden's home and office, and as of now, we don't expect any criminal charges to be filed. biden says he returned the documents voluntarily. he's been cooperating with law enforcement and this is very different from donald trump's documents case. he directed hundreds of classified documents to be moved to his mar-a-lago residence, repeatedly ignored the request to have the records returned, everyone allegedly showed the classified information to multiple people who did not have clearance, so we're waiting on that one.

up next on "ana cabrera reports" donald trump wasn't on nevada's primary ballot, but voters still didn't choose nikki haley, who won instead? plus, the reported shake-up on the horizon in the rnc in an election year. year. (♪♪) we come from a long line of cowboys. (♪♪) when i see all of us out here on this ranch, i see how far our legacy can go. (♪♪) 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. every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet 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.

there's nothing better than a subway series footlong. except when you add on an all new footlong sidekick. we're talking a $2 footlong churro. $3 footlong pretzel and a five dollar footlong cookie. every epic footlong deserves the perfect sidekick. order one with your favorite subway series sub today. >> woman: what's my safelite story? i'm a photographer. ordand when i'm driving,rite 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. ♪ ♪♪

with fastsigns, create factory grade visual solutions to perfect your process. ♪♪ fastsigns. make your statement™.

welcome back. nada in nevada, in the state's gop primary, nikki haley lost to the none of these candidates option, meaning more voters decided to vote for no one rather than select the former south carolina governor. and a huge part of that result, donald trump wasn't on the ballot. he didn't take part in the primary, but will participate in the nevada caucus tomorrow, which will award all of the state's republican delegates. let's bring in republican strategist susan del percio and democratic strategist basil smikle. trump wasn't on the ballot. nikki haley was, and yet voters

chose none of the above. if you were nikki haley today, what is going through your mind? >> i'm concerned because she should have had -- been able to at least fake brag to win, at least got a little momentum off of it. it also goes to the point that we've been hearing quite a bit even from the trump side, she's baked in at 30%. that's -- >> with republican voters. >> with republicans. so her work needs to be done in south carolina with independents. independents couldn't vote in nevada's primary. just worth noting. it wasn't an open primary like we saw in new hampshire or we'll see in south carolina. but at the end of the day, that's a really bad night, and it showed she wasn't paying attention to details. i'll she'll get a pass because people say it wasn't really a race. >> didn't really matter. >> you can wash it away, but you shouldn't have to. >> but still, to lose to none of the above essentially is not a good look. it doesn't say people are voting for you, that they are attracted to your campaign or your

president, so basil, we do know voter turnout was low, 80,000 total in the republican primary. i wonder how much of that is about this complicated primary and caucus scenario or how much of it is because of donald trump? >> well, first of all, it's all donald trump, right? the only reason that they actually have this divided primary caucus is because the republicans changed it to make it so. and that in many respects benefits donald trump. why? because look at the turnout for nikki haley yesterday or the results for nikki haley yesterday and he can come back and say, you know, nobody wants her. everybody wants me. given me the delegates and let's move forward, which is what's going to happen -- what is it, tomorrow, and so it also shows that nikki haley has not been on a ballot in ten years since she ran for governor in, what, 2014 in south carolina. it is firmly donald trump's party right now, and the only platform she has is the one donald trump gave her, and so

it's so difficult for her to then try to bring that back to her to say pay attention to what i have to say, and it's clear that the voters really don't want to do that. she's baked in at 30%, and they're more focusd on what donald trump is bringing. >> let's talk about the potential shake-up we could see at the republican national committee. "the new york times" is reporting that chair ronna mcdaniel is out. now nbc is told from the rnc nothing has changed. this will be decided after south carolina, but this is days after trump has publicly been suggesting it's time for a change. what do you make of it? >> it's a big deal, days after south carolina is still only a couple of months before the convention. you don't switch a national party chair at that time. >> why not? >> well, because you care about operations. you want to see how things are going. now, i think donald trump is doing it because he wants to be able to get more money out of the rnc and raise money and make

the deals that they tend to do on fund-raising. but it is going to be -- whoever it is, donald trump's going to choose them, and it's going to be awful, and i hope that people pay attention because it will show you that if he were elected president again, the type of people he's going to pick, only people who follow him. >> real quick on that point because it's so important. if we think about how all that we're saying about donald trump and how he would run the -- how he would run the country in a more autocratic way, that obviously suggests that he could do the same thing with his own party, which is what he's doing. >> he's already doing that. >> he's got his massive legal bills. he's saying give me money. i've got bills to pay, a campaign to run. i'm not concerned about party lines and party rules. i need this support right here right now, and if nobody's stepping up to do, that he's going to take it over and make sure that he gets what he wants. >> basil smikle, susan del percio, as always, good to have you here, thank you. >> thank you. next on "ana cabrera

reports," the foreperson in jennifer crumbley's case now speaking out on the historic guilty verdict. out on the histc guilty verdict

two leading candidates for senate. two very different visions for california. steve garvey, the leading republican, is too conservative for california. he voted for trump twice and supported republicans for years, including far right conservatives. adam schiff, the leading democrat, defended democracy against trump and the insurrectionists. he helped build affordable housing, lower drug costs, and bring good jobs back home. the choice is clear. i'm adam schiff, and i approve this message. growing up, my parents wanted me to become a doctor or an engineer. those are good careers! but i chose a different path. first, as mayor and then in the legislature. i enshrined abortion rights in our california constitution. in the face of trump, i strengthened hate crime laws and lowered the costs for the middle class. now i'm running to bring the fight to congress. you were always stubborn.

and on that note, i'm evan low, and i approve this message. jennifer didn't separate her son from the gun enough to save those lives that day. >> that is the forewoman of the jury that found jennifer crumbley guilty of involuntary manslaughter yesterday. the historic conviction marks the first time a parent has been held criminally responsible for their child's mass shooting. now crumbley sat with her eyes shut as she heard the verdict. she now faces up to 15 years behind bars, and her case raises more questions about whether juries will convict more parents for their children's crimes, including crumbley's husband who stands trial on the same charges next month.

nbc's maggie vespa joins us from pontiac, michigan, now. what are we learning about the conversations that went on in that jury room? >> reporter: yeah, ana, it was really interesting, that forewoman telling us while it obviously ended with a unanimous verdict, juries in michigan have to be unanimous, it definitely didn't start off that way. she told us yesterday that both sides, in her words, were well-represented, meaning some jurors went in thinking that this should be a not guilty verdict. others went in thinking she was definitely guilty. she also told savannah in that exclusive conversation this morning that everyone's reason for voting guilty, she said, was different or at least there were different reasons among the jury. for her specifically it was that point that she raised about the fact that jennifer crumbley was the last adult to have possession of the gun that ethan had. it was the one that had been gifted to him, and it was the one that he used in the shooting, and then following up on that point, savannah asked this question this morning, take a listen. >> there was a point where she was asked would you have done anything differently, and she

said she wouldn't have. how did that strike you and the other jurors? >> it was repeated a lot in the deliberation room. i think that it was very upsetting to hear. i think that there are many small things that could have been done to prevent this. >> reporter: the two of them talking about jennifer crumbley's testimony there. she took the stand in her own defense, when asked if basically the forewoman thought that helped or hurt her case or if it would have been better had she not taken the stand she said we'll never know. we talked to the families of the four victims in the oxford high school massacre and the fathers of hana st. juliana and craig shilling telling us they hope this is a wake-up call to parents across the country, adding when they heard jennifer crumbley say that on the stand, it felt like a slap in the face, ana. >> we have about a minute here, maggie. early this morning, i understand

lawyers from james crumbley's defense filed several motions related to his wife trial. >> reporter: those were filed yesterday. he wants to try to exclude photographic evidence and video evidence of the shooting itself including evidence that shows the victims' bodies, graphic scenes in the aftermath of the shooting basically saying we're not arguing about whether or not the shooting happened. we're arguing about what my client did leading up to the shooting and that could basically kind of poison the jury pool. it's so graphic to see. we also got our hands on a witness list. it's worth noting every single witness called by the prosecution in jennifer's trial will also -- is also on that list, so could be called in james' trial as well, which is expected to begin on march 5th. >> maggie vespa, a really gut wrenching case to report on. thank you so much for following it for us and helping us understand this moment. 12 million people remain under flood watches across southern california this morning. the storm that's been drenching

california for days now has shattered rainfall records across the state being called one in a 1,000 year rainfall event. that storm is expected to finally taper off today. up next could donald trump be booted from the ballot for january 6th, this constitutional showdown at the supreme court tomorrow. are hostages closer to being freed? hamas now responding to a potential deal. o ta potential deal

rsv can seriously impact breathing, even for the best performer. protect yourself with pfizer's abrysvo... ...a vaccine to prevent lower respiratory disease from rsv in people 60 years and older. it's not for everyone and may not protect all who receive it. don't get abrysvo if you've had an allergic reaction to its ingredients. a weakened immune system may decrease your response. most common side effects are tiredness, headache, injection-site pain and muscle pain. ask your pharmacist or doctor about abrysvo today.

with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, my skin was no longer mine. my active psoriatic arthritis joint symptoms held me back. don't let symptoms define you. emerge as you. with tremfya®, most people saw 90% clearer skin at 4 months... ...and the majority stayed clearer, at 5 years. tremfya® is proven to significantly reduce joint pain, stiffness and swelling it's just 6 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. emerge as you. emerge tremfyant®. ask you doctor about tremfya®. (ella) fashion moves fast. (jen) so we partner with verizon to take our operations to the next level. (marquis) with a custom private 5g network. (ella) we get more control of production, efficiencies, and greater agility. (jen) that's enterprise intelligence. (vo) it's your vision, it's your verizon.

now back to the legal case creating a perfect storm for donald trump. the supreme court will hear oral arguments tomorrow over whether the former president can be booted from colorado's 2024 ballot for violating the 14th amendment. barring officials from holding office if they have engaged in an insurrection. two states have found trump ineligible, maine and colorado. justices are considering the colorado case tomorrow. nbc news senior legal correspondent, laura jarrett has a preview. >> reporter: krista kafer is a conservative columnist who voted for donald trump in 2020, but says she won't do it again. >> former president trump tried to disenfranchise 80 million americans, and how did he do that? he tried to overturn an election. he fomented violence to stop the peaceful transfer of power. she and five other voters in

colorado successfully managed to get the republican front runner kicked off the state's primary ballot in 2024 for what happened on january 6th, 2021. >> through his actions and his actions alone, donald trump has disqualified himself from ever holding office again. >> reporter: trump says he did nothing wrong, predicting chaos and bedlam if the u.s. supreme court doesn't rule in his favor saying this about the justices he appointed to the bench. >> i fought really hard to get three very, very good people, and they're great people, very smart people, and i just hope that they're going to be fair. >> reporter: to understand how we got here, you have to start with the legal word salad that is section 3 of the 14th amendment to the u.s. constitution. quote, no person shall hold any office who having previously taken an oath as an officer of the united states to support the constitution of the united states shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion

against the same or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. english translation, if you took an oath and you break that oath by engaging in an insurrection, then you don't get to hold public office in the future, a view that's been embraced by some leading conservative legal voices. >> it's not president joe biden. it's not the democrats. it's not the anti-trumpers, it's the constitution of the united states. >> reporter: the 14th amendment's framers wanted to make sure that after the civil war, ex-confederate leaders wouldn't get voted back into office, but the text that went into effect in 1868 raises a bunch of tricky questions now at the heart of the legal fight in 2023, like is the president an officer of the united states? if so, why not say so. did trump engage in an insurrection or rebellion? even if he didn't break into the capitol himself.

and who exactly is supposed to enforce this part of the constitution anyway? congress or the courts? in the wave of lawsuits to ban trump from the ballot, most courts have dodged these questions or ruled in his favor until colorado, where the state's highest court found him ineligible for office. the case now on the u.s. supreme court's docket where the ultimate result for colorado and the rest of the country is far from clear cut. laura jarrett, nbc news. >> and now let's bring in legal counsel mario nicholas. he's one of the lawyers representing the petitioners in this colorado ballot challenge. so mario, as you head into tomorrow, what is on the line? what's at stake? >> i think our democracy is at stake. i think that our u.s. constitution, which is our democracy is at stake. we either abide by the terms of the constitution or we do not, and i think that's what the justices will have to decide. >> so what do you say to those

who argue the voters should decide, not the courts? >> well, i think that you have to look at the constitution itself. the constitution doesn't allow us to go for just anyone we want. you have to be at least 35 years old, so taylor swift is not eligible. you have to be a natural born citizen, elon musk is not eligible. barack obama and george w. bush are not eligible. this is just one more qualification the constitution puts in place. >> "the washington post" profiled one of the colorado voters you're representing, 91-year-old norma anderson. she was the state's first female majority leader, a republican, by the way, and she told the post, quote, the first time i ever ran, i didn't win. i didn't go out and try to change the election, i said, whoops, work harder next time, lady. so, mario, why was it so important to norma and your other clients to bring this case

forward? >> well, i can tell you from norma's perspective, she actually has a constitution that she reads almost every day. she has one in her purse, she has one at the side of her bedside, she has one in by where she watches tv and for her, it is the defining piece of our democracy. and so she said, look, donald trump is a threat to that democracy. he's a threat to the american way of life, and i'm going to do everything i can to stand up against that, including being a part of this lawsuit. >> trump appointed three of the nine current supreme court justices. let's remember some remarks he made in his now infamous january 6th speech at the ellipse. >> i'm not happy with the supreme court. they love to rule against me. i picked three people, i fought like hell for them. i read a story in one of the newspapers recently how i control the three supreme court justices. i control them! they're puppets!

it really is genius, because what they do is that -- and it makes it really impossible for them to ever give you a victory. >> so, mario, does the court love to rule against him? how much of an impact do you foresee trump's mark on the court playing into their decision on this matter? >> i think that these justices have dedicated themselves to the rule of law for their entire careers. i think they're all incredibly sharp and intelligent. the preeminent legal minds in america and i think that they will apply the law. if they do that, we will win. >> i do want to take a closer look at section 3 of the 14th amendment. again, no person shall hold any office under the united states having previously taken an oath as an officer of the united states to support the constitution of the united states, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. now, other lawyers i have talked to say the supreme court could take a number of off ramps here

without deciding on the merits of the case. for example, they could simply find the petitioners don't have standing, they could determine a president is technically not an officer of the united states. they could say trump's oath when he became president didn't actually include the words support the constitution, so, my question to you is how crucial is it for the justices to address the merits of this case as it pertains to trump's role on january 6th? >> well, i think that there are multiple amicus briefs that talked about some of this and what happens if they don't address the merits or try to kick the can down the road, which will lead to greater chaos than president trump actually threatened in his own brief, and it would lead to greater disenfranchisement, it would lead to people, tens of millions of people potentially casting a vote for someone who is not eligible to be president. and that's the kind of thing we should avoid. further more, there are other historians who talk about what

autocracies could come through, and what would happen and this mirrors some of those and we should avoid that. >> mario nicholas, thank you for taking the time. i hope you'll come back and join us following the supreme court arguments, which we'll have live here on msnbc tomorrow. up next on "ana cabrera reports," as secretary blinken's middle east trip moving the dial on a hostage deal between israel and hamas? hostage deal betweenl and hamas? it's like to perform through pain. if you're like me, one of the millions suffering from pain caused by migraine, nurtec odt may help. 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. feeling claritin clear is like... ♪♪

is she? playing with the confidence of a pro and getting all up in that grass as if she doesn't have allergies? yeah. nice.

overseas this morning, secretary of state antony blinken is back in israel for a high stakes meeting with prime minister benjamin netanyahu, hoping to broker a new cease-fire and hostage deal. and we're learning hamas has now offered a counterproposal to the original framework, requesting the release of 1500 prisoners from israel, and permission for all displaced gazans to return to their homes. this is according to a senior arab source familiar with the talks. nbc's matt bradley is joining us from tel aviv with more now.

matt, do we have any indications how the israelis will respond to this counterproposal? >> reporter: we haven't had an official reaction from the israelis. i spoke with an israeli official who is attached to the prime minister's office this morning and was told that this is a nonstarter, this counteroffer from hamas. the ideas in it are too much, basically they're asking for a much longer window of a pause in the fighting, 135 days as opposed to the six weeks that were originally offered by that deal that was hashed out in paris, by the cia chief, along with his counterparts from israel and egypt and the prime minister of qatar. there was also a lot of discussion about withdrawing the israeli military from the gaza strip. as far as the israelis are concerned, they said that's not going to work. and this official i was speaking to said the proposal by hamas might not even make it to the war cabinet. that would be the first stage of discussing and eventually passing it and putting it before the public. so, for them, they are so pessimistic about the status of

these negotiations, they really don't see them going any further than that. there is a possibility the israelis might come back with a counteroffer. we don't know that for sure. another thing that i was told was that hamas seems to want to include in their hostage basically swap that would happen between the israelis who are currently in the gaza strip and the palestinian prisoners who are being held in israeli prisons, it sounds as though hamas might want to have released some of the perpetrators of the october 7th attack and this person said, that is definitely not even on the table. >> and a tight answer if you will, over in the red sea, we know ships are continuing to face attacks from the iranian-backed houthi militants. what more do we know about iran's role in all of this? >> reporter: well, so far it sounds as though iranians are kind of helping. we have been seeing they have been probably offering some level of surveillance, maybe helping to guide some of these houthi attacks. this is something that the smoking gun that a lot of

officials in washington and throughout the world are looking for, just to show that the iranians are the ones behind all this, but so far, there has been one big thing absent from the u.s. retaliation, they haven't been striking iranian ships or the iranian mainland. ana? >> matt bradley, thank you for those updates. we appreciate you. that does it for us today, see you back here tomorrow, same time, same place, for special coverage alongside my friends andrea mitchell and jose diaz-balart as we bring you the supreme court's oral arguments over former president trump's colorado ballot case. we'll have it live in full here on msnbc. for now, i'm ana cabrera, reporting from new york. jose diaz-balart picks up our coverage right now. good morning. it is 11:00 a.m. eastern, 8:00 a.m. pacific. i'm jose diaz-balart. right now high drama on capitol hill, the bipartisan border bill hangs in the balance. republicans say it is dead. we'll tell you what senate majority leader chuck schumer is expected to do next. a stunning