they all cave in, and it's not the first time in 2013, this is exactly what happened. there was a bipartisan deal, which included those legal pathways that passed the united states senate. speaker boehner didn't bring it up for a vote. 2018 we saw it again, 2024 republicans are cutting and running again. >> we have some breaking news, a u.s. official tells nbc news that there was a u.s. military strike in iraq that killed a hezbollah commander responsible for attacks on u.s. forces. this is near baghdad. much more on "deadline white house," which starts right now. it is 4:00 here in new york, i'm in for nicolle wallace with breaking news. an official tells nbc news an air strike by the united states has killed a commander belonging to the militia group believed to be responsible for the strike that killed three u.s. service

members at a base in jordan. joining us now, nbc news chief international correspondent keir simmons joins us from erbil, iraq. we do not have keir yet. we are waiting to get him. we are waiting to get in to you some of our correspondents waiting at the pentagon. help us understand the planning that did or did not go into this attack, the targets of this attack, the significance of this group. again, this is breaking news happening as we come on the air. we have learned that there has been a strike against an iran-backed armed group in iraq. the pentagon suspects led the broad coalition of iran-backed militias behind the attack in jordan that killed three u.s. troop members. we are getting on air, our correspondents at the pentagon to break down what this all means, the planning that was behind this attack, whether or not this was part of the tiered approach we have heard so much about from the u.s. government in the past few days, the

significance of the attack, how these targets came together. we are also waiting to hear from keir simmons who is for us in erbil, iraq, the response that we are hearing from the international community. again, if you are just joining us, an iran-backed armed group in iraq, hezbollah, that the pentagon suspects led the broad coalition of iran-backed militias behind the attack in jordan that killed three u.s. troops. it was a u.s. drone strike. hit a car in baghdad, killing three members of hezbollah that includes a high ranking commander. the strike was on a main thoroughfare in eastern baghdad. details are still coming in. going to bring those to you as we get them. you have one u.s. official telling the a.p. the senior commander was targeted. big questions about whether or not this was planned. the planning that would have gone into an attack of this

variety, whether or not it is part of the tiered approach that we have heard so much about from the u.s. government in the past few days. we are waiting to talk to our correspondents who are there at the pentagon, and we're going to have more as it develops, but for now, we're going to talk about the nine justices on the nation's highest court who were in the spotlight in a nearly unprecedented and for them, quite possibly uncomfortable way at this very moment. the next few days the court will be dealing with not one, but two cases directly involving the ex-president. attorneys for donald trump are expected to ask the supreme court to put a hold on yesterday's stunning ruling by the d.c. circuit court of appeals that trump is not immune to prosecution for things he did while serving as president. they have until monday to make that request. trump is then also expected to ask the court to overturn the decision, which deals a body blow to trump's efforts to te

derail the january 6th case. tomorrow the justices will hear article arguments in the case about whether donald trump can be on the ballot. what "the washington post" calls the, quote, most consequential case involving a presidential election since bush versus gore in 2000. it involves some very big questions about the constitution, the text of the 14th amendment, which bars insurrectionists from running for office. whether what happened on january 6th was actually an insurrection. all of it means that the justices are dealing with two separate cases involving a very similar set of facts. one case asking whether donald trump is barred from running for office because of the january 6th attack, the other seeking to hold him criminally accountable for his role in that attack, and the outcome in the 14th amendment case could have a major, maybe decisive impact on the federal election case. and this is why "the new york times" explains trump's legal strategy in the january 6th case looks like this, quote, mr. trump's legal team has used every lever at its disposal to push the start of the trial

until after this fall's election is decided. if that were to happen and mr. trump were to win the race, he could order his attorney general to simply dismiss the charges. even if the indictment were left in place, proceedings against him could be frozen for as long as he is in office under a long-standing justice department policy against prosecuting a sitting president. of course none of that happens if -- and this is a big if -- the justices decide that trump cannot run for president at all, and that is where we start with senior correspondent at vox and author of the agenda, how a republican supreme court is reshaping america, ian mill hiezer, and co-host of the hashtag sisters-in-law podcast, barbara mcquade, andrew weissmann is here. andrew, let's start with you. walk us through what it is we can expect when those oral arguments begin tomorrow. >> sure, well, one thing to note is that the court is going to be

deciding whether donald trump can be an officer again. in other words, whether somebody who has engaged in insurrection or aided an insurrection can hold a federal office again. if they decide that he can run, then the decision will be for all of us when we vote to decide whether somebody who has done that should be in office. so you know, the issue of how one deals with the 14th amendment is initially in the supreme court, even if they rule for him and overrule the colorado supreme court, we will still have the decision about whether somebody who is engged in that conduct should be there.

there are a lot of very technical legal issues here embedded in that constitutional provision about whether he was encompassed within the 14th amendment, prohibition for somebody who is engaged in insurrection or aided and abetted in insurrection, whether that person can run for office again, and there are a whole host of issues that donald trump raised. he, to be clear, only has to win on any one of those, whereas to affirm the colorado case, they kind of have to win all of them, so that's a pretty uphill battle in many ways. i'm going to be looking for mostly whether the court engages on the issue of is he, in fact, somebody who engaged in insurrection, and it was that sort of factual inquiry, and it will be interesting to me whether the court takes issue with the factual findings of the

colorado supreme court and trial court that he, in fact, did do that on january 6th. >> andrew's sort of walking through these, but "the washington post" broke down the case into four big points of contention. one, is the president an officer? meaning does the president count as one of the officials who have to abide by the terms of the 14th amendment. two, does the president take a different oath, whether the oath the president has is different from any other officer? three, did trump engage in insurrection, that is what andrew was just talking ab. four, is congress require to enforce it? meaning is congress the one who decides if the 14th amendment bars someone from the ballot. strategically, barb, which of those arguments do you think is the strongest for team trump? >> i think that he will want to avoid the question that andrew just talked about, which is the big one. did he engage in insurrection. i think that one's a tricky one for donald trump. i think they are better off looking for some legal off-ramp,

some of the questions you just mentioned there. to argue that the president is not an officer of the united states as used in this particular provision. certainly is an officer of the united states in other context, but because of the language, these are textualists, appeal to your audience. it talks about senators and representatives and then other officers of the united states. maybe that's one way out. another one that you just mentioned is that they take a different oath. again, if they are literally textualists, it says if you have taken an oath to support the constitution. of course the president takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution, and that could be some evidence that they did not intend for this provision to apply to the president. and i think the third one you mentioned is also important is that it is congress and not the courts who get to decide whether someone is eligible to become president after having engaged in insurrection. so this is a political we cannot for the courts but for congress to decide because it's congress

that can remove that restriction through a two-thirds vote, so it must be presumed that it is congress who decides on eligibility. i think it's safer ground for donald trump to talk about those things than it is to engage on the issue of whether he engaged in an insurrection. >> that is the what and the when, we all know the where. the attorneys who are arguing the case tomorrow from that reporting, mitchell, 47 is a prominent conservative lawyer and theorist who's worked as the texas solicitor general, a law professor and a private litigator running his own firm. before the trump case mitchell was best known to the justices as the architect of a restrictive texas abortion law that preceded the course reversal of roe v. wade. in a challenge to the texas case, kagan skewered mitchell, though not by name, remarking

that after oh these many years some geniuses came up with a way to evade the court's authority. undercutting the notion that the supreme court is the ultimate interpreter of the constitution, a belief known as judicial supremacy. so often, ian, we try to connect the dots and here you have a person who is at the nexus of so many of these legal challenges. >> you remember the story of the monkey poll, i think most of us read in middle school. mitchell is a lawyer who specializes in trying to get judges to construe the law in the same malicious way that the monkeys pal construes wishes. his argument in this case, his primary argument, he spends half of his brief on it, is that the constitution if uses the phrase officer of the united states to determine who cannot commit insurrection. if they do, they then are disqualified from serving as an officer again. he argues that the president is not an officer of the united states. i promise you that argument is exactly as stupid as it sounds.

the premise -- you know, the premise of this argument is that when the framers of the 14th amendment wrote the 14th amendment, they wanted to say if you are a city council member, if you are a state senator, if you are an elected state dogcatcher and you engage in an insurrection, then you are disqualified from holding office again. but if you are the commander in chief of the military and you violate your presidential oath and engage in an insurrection, that's fine. there's no need for any consequence then. i mean, what are we even doing here? like, there is a sort of literalist monkey's pal textualist argument. it's not a good one. it's the sort of argument that lawyers can make for this construction of the constitution, but like if your reading of the legal text leads you to the conclusion that the president is allowed to violate his oath and participate in an effort to overthrow the united states government, you're reading the constitution wrong.

>> andrew, i want to go back to what you were talking about, this question of their grappling with whether or not he actually engaged in insurrection. what what happens if they grapple with that question and they say, yes, he did, in fact, engage in insurrection, but then they use one of these other off ramps or escape hatches. where does that leave us? >> you know, in many ways i think it leaves us in a similar position that we're in now when by look at the d.c. circuit decision yesterday, and what i mean by that is if you look at the d.c. circuit decision, you have three circuit judges, what is called the second highest court in this country, saying that trump's position is irrational and is fundamentally at odds with what it means to have checks and balances and what it means to be an american

democracy. it is scathing about the position that donald trump has with respect to the role of the presidency in our country. it really puts the lie to the idea that donald trump is saying, oh, don't worry, it will only be a dictator for a day. his view articulated to this court is at odds with what this country stands for. if the supreme court were to say, and he engaged in insurrection but takes an off-ramp. again, i think what it means, for this country, we will be deciding the import of somebody who engages in an insurrection, somebody who doesn't understand the role of the presidency and that will be for us as the electorate to decide is that somebody who should be in the office, not that he can't legally be, but given that you have all of these courts saying that he is running on a position that is really fundamentally

challenging what this country for, that is something that i think you will certainly hear democrats be talking about, but i think just at bottom, all of us are going to need to grapple with that fact about somebody who is a leading contender for a major party in the united states. >> absolutely, and barb, let's talk about what a ruling from the court will look like, a ruling that applies nationwide or a ruling that just takes on colorado? >> i think it's going to apply nationwide, and the reason i say that is there have been amicus briefs filed by the secretaries of state by a number of states who say i don't have a stake in which way you come out, whether donald trump is or is not going to be on the ballot, but for the love of god, you need to tell me which. different states have different rules about whether the secretary of state or others determined the eligibility of a candidate, but the practical reality is it's time to start printing ballots.

super tuesday is coming up, we've got a lot of states who are having primary elections. we're going to have those in the coming weeks and months. i think to give clarity once and for all for all of the states that are going to be having a primary and a general election, it makes sense for the court to decide this case not just based on colorado but whether donald trump is indeed barred by the 14th amendment. >> thank you all so much for getting us started. and we have an update on the breaking news reported at the top of the program. in a statement released just moments ago, the u.s. military says that an air strike by the u.s. has killed a commander belonging to an iranian-backed militia group believes to be responsible for strikes against forces in the middle east. the u.s. military says there are no indications of civilian casualties at this time. they add, quote, we will not hesitate to hold responsible all those who threaten our forces' safety. joining us now, nbc news chief international keir simmons in erbil, iraq, and national

security and global affairs reporter dan de luce at the pentagon. what more do we know? >> this is what they're calling a unilateral strike. the u.s. central command says they have taken out the commander of chi tab hezbollah, this iranian-backed militia, that has been blamed for many attacks, dozens of attacks on u.s. forces in iraq and syria, and as you said, they believe at this point there were no civilian casualties or collateral damage, and they of course, say that they will continue to take these strikes as necessary to, as they say, protect our people, american service members. important to point out here that this campaign started on friday after three u.s. service members were killed and dozens of others were wounded in an attack at a u.s. outpost in jordan, and those retaliatory air strikes targeted militias back bid iran in iraq and syria, and today they're saying they targeted and killed this commander of this

iranian-backed militia. >> help me understand, though, is this part of the tiered attack? is this part of that ongoing campaign? >> i think very much so. very much so. this is about holding accountable those who the u.s. believes have been conducting rocket and drone attacks on american forces in iraq and syria and then of course there was that lethal attack that killed three american troops in jordan. so this is part of this reprisal campaign, which is continuing, and of course they're trying to calibrate it so that they do not trigger some wider conflict. so the strikes so far have not been conducted or targeted, anything inside iran. they're going after these proxy networks that the u.s. says they're armed and trained in finance by iran. >> keir, what more can you tell us from iraq from syria? >> reporter: in baghdad, the

first we heard was all of this explosion, a car on fire in eastern baghdad. it's in a mixed neighborhood, christian, butting it looks like this hit a vehicle that was carrying members of kataib hezbollah. one of these killed is a leader of that group as far as we can see. this is being reported on telegram channels, so we have to get confirmation from the u.s. if you like they hit who they intended to hit, but it does appear as if what has happened here is that the u.s. has specifically targeted and assassinated a member of a group that they believe is responsible for that attack on tower 22. and just to add to what was reported there, what we're being told by people, eyewitnesses, people in baghdad who are talking to eyewitnesses is that it does look as if it hit

specifically this car and even a car right next door didn't sustain damage. now, that's not to say even if there weren't any civilian casualties that there aren't -- there isn't a huge amount of anger. crowds around shouting no to america, no to israel, as ambulances took these bodies away, some reports that three people were killed in this vehicle. i don't have confirmation of that. that's what's being report ed in this opening hour, a lot is being reported that we can't necessarily confirm. it does look as if this has been a specific target on a specific member of this group that the u.s. accuses of carrying out this attack on tower 22 where those three servicemen and women were killed. >> what more can you tell us about kataib hezbollah or this senior military commander? >> the commander -- >> this group is one -- >> go ahead. >> a number of iranian -- >> oh, i'm sorry.

>> no, go, dan. >> fire away. >> keir, let's start with you, and then we'll bounce over to dan. >> sure. i mean, you know, this group is one of many iranian-backed militia. it is under an umbrella group here in iraq, and these groups have been continuing to carry out attacks on bases sporadically, even since those u.s. strikes on just last friday, so you know, this is one of many groups that are backed by the iranians. they have some awe ton my, buts ultimately the u.s. holding them responsible for what happened. >> dan, what more can you add? >> no, i think the problem is here the challenge is going to be does this actually deter and halt these attacks from these

iranian-backed groups. even if they do succeed in killing this commander or other leaders of these militia groups, does that mean these attacks on u.s. forces stop? it's just too early to say, but it's a very difficult challenge because there are years of this kind of thing going on. iran uses these proxies to sort of exert influence and create huge headaches for its adversaries. it's truly to say how effective this will be over time, and again, i think the administration is really putting its chips on the idea of diplomacy that they can help forge a cease fire between israel and hamas, and that will reduce tensions, and that will sort of take away this -- stop this cycle, this escalatory cycle we're in right now. >> keir simmons for us in erbil, iraq, thank you so much. i want to bring into our conversation, former deputy national security adviser to president obama, ben rhodes.

can you give me a sense of the type of planning that goes into an attack like this? >> this definitely feels like a direct retaliatory strike. perhaps this commander was involved, we don't know yet, but could have been involved in some of the planning around attacks in the united states. the united states monitors and gathers intelligence on a group like kataib hezbollah kh because they're regularly involved in attacks on u.s. facilities or troops dating back to the last days of the iraq war. this goes back a decade, and so it would be the normal course of action that you have intelligence that you've been gathering on this group, after an attack like what we saw that killed three u.s. service members, you probably really ramp up efforts to try to identify who might have been responsible, where they are, track their movements, have some obviously overhead capacity to see where someone like this is moving, and then a decision is teed up to the president

probably, if it's involving a strike like this in baghdad, right? we should talk about that. that's quite sensitive to do something in baghdad for his decision, and so there's both the kind of military and intelligence development of this kind of target, and then there's the policy decision about whether you engage in this type of targeted assassination in a sensitive area to the iraqi government like baghdad. >> a lot to unpack there. let's start with baghdad and the decision to complete a mission like this in such a sensitive region. the complexity of that, the conversations that were likely had on that point specifically. >> so on that point specifically, you know, we've been taking some strikes since october 7th in this kind of tit for tat of escalatory violence with these groups in parts of syria and iraq that are usually a bit further afield. and some of these strikes that we saw the other day were like that. baghdad is particularly sensitive to the iraqi government. it's obviously the seat of the iraqi government, the capital of the country.

these types of strikes are done without prenotification of the iraqi government. the iraqi government will see anything like this as a violation of sovereignty. they see any strikes in iraq that don't involve prenotification or coordination as a violation of their sovereignty, but doing it in baghdad is obviously much more sensitive because it's a highly populated area and the government is right there, and it kind of makes them look somewhat powerless to their own people. so the risk that i think would be weighed in the white house is, look, the iraqi government may get to a point where it starts to call for the u.s. troops and we have some 2,500 troops in iraq, to leave if they feel like their sovereignty is violated. versus the gain of taking out this particular commander and demonstrating that there's retaliation for what happened to u.s. troops, i think that is ultimately the balance of decision for the white house, and they may have determined that they think they can manage

whatever tension arises. you also heard in keir's reporting this stirs up the public in baghdad, and our diplomatic facilities in the past have sometimes been threatened by not just groups like kh but by people being upset, by people being stirred up by demonstrations, so i think there's obviously probably a surge in the diplomatic security around u.s. facilities in a place like baghdad that might be worried about both popular sentiment against the united states stirred up and by groups like kh potentially seeking reprisals. >> and the fact that you have secretary blinken in the region, the fact that we were moments before this news broke taking his press conference live, we often talk about the fact that these things are happening in tandem. it feels like we saw in realtime today the extent to which that is true. >> that's exactly right. i mean, on the one hand, you've

got the secretary of state over there trying to achieve some kind of humanitarian pause or cease fire in gaza to avert the kind of catastrophic humanitarian consequences we're seeing there to try to get some hostages released and also to just deescalate tensions across the region. far of what i think tony blinken is probably hearing is from arab leaders about they don't want to see this regional war escalate further. even those countries that have concerns about iran, i don't think they want to see this level of violence in a place like iraq that is right at the heart of the middle east, right at the heart of sunni shia tensions in the region. it speaks to the delicate balancing act. the u.s. is trying to do so many things at once in the region right now, trying to support israel but deescalate the crisis in gaza but get to a cease fire. trying to escalate in retaliation for what happened to our troops in jordan but not have that escalation lead to a regional war.

>> i think we at this point all understand the message that the u.s. is attempting to deliver to iran where things get a little bit grayer, at least in my estimation, is the message that then iran relays to its proxies given as you and i have discussed the varying levels of control it has over these proxies, so when an attack like today's attack is launched, what then are the communication dominos that begin to fall? what are the conversations that iran is or isn't having with these proxy groups? >> well, first of all, interestingly -- and look, irgc, iranian revolutionary guard commanders do have communications into groups like kataib hezbollah, if there's something like the strike in jordan that killed u.s. service members, i would expect there's some communication back between the irgc and kh, this group. interestingly, alicia, a few days ago even before the u.s.

retaliatory strikes, kataib hezbollah put out a statement saying they weren't going to strike u.s. forces anymore. it seemed like they wanted to signal they were deescalating. that's the kind of decision they probably make in consultation with iranians. kh saying now we want to deescalate. we don't want to be part of an escalation inside of iraq. what they want is for the iraqi government to decide that the u.s. is the one that is escalating and the u.s. is the one that should be evicted from having a military presence in iraq. so we've already seen that there's clearly some diplomacy or probably some discussion happening with iranians. i think after a strike like that this takes out and targets a commander, there's usually a desire to retaliate when one of their senior people is taken out, they'll have to weigh the question of do we want to continue to signal that we're the ones that are trying to be

reasonable and deescalate and the americans are the ones that are taking these strikes in baghdad, or do they make a determination we have to do something in response? and that probably is something that would involve a conversation between the irgc and this group, even if it might be kh in the end that makes a decision about what they're going to do. >> as always, thank you so much for being with us, and our thanks to keir simmons in iraq, and dan de luce in washington, d.c. spectacular fails from the republican party today, both chambers of congress have now officially backed off border security legislation that they were calling for. and a hard right push to impeach a cabinet member fell flat. the stakes of what doing nothing looks like. plus, reporting today on changes at the rnc, turning the official political arm of the republican party into a branch of the trump maga movement. all that and much more news to come when "deadline white house" continues after this. hen "deadl" continues after this [crowd noises]

[dramaticlly beat] introducing, ned's plaque psoriasis. he thinks his flaky red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. ned? otezla can help you get clearer skin, and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing otezla 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. with clearer skin, movie night, is a groovy night. ♪♪ live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla.

we really don't want people to think of feeding food like ours is spoiling their dogs. good, real food is simple. it looks like food, it smells like food, it's what dogs are supposed to be eating. no living being should ever eat processed food for every single meal of their life. it's amazing to me how many people write in about their dogs changing for the better. the farmer's dog is just our way to help people take care of them. ♪ you can make money the hard way as a bullfighter

or a human cannonball... or save money the easy way, with xfinity mobile. existing customers can get a free line of our most popular unlimited plan for a year! not only will you save hundreds but you'll also be joining millions who have connected to america's most reliable 5g network. sure is a lot safer than becoming a stuntman for money. get a free line of unlimited intro for a year when you buy one unlimited line. plus, get the new samsung galaxy s24 on us. liberty mutual customized my car insurance

and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, i've bee telling everyone. baby: liberty. oh! baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪ you really got to hand it to him, just when we think there's no way republicans could fail any more spectacularly, they lower themselves into the muck. they prove us all wrong. for so-called lawmakers, they don't appear to be very good at, you know, making laws. mere hours after one embarrassment, the attempted impeachment of homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas, a house gop measure that failed because republicans couldn't

whip up enough votes in a chamber they control. another humiliation, failure to pass a stand-alone bill on israel aid that would have provided over $17 billion to that nation. just last hour over in the senate, a vote on the broader funding package, the one including immigration restrictions failed. so now majority leader chuck schumer is expected to force a vote on an israel and ukraine aid package stripped of border provisions. forget what is in these bills for just a moment. consider simply republicans appear unable to produce any substantive solution to issues they themselves admit are dire, on serious efforts undertaken by unserious people. joining our conversation capitol hill correspondent ryan nobles joins us and former congressman from florida, msnbc political analyst, david jolly.

where are we with this bill on foreign aid that is stripped of border language? >> reporter: right now the senate is voting on a procedural step that essentially opens the door to another procedural vote on the broader package with that border security component pulled out. so chuck schumer's plan here is to put this bill on the floor with aid to ukraine, aid to israel, aid to the indo-pacific, it still includes interdiction for fentanyl and also removes things like funding to u anwar, that procedural step is scheduled to be the next vote. this step they're on now is effectively already passed. it only requires a simple majority, but they're keeping the vote open as republicans try and discuss with each other about whether or not they want to kill the next piece of legislation, which would be that stand alone package -- i guess not stand alone, but that package without the border component tied to it. you know, it's kind of a head spinning few days here on

capitol hill because it's hard to figure out exactly what republicans want. it seems as though democrats several times throughout this process have gone to them and answered their calls for certain provisions to be included in packages like these, and every time they do it, republicans say we're not interested in that. what's also an interesting component to all of this, alicia, is one of the things some republicans have asked for to pass this new package, the package without border security provisions are amendments related to the border. you heard that right. they didn't want to vote for the border package before, now they want to add amendments to this new package. not to make this more confusing than it already is, even if this eventually does pass through the senate, which is a huge if right now, there's the real possibility that the whole thing comes apart in the house. there's obviously a lot of disagreement on the republican side as to whether or not ukraine funding in any form is worth it, they obviously just voted down a stand alone israel package.

the house is in a position right now where they can't even pass things they want to pass, like the mayorkas impeachment last night. the sum total of this is congress is a dysfunctional place where not much of anything is getting done. >> david, i will not ask you the question i always ask you on days like this is whether or not you miss being a member of this legislative body. stakes are incredibly high in this moment as it relates to all of this foreign aid, but there are also big challenges coming up on the horizon. congress is going to have to tackle two shutdown threats. if speaker johnson can't land this plane, how is he supposed to land that one? >> i don't know that he will ch the votes aren't there. let's lean into what ryan just reported. this is remarkable what's happening in the senate. we often talk about the train wreck of house republicans, but mitch mcconnell has largely had a steady hand of leadership with

the republican conference in the senate. republican senators are melting down right now in realtime. as you reported out earlier today they blocked their other border security bill in the senate and said we're stripping that under the o'. we're just going to do aid to ukraine, israel, and other national security measures. it came time to vote on that, and they realized wait a minute, we spent the last month saying we're not giving foreign aid if we don't secure our border, so now we can't vote for the bill we said we wanted now, so now we have to put border security amendments back up for a vote on the foreign aid bill, and the republicans are in a circular firing squad in the senate, which you don't often see. the thing that ties this all together, and this is the critical moment where the stakes really do matter. what does that misbehavior in the senate have in common? it's this, republicans are

voting down border security because donald trump doesn't want border security solved. and what we are witnessing is republican senators and republican house members, patsies for donald trump both in leaving the border problem unsolved but also in compromising u.s. security interests around the globe by now opposing the aid to ukraine that is so critical. >> i'm curious, when you talk to democrats on capitol hill, do had they feel they have succeeded at a minimum in calling republicans' bluff? >> reporter: i do think that they understand that this -- that what they've predicted for quite a while has manifested itself, that they've warned us all that we should believe republicans when they tell us that they're not going to vote any of this stuff through. i mean, i think there was, you know, some sort of maybe hope attached to this idea that all of this was just a negotiating

posture, and you start from the furthest end of a negotiating window and work yourself back to the middle once the brass tacks starts to become a reality. in this case, republicans have held firm to what they told us from the beginning, they weren't going to pass any border deal that democrats would agree to. they were only in favor of the most radical form of immigration reform, which had a long list of provisions that democrats under any circumstance were not going to agree to. and in this case, in these negotiations, which i think is such an important point is that democrats made remarkable concessions within the immigration debate that they never would have made under any other circumstances. for instance, there is nothing in this legislation that does anything for dreamers. that was often a red line for democrats. they wouldn't even enter into a conversation about immigration reform that didn't include some sort of pathway to citizenship or protection for dreamers. that wasn't the case this time around. it still wasn't good enough for republicans. right now democrats maybe saw

some political advantage to this up until this point, but now you're starting to get a real sense of frustration and almost worry, what else can we do to try and get these things over the finish line, and there isn't any sort of real substantive answer to that question. >> the embarrassment would be funny if the stakes were not so high. ryan nobles, thank you so much for joining us and for your reporting. david, you are sticking with me. up next, from one slow motion disaster to another, donald trump's hand-picked rnc chair is reportedly on her way out, why? and what is next for the gop just ahead. d what is next for tp just ahead

one in five children worldwide are faced with the reality of living without food, no family dinners, no special treats, not enough energy to play. all around the world, hunger is affecting children's physical and mental health. toddlers are suffering from acute malnutrition, which stunts their growth. kids are forced to drop out of school so they can help support their families. conflict, inflation and climate have ignited the worst famine in our lifetime, and we are fed up! fed up that hunger devours dreams. fed up, that hunger destroys joy. fed up with the fact that hunger eats childhood. help us feed the futures of children all over the world by visiting.

getfedupnow.org. for as little as $10 a month, you can join save the children as we support children and families in desperate need of our help. now is the time to get fed up and give back. when you join the cause, your $10 monthly donation can help communities in need of lifesaving treatments and nutrients, prevent children from dropping out of school. support our work with communities and governments to help children go from short term surviving to long term thriving. and now, thanks to special government grants, every dollar you give before december 31st can multiply up to ten times the impact. that means more food, water, medicine and help for kids around the world. you'll also receive a free tote bag to share your support for children in need. having your childhood eaten away by hunger is unimaginable. get fed up. call us now or visit getfedupnow.org, today.

wealth-changing question -- are you keeping as much of your investment gains as possible? high taxes can erode returns quickly, so you need a tax-optimized portfolio. at creative planning, our money managers and specialists work together to make sure your portfolio and wealth are managed in a tax-efficient manner. it's what you keep that really matters. why not give your wealth a second look? book your free meeting today at creativeplanning.com. creative planning -- a richer way to wealth. that first time you take a step back. i made that. with your very own online store. i sold that. and you can manage it all in one place. i built this. and it was easy, with a partner that puts you first. godaddy.

continuing with the theme of the republican party eating itself alive, next up the head of the republican national committee, ronna mcdaniel who reportedly will leave that post after the primary in south carolina at the end of the month. mcdaniel has held the job since 2016 and was just reelected to another term last year, but had been facing calls to resign as the party dealt with a fund-raising drought and increased scrutiny over the organization's finances. mcdaniel's term will be defined by a culture of losing with an embarrassing string of defeats on everything from governors races to senate races, state legislature, ballot referendums and a resounding defeat in the 2020 presidential election. but all of that wasn't enough to cost mcdaniel her job. donald trump is looking for someone even more of a sycophant to him and the big lie than shefsz. quote, mr. trump is likely to

promote the chairman of the north carolina republican party, michael whitley as her replacement. trump likes whitley for one overwhelming reason, he is, quote a stop the steal guy as one of the people described him. mcdaniel could remain chairman of the rnc, but she would have to clear nearly all of her major decisions with trump appointees. so it begins. joining our conversation, nbc news correspondent vaughn hillyard in las vegas following the trump campaign. david jolly is back with us. vaughn, this afternoon you had mcdaniel sending out a letter saying she's still hard at work, not getting distracted by this speculation. what are you hearing? >> reporter: the rnc has insisted that the decision for ronna mcdaniel whether to step down or not will not come until after february 24th. it's all but disarray inside the rnc body right now. i just got off the phone with

one rnc member who used the word disarray to describe it. he said there is disagreements over who should be running the republican national committee, and whether that person is donald trump because in the words of this rnc member, donald trump is not the president yet. typically the party that is chosen by the sitting president. this individual told me, look, if donald trump wants to pick who's going to run the party, he should win the general election and win the white house in november. there is a co-chair to ronna mcdaniel, drew mckizic out of south carolina. if ronna mcdaniel, that cochair would fall in line to be the chair, and there's questions over whether he would agree to withdraw as the party chair. a senior adviser to donald trump just in the last hour promoted online an article in which north carolina rnc committee man

whatley is an election denier, currently the chairman of the north carolina gop. all of this is happening at really a precarious time. just last week i was here with all of those rnc members and ronna mcdaniel covering their annual winter meeting and there was no explicit effort to get her out and really no inkling that was going to happen until donald trump over the last couple of days in talking with conservative right wing media suggested it was time for her to go after fund-raising numbers that did not match up with what the party had in mind. this is a moment here for the republican party that is difficult to reconcile with the fact they're nine months away from not only trying to keep the majority in the congress but also win back the white house. >> it also given, david jolly, the direction that trump reportedly wants to go into a misdiagnosis of the problem? >> yeah, in a really, really big way. he's basically saying the party leadership is not trump enough, and i think what really has

rubbed donald trump wrong is when he was president, he had a strong grip to the rnc. in fact, the rnc even paid many of his litigation expenses. since he has been out and they entered into a republican primary, the rnc has now had to be neutral, and that frustrated donald trump. now that ron desantis, nikki haley, mike pence, it was a team of equals, if you will, and there were limitations on the litigation expenses. i think the legitimate reason to be really worried about the direction of the rnc if you are donald trump it's the lowest level in ten years. that should be an alarm bell for poor leadership at the rnc right now. if i'm donald trump who sucks up all the money i can for litigation expenses, looking at an rnc you expect to be there

for you and realize they may not be there for you, it's why he's making this move. he's the presumptive nominee and he wants the rnc to look like him. >> kevin mccarthy endorsed to be the next rnc chair by none other than matt gaetz. does that speak to the fact that they're not worried about this institution, that it's all become more of the show, more of the bluster? to david's point, where does the rnc actually matter to these candidates? ron? i think -- >> sorry, alicia. >> we got you now. go ahead. >> i think that for these rnc members, a lot of these folks are long time rnc committee members who have been working

for them forever. tleez more than two thirds of those individuals that weren't even in the party when donald trump ran to power. when i was covering some of my rnc meetings, they're no longer involved. instead it's the likes of charlie kirk and turning point usa, trump allies who have been working at the county level and state level to get these maga-time characters into committee positions, into county and state chair positions so they would eventually be able to rule the republican party. that's what you are seeing coming to a head here, is one year ago the rnc committee woman out of california actually challenged ronna mcdaniel for the rnc chair. the rnc voted to stick with

ronna mcdaniel. now we're seeing some pushback and there's a question over who will rule the republican party and whether it has a resemblance to the one that david knew. >> thank you both so much for spending time with us. florida today considering adding a ballot measure to secure access to abortion in the state. those details next. ose details t friends, they are the future. but did you know that millions of kids right here in our own backyard are facing hunger every day without healthy food it's harder to grow, to thrive, to feel their best. the impact when children don't have enough to eat is tremendous, because when you're hungry and your basic needs aren't being met, you cannot learn. that's why i'm here now, asking you to join me in helping end child hunger in america. this is a problem we know how to solve

and we can do it better by supporting no kid hungry for just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month. you can help provide healthy meals like a good breakfast in class to power kids through their days. breakfast in the classroom contributes to kids being more focused, which leads to higher grades, test scores and simply just their well-being. ensuring all kids get a good breakfast and other nutritious food is a beautiful thing. it's a game changer and you can help make it happen when you join me in supporting no kid hungry today. that food is not just food. it's energy, health, confidence, hope, and even love. yes, love. so please call now or go online to helpnokidhungry.org right now give $19 a month, only $0.63 a day. and when you use your credit card, you'll get this special team t-shirt

to show that you're helping kids build a brighter future for themselves. thank you. families are struggling to make ends meet. these are hard times, but together we can help connect america's kids with meals. so please call now or go online to give. thank you. - "best thing i've ever done." that's what freddie told me. - it was the best thing i've ever done, and- - really? - yes, without a doubt! - i don't have any anxiety about money anymore. - great people. different people, that's for sure, and all of them had different reasons for getting a reverse mortgage, but you know what, they all felt the same about two things: they all loved their home, and they all wanted to stay in that home. and they all wanted to stay in that home. - [announcer] if you're 62 or older and own your home, you could access your equity to improve your lifestyle. a reverse mortgage loan eliminates

your monthly mortgage payments and puts tax-free cash in your pocket. call the number on your screen. - why don't you call aag... and find out what a reverse mortgage can mean for you? - [announcer] call right now to receive your free no-obligation info kit. call the number on your screen. do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have $100,000 or more of life insurance, you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit coventrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.

opening arguments today at the florida supreme court on whether an amendment enshrining abortion rights can appear on the ballot. justices already appear skeptical of the motion, arguing the language of the initiative is too complicated for voters to take in. the court's chief justice saying after a half hour of oral arguments he believes florida voters aren't stupid. they can figure things out. if the measure goes before voters, 60% have to vote yes for it to take effect. the court has until april 1st to decide how to proceed. up next for us, how donald trump's authoritarian impulses continue to collide with the rule of law. the next hour of "deadline white house" starts after this quick break. use" starts after this quk break.

liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, i've bee telling everyone. baby: liberty. oh! baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪

the first time you connected your godaddy website and your store was also the first time you realized... well, we can do anything. cheesecake cookies? the chookie! manage all your sales from one place with a partner that always puts you first. (we did it) start today at godaddy.com

president of the united states, the authority is total. that's the way it's got to be. >> when the president does it, it's not illegal? >> i'm saying a president under article two, it's very strong. read it. >> it gives me all these rights. >> it is 5:00 here in new york. i'm alicia menendez in for nicolle wallace. as you just heard one voice is saying over and over that he

should be able to rule without consequence. he should be able to say and do anything he wants. from what we've seen over the past several years, his party has welcomed and cheered those impulses on. yesterday's ruling from the federal appeals court in d.c. was a declaration against that way of governing, a reminder there are guardrails in our government. the three-judge panel ruled that the president is not immune from prosecution for things he did while in office, saying that those in power cannot do whatever they feel like. it was a devastating takedown of the former president's case, one that attorney george conway describes as, an air-tight ruling. after the ruling came down, he said by writing such a strong opinion the d.c. circuit may have h hastened the day that

donald trump thought he would have. the best course of action would be for the supreme court to deny a stay and deny review altogether. in a matter of days, and that could mean a trial in the united states from donald trump. even former trump white house lawyer ty cobb agreed. >> this is an epic opinion. it's an opinion, if it's the last word on these issues, as it may be depending on what the supreme court does, will be studied in law schools for years. >> i think it will give the supreme court some pause because it gets these issues right. while it's compelling, historic,

monumental, it doesn't sweep too broadly. they only decided the few issues they need to decide. >> trump has until monday to appeal the immunity ruling, which he has said he will do. then we'll see if the u.s. supreme court agrees with conway and cobb. that's where we start with congresswoman zoe loghlin of california and former to state department official during the obama administration rick stengel. representative loughlin, let's start with you. what went through your head as you read this opinion? >> it's carefully crafted and comes to the conclusion that the ex president is not above the law. when he broke the law, he could

be accountable criminally. we understood that. that's why we voted unanimously to refer to the department of justice for prosecution for a variety of criminal agents. we found when we investigated, he was at the center of a broad-ranging conspiracy to overturn the election, overturn the constitution. it was gratifying that the court wrote such a careful decision, really confirming what we already concluded in the january 6th committee. >> do you think this decision is so strong, so buttoned up that as you had conway, cobb, others saying, it doesn't make sense for the supreme court to take it up? it makes more sense for them to say we can't outdo this? >> i never like to speculate what the roberts' court will do. they couldn't write a better opinion. i would be hard pressed to

figure out how they could come to a different conclusion. it's based on precedence, the founding fathers' words and common sense. i guess the real question is whether they issue a stay and delay. i would hope they would not. i think that would further undercut confidence in the court. we know their prestige is at an all-time low now. i'm sure that justice roberts wants to avoid doing anything that would further undercut confidence in the court. >> cannot talk about presidential immunity without talking about what's coming tomorrow. the court is going to hear oral arguments on the 14th amendment case brought by colorado. representative lofgren, what do you expect to hear tomorrow? >> i don't know. certainly he committed insurrection. there's no question about that. i guess the real issue is who gets to decide and what are the standards for deciding. i suppose the court could weasel

out of the conclusion in that way. we know what he did. it's interesting, some of my colleagues, matt gaetz and marjorie taylor greene just introduced a bill saying he didn't do it. the 14th amendment provides for a role of congress. both houses can excuse the insurrectionist by a vote of two thirds. that's not what their motion does. it's lying eyes. >> let's pull up that resolution led by matt gaetz. they're trying to say that trump didn't engage in insurrection or rebellion. this is an attack on the 14th amendment language, tim. they're trying to undermine it. one of the arguments we've heard from trump's own attorneys. the 14th amendment amendment

case, the immunity case they're tied, not just legally, but the subject matter itself. >> they are tied, but the supreme court doesn't typically, alicia, review findings of fact. they're not set up to do that. their role is to evaluate questions of the law. as ms. lofgren said, they will evaluate whether or not section 3 of the 14th amendment can be invoked by a state official or is it congress. did the colorado official provide the former president with due process in making its findings? is the president one of the officials who is subject to coverage? those are legal questions. they again institutionally are not equipped to make findings of fact. i don't think they're going to decide whenever they issue an opinion whether or not the president did or didn't engage

in insurrection. that's a factual question that the colorado court answered in the affirmative. they're going to evaluate the process by which the finding was made and whether or not the 14th amendment can be invoked by a state official. haven't had this before with respect an insurrectionist former president. it will be fascinating to see how that answer those legal issues. >> speaking of situations we haven't found ourselves in before, you have a person vying for the presidency, but telling us he doesn't want to abide by the constitution of this country. >> i was struck by the roll you had before. he has confused the job of president of the united states with king. that's what he thinks it is. the ruling by the federal court doesn't seem novel to me. if there's any principle enshrined in the constitution, it's that no person is above the

law, even a former president. as the court said, the highest office in a democracy is citizen. they called him citizen trump. we're only looking at these things because you have someone who basically wants to be a dictator, wants to be a king. you know, the supreme court -- if you're asking me what i think they'll do, i think they'll weasel out of it. the other thing the constitution provides is we want elections to make decisions. the question is whether article 3 is self-enforcing or not and it's one they will probably weigh in on. >> we were going through, congresswoman, the four different buckets of questions that will be called tomorrow. one of those questions is who's responsibility, accountability is here. i don't know if you've seen the meme of all the spidermen pointing at each other. there's finger pointing back at

congress. i can only imagine there's a little bit of you saying, we tried to hold him accountable. we tried and members of his party were unwilling to heed the call the duty and instead they stood by their guy. now there's no choice that this is contended with by the courts or in the ballot box. >> the court itself relied on the fact that members of the senate said he should be prosecuted, but was no longer president, when they failed to convict. that was a big mistake on their part. we paid a price for it, but we can't unwind history. i think the court will decide on procedural grounds that the 14th amendment is not self-executing. that's not an irrational position to reach, but there's

no question that trump tried to overturn the election and the constitution. he was an insurrectionist. the real question is who gets to decide that when it comes to ballot access. >> the timeline, as always, is of the essence. before we had this amendment ruling, you had a lot of folks, hair on firing, saying we're at the freak out stage. that doesn't necessarily change now that we have the immunity ruling as it relates to this big question, the only question that matters, the question we circle back to which is will there be accountability before november? >> it's a good question, but it's hard to answer. judge chutkan, the judge to whom the january 6th case is ascribed will be fair to the charged defendant. that includes giving him time to be adequately prepared.

she gave him initially seven months from the initial appearance to the first trial date. when that was stayed, she'll provide about the same amount of the stay, additional time to prepare. that's been about two months. i believe, alicia, that the supreme court, contrary to what a lot of nonlawyers think, the default is no. they always say yes when there's a close question of the federal law to interpreter a conflict in lower courts. we have neither. this is not a close case. there was a very strong opinion. the default is there's nothing for us to review. a denial of sert sets this back on the trial calendar, perhaps a two-month delay, and i don't think there are any other possible impediments that will

prevent that case from finally arriving in front of the jury in washington, d.c. where the former president is presumed innocent. the government has to meet a very high burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and the former president has an opportunity to present a defense. that is where this belongs. that's what the select committee said when we issued our findings. we're getting closer and closer to that day, probably sometime late this spring or early summer. >> which is amazing when you think about the republican national convention being in the early days of july and the ways in which those calendars, rick, collide. >> yes. i mean, we're witness to history. everything is unprecedented and everything is very, very dangerous. i mean, to have a person running for office who may be convicted of a crime, who is on trial for

felonies, on trial for treason, insurrection, and running for office and having the unilateral support of his party is unimaginable. >> and very busy at the rnc. there's a theme of authoritarians that we talk about a lot. that is this idea of going after your enemies. you heard donald trump explicitly say he plans to do so. i want to play what ty cobb had to say about this. take a listen. >> well, i do believe that if trump is elected that president biden could be in danger of retribution. i don't believe there's a legal basis for it, and i don't think it will go very far. >> there is that danger, representative lofgren, and there's whether or not our

guardrails are strong enough to protect against that danger. >> there's a lot of danger. trump himself says he intends to terminate parts of the constitution. those are his words, not my words. that was before he said he planned to be a dictator on day one. what does he mean by that? you know, there's speculation, but you can't terminate the constitution legally. you know, is he saying he's not going to abide by the rule of law? is he going to go off on his own way even though the courts have ruled otherwise? we don't know. certainly it's not a comforting scenario to think that someone with so little regard to the constitution, the rule of law, our history and patriotism, could end up in the oval office. >> congresswoman lofgren, thank you for taking the time. tim, thank you. rick, you're sticking with me.

with republicans blocking aid to ukraine, a leading figure in right wing media, tucker carlson is sitting down with vladimir putin. plus, our good friend who lost his daughter in the parkland school shooting on yesterday's ruling to hold a mother accountable for her son's crimes. and another example of blatant abuse of power wielded by the former president. "deadline whitehouse" continues after the break. stick with us. r the break. stick with us. even a little blurry vision can distort things. and something serious may be behind those itchy eyes.

up to 50% of people with graves' could develop a different condition called thyroid eye disease, which should be treated by a different doctor. see an expert. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com my mental health was much better. but i struggled with uncontrollable movements called td, tardive dyskinesia. td can be caused by some mental health meds. and it's unlikely to improve without treatment. i felt like my movements were in the spotlight. #1-prescribed ingrezza is the only td treatment for adults that's always one pill, once daily. ingrezza 80 mg is proven to reduce td movements in 7 out of 10 people. people taking ingrezza can stay on most mental health meds. ingrezza can cause depression, suicidal thoughts, or actions in patients with huntington's disease. pay close attention to and call your doctor if you become depressed, have sudden changes in mood, behaviors, feelings, or have thoughts of suicide. don't take ingrezza if you're allergic to its ingredients. ingrezza may cause serious side effects, including angioedema, potential heart rhythm problems, and abnormal movements.

report fevers, stiff muscles, or problems thinking as these may be life threatening. sleepiness is the most common side effect. it's nice. people focus more on me. ask your doctor about #1 prescribed, once-daily ingrezza. ♪ ingrezza ♪ i used to leak urine when i coughed, laughed or exercised. i couldn't even enjoy playing with my kids. i leaked too. i just assumed it was normal. then we learned about bulkamid - an fda-approved, non-drug solution for our condition. it really works, and it lasts for years. it's been the best thing we've done for our families. visit findrealrelief.com to find an expert physician near you. ask if bulkamid is right for you and discuss potential risks. results and experiences may vary. move beyond the leaks. 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.

as they torpedo their own deals, republicans in congress are putting aid to ukraine in serious jeopardy. all to appease the leading gop candidate. it comes as tucker carlson, a leading voice of the right wing disinformation campaign is moscow. ironically he's there in the name of keeping americans informed, sitting down for an interview with vladimir putin. all of it in a super-charged election year and it makes this new warning about the coming flood of disinformation all the more timely and dire. jenkowitz served as the dhs disinformation corp. she said the united states has

failed to stop the disinformation coming from russia. she writes, quote, the result is an information ecosystem that is ripe for manipulation. the united states has failed to stand up to the very disinformation it sought to fight and it's broader ongoing struggle to grapple with disinformation is ill for the country and democracy around the world. joining us now frank peglisi is back. frank, your reaction when you learned that tucker carlson was sitting down with vladimir putin? >> well, we know some things. we know that vladimir putin hasn't granted an interview with

legitimate western journalists for almost four years. tucker carlson is neither a journalist or reporter, but he has played one on tv. putin has chosen him. putin was a former kgb officer. that means he does things when he know it is outcome. he does things with a purpose and strategy. he knows what the outcome will be here. he knows he can play tucker carlson who he played when he was on fox and now on his x channel. it will be edited by both carlson and by putin. the russian media is already fawning all over carlson, following him to restaurants and ballet in moscow. they'll use this interview in russia showing clips of how lovely his visit was with

mr. putin. let's see if he's really a journalist. let's see if he asks the hard questions. let's see if he asks mr. putin about the innocent men, women and children killed in ukraine. let's see if he asks about the 20 journalists in prison in russia for doing their job. let's he knows the whereabouts of the persons who interfered with our election. how about how many times mr. putin had somebody thrown out a window or poisoned one of his opponents? don't hold your breath on whether those are asked. >> rick, i like frank's frame there. it's the idea about the

questions asked, the confrontation, about holding a powerful person to account and whether or not that is done. i want to hear your thoughts on that as someone who has themselves, a real journalist, interviewed vladimir putin. i want to remind you what tucker says he's encouraging viewers to do, not to agree with putin, but to decide for themselves. >> so the word disinformation comes from the russia word -- [ speaking in a global language ] -- which was invented under the '30s under stalin. putin was a kgb officer. he understands disinformation better than anybody and he would never agree to an interview with a western person or report or somebody who plays a reporter without knowing what the outcome is. there's probably some understanding that there will be some illusion of a difficult

question without there being a difficult question. i think it's always valuable for americans to hear putin speak and hear the lies that come out of his mouth, hear the justification for an invasion, the worst cross border invasion since world war ii of europe's largest country that caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. will he ask putin about the deaths of russian soldiers? i don't think that will happen. >> you're talking about a two-step. you're talking about the fact that the question itself matters, but the analysis of the answer matters, right, the fact check on the answer matters. when you talk about this through the lens of disinformation, people get nervous. if you don't have that second piece, if you don't have someone saying, that's not true, let me put that in context, then you have lies running rampant. >> yes. by the way, that reminds me, in

nina's piece, which you talked about, i agree with everything she said. she makes the point of why russian disinformation is effective. it's because you have one of two american political parties that are buying into it and echoing it as a matter of policy. that's just completely unimaginable. >> frank, you have nina saying the united states has been unable to rein in disinformation because it's become a politicized issue, which would make all the structural mechanisms in place to fight it that much more complicated. >> indeed. as richard alluded to, disinformation has become truth for a substantial part of our society. lies are now facts for some folks. when you're in that environment and you have a strong figure who has been president, is running for president again, it's incredibly hard in our society to actually mitigate the damage.

social media plays a huge role. so does the fact that an entire party seems not to be calling out lies. even today on this network we may have a new leader of the rnc that believes the big lie. we're looking at the most highly charged disinformation environment we've ever faced in this nation as we approach the next election. people like vladimir putin, state sponsors like russia, will use the position we're in to further spoon feed us lies and disinformation and it will ramp up as we get closer to november. >> nina also writes, lawmakers haven't been able to agree on common sense reforms. many people, particularly conservatives, have used false

information to raise the spector of a vast government censorship regime. i mean -- >> yeah. she mentions there's easy legislation that came close to being passed, the honest ads act. are republicans not passing that because they want their propaganda out there and don't want it to be legislated against? it's happening too at a time that social media companies are cutting back on their integrity units. elon musk basically fired the entire twitter integrity unit which did a fantastic job of policing hate speech, but also resisting government efforts to censor speech. it's kind of a perfect storm coming. >> franning puglisi, thank you. when we return, the verdict in michigan holding the mother of a school shooter accountable for her son's actions could give

prosecutors a new tool to prosecute mass shooting cases. frank gutenberg joins us after a short break. break. so i didn't think i needed swiffer, until, i saw how easily it picked up my hair every time i dried it! only takes a minute. look at that! the heavy duty cloths are extra thick, for amazing trap & lock. even for his hair. wow. and for dust, i love my heavy duty duster. the fluffy fibers trap dust on contact,

up high and all around without having to lift a thing. i'm so hooked. you'll love swiffer. or your money back! i brought in ensure max protein with 30 grams of protein! those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks. -ugh. -here, i'll take that. woo hoo! ensure max protein, 30 grams protein, 1 gram sugar, 25 vitamins and minerals. and a new fiber blend with a prebiotic. (♪♪) (vo) in the next 30 seconds, and a new fiber 250 couples will need to make room for a nursery. (man) ah ha! (vo) 26 people will go all-in. (woman) yes! (vo) this family will get two bathrooms. and finally, one vacationer will say... (man) yeah, woo, i'm going to live here... (vo) but as the euphoria subsides, the realization hits... (man) i've got to sell the house. (all) [screams] (vo) don't worry, just sell and buy in one move when you start with opendoor. (woman) oh wow. (vo) oh yes. start with an all-cash offer at opendoor.com (sigh) if you struggle with cpap... you should check out inspire.

no mask. no hose. just sleep. inspire. learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com if you're looking for a medicare supplement insurance plan that's smart now... i'm 65. and really smart later i'm 70-ish. consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan from unitedhealthcare. with this type of plan, you'll know upfront about how much your care costs. which makes planning your financial future easier. so call unitedhealthcare today to learn more about the only plans of their kind with the aarp name. and set yourself and your future self up with an aarp medicare supplement plan from unitedhealthcare.

you're probably not easily persuaded to switch with an aarp medicare supplement plan mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? did we peak your interest? you can get two unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. there are no term contracts or line activation fees. and you can bring your own device. oh, and all on the most reliable 5g mobile network nationwide. wireless that works for you. it's not just possible, it's happening. jury came through with the verdict they did. without accountability there's no change. it's not a matter of if this is

going to happen again. it's when it's going to happen. people need to wake up and take action, make change to prevent this. >> that was steve julianna, the father of hannah, reacting to the news that jennifer crumbley had been convicted of manslaughter. ethan crumbley was convicted of michigan's deadliest school shooting. jennifer crumbley is the first person to be charged in connection. "the new york times" said the successful prosecution of ms. crumbley provides a template for prosecutors around the country. in many ways, this case will

make prosecutors look at their work differently when it comes to parents who are neglectful in terms of how they handle weapons in their home. the trial for ethan crumbley's father james starts march 5. joining the conversation, fred gutenberg, his daughter was murdered at marjory stoneman douglas high school in parkland, florida. a lot of us watched this verdict come down with our hearts in our throat. your reaction? >> first, hello. second, listen, long overdue. we currently have over 400 million weapons in america, far too many are in homes where they're not locked up. shootings like this, they're inevitable because of that fact. if you look at school shootings, 76% of kids who use a gun in a

school shooting get it from an unlocked place in a home. last week president biden held a conference in the white house through the office of gun violence prevention hosting school principals and my friend kristen tsong and others talking about safe storage. doing something to stop the next one isn't complicated. we need to hold people accountable. the father you had on had it right. it's ability accountability and what we do next. i'm truly thankful to a jury of peers, gun owners and nongun owners on that jury, who went ahead and rendered this verdict. >> fred, the prosecutors laid out how many signs there were that the crumbleys missed. james crumbley bought him the

gun as a gift. his mother took him to a shooting range days before the attack. on the day of the shooting, after the crumbleys were summoned to the school because of a disturbing drawing made by their son, the parents didn't tell officials he had access to a weapon or take him home. ethan wrote about wanting mental health treatment. i want help, but my parents don't listen to me so i can't get help. i don't know how you legislate your way out of that piece of things. >> well, listen, you can't legislate good parenting versus bad parenting, but you can make it clear you will spend a significant part of your life in prison if you allow this to happen. you know, i think -- listen, it's all hands on deck, right? we need media. we need hollywood to step in and model safe storage in film and

television. we need legislation. i can't overstate it enough for me personally how important this next election is. we currently have president biden, a president committed to doing everything possible through legislation and executive action, to tackle issues like this. we don't have a congress that will support it. we need that. you know, it's all hands on deck. we've got to elect the right people. we have got to pass legislation. we've been having the wrong argument about legislation and gun safety. we've made it about gun owners versus nongun owners. while we've been having that argument, gun sales have sky rocketed. over 400 million in this country. it's time for us to agree as a country we must do more to reduce the instances of gun violence and the gun violence death rate. i believe yesterday's ruling sends a powerful message to

adults. you better lock up your weapons or you could end up in prison. >> if the answer isn't gun owners versus nongun owners, how do you talk to people on opposite sides of what should be a common sense issue? >> it's the reason i wrote my book because the past 20 to 30 years have focussed on this from the perspective of a lobby that lied and a lobby that used money to elect people who would make it easier to get guns and also saying we would be on a slippery slope if we did anything to protect us. it's time to stop listening to the liars. that's number one. it's time to elect those who understand doing something to reduce gun violence is not anti-gun. you can be against gun violence, but not against the second

amendment. it's time to stop having that false argument and that false choice. listen, america, this is our turn to solve this. we do so by voting in the 2024 election. we do so by demanding better of those we elect. we do so by making sure we push the judicial system to hold those accountable when gun violence happens. >> i think about the fact that you had senator graham and senator hawley at the social media hearings, talking about how social media companies had blood on their hands when they're not able to bring that same energy to this conversation. >> listening to them last week, i was so angry because every time they said the word social media, if you would have replaced it with gun, they would have been making the argument to do something to reduce gun violence. they know their behavior, their

actions, their lack of any effort to do something to reduce gun violence puts blood on their hands. they know -- they've been a part of a process that led to the murder of my daughter and 16 others. it will be six years next week, six years. in six years they have done nothing. while my friend senator chris murphy led a bipartisan effort to actually get some legislation passed and it was signed by president biden. they sat out and said, no. they have blood on their hands. i don't want to hear their fake anger, okay, talking about the safety of kids if they won't do something about gun violence. >> fred, i'm not sure if you saw this. on the stand jennifer crumbley said she wouldn't have done anything differently. she said she didn't think she was a failure as a parent. i wonder what you would say to her and those who might agree

with her. >> i'm going to treat her similarly to the way i treat the person who murdered my daughter. i actually have nothing to say to her now except -- in a place where you're now going to spend a good part of your adult life, you deserve it. if you think you did nothing wrong, i'm glad you're in prison. to every other adult who watches you be taken away in cuffs knowing you're going to prison, make a different choice. >> fred gutenberg, i'm grateful for you and your time and to see jamie soaring behind you. thank you. a stunning reminder of how donald trump abused the power of a pardon. brand new reporting about a convicted felon he pardoned and the legal trouble he's now facing. e legal trouble he's now facing

have you ever considered getting a walk-in tub? well, look no further. proudly made in tennessee, a safe step walk-in tub is the best in it's class. the ultra-low easy step helps keep you safe from having to climb over those high walled tubs, allowing you to age gracefully in the home you love. and now, back by popular demand, for a limited time, when you purchase your brand-new safe step walk-in tub, you'll receive a free shower package! yes! a free shower package, and if you call today, you'll also receive $1600 off. now you can enjoy the best of both worlds.

the therapeutic benefits of a warm, soothing bath, that can help increase mobility, relieve pain, boost energy, and even improve sleep. or, if you prefer, you can take a refreshing shower all in one product! call now! in the final hours of donald trump's presidency, the disgraced ex president pardoned a man named jonathan rahm. "the new york times" wrote it dealt a significant blow to another prosecution. he was in talks to cooperate, but the government lost leverage they had.

now he's been fined $20 million by a new york judge. as "the new york times" put it, quote, the apparent lack of vetting by mr. braun by the trump white house highlighted the manner in which mr. trump made decisions about using clemency powers. joining us now mike schmidt. rick is also back. mike, let me read some more from your reporting. mr. braun threatened to send the consumer to jail and said he would spit on the customer's face on visiting day. mr. braun told a consumer to drive his honda off a cliff. many hoped the consumer's wife would leave him. the judge said mr. braun called the consumer names including a loser and a number of obscenities. wild behavior. how does someone like that get a pardon from donald trump?

>> that was sort of what intrigued us about jonathan braun's case. how was it that someone who had such a background, who had so many legal problems, who used threats of violence against others, how did that person get to the front of the line? in our reporting we were able to learn about how the kushners helped open the door to the white house. jonathan brown went to the kushner high school in new jersey. the families knew each other. when they reached out to the kushners, they helped them get to the white house and before trump. what surprised us about braun's case is there was an ongoing civil litigation against him by the ftc, which was run by one of trump's appointees and the new york state attorney general's office. they had open cases against him while he was in prison, try to recoup money from him that he

had stolen from small businesses across the country. now one of the ramifications of that has come home to roost for jonathan braun. he's now -- has to pay -- >> oh, no. i'm losing mike schmidt. you and i were sitting here during the commercial break. i said it's a wild story, which is a very high bar, right? the fact that anything at this point would surprise us, that we would say that anything went beyond the pale. it tells you something. all the core issues within trump world and all of this additional stuff is at the margins. >> yeah, i mean, i'm not easily surprised. i found it surprising. i'll take this to the philosophical level. >> go for it, rick. >> what i found in my career in journalism and government is that leaders of good moral

character attract followers that are both good and bad. leaders of bad moral character attract other people of bad moral character. this is a group of people that are -- have no fidelity to the law. that are trying to trick other people out of their money. this is how they see the world. that's why they're collectiveness. that's why donald trump asked for a pardon of this guy on the basis of the recommendation from the kushner family. i can't think of a worse reason to give a pardon. >> i appreciate what you're pa that. >> i appreciate what you were saying is power magnetizes all sorts and specifically when you don't have that strong moral compass people can read that and there's clarity around it and there's this question of what pardon -- what a pardon process would look like if there would be a second trump term because this is slapped -- they didn't understand -- about all types of things. they didn't understand how

government worked. they didn't understand how to pull the levers of power and you can quibble over whether that was, in fact, true. there is question about how they had spent four years in power and four years and there is a better understanding of how this works and which one makes the ability to execute that much more dangerous and you can no longer hide behind how this all works. >> and that's what's dangerous about a possible second term and to connect this to where we started the immunity trial and the closest thing that a president has to unlimited power and that's reason that trump gravitated to it because i can be a king and pardon people just like that, and unfortunately that was a mistake that the framers gave to bring it to pardon people? and bringing it full circle as always, rick stengel, thank you

so much and thank you to mike schmitt who will get back on that story and we'll sneak in a quick break and we'll be right back. n a quick break and we'll be right back and i didn't live in that shoebox for years. not just— with empower, we get all of our financial questions answered. so you don't have to worry. i guess i'll get the caviar... just kidding. join 18 million americans and take control of your financial future with a real time dashboard and real live conversations. empower. what's next.

your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire a mystery that wrangled new hampshire's primary may be solved. after that state's attorney general traced fake robocalls and used president biden's voice to discourage voting to two companies in texas. life corporation and lingo telecom, that's according to a statement from the a.g.'s office and it promises to be the first

big scare in an election cycle vulnerable to deep fakes and disinformation and even included the phrase a bunch of malarkey, a favorite bidenism making it sound all the more real and they sent cease-and-desist letters to both companies while the sec warned the telecom company to immediately cease any unlawful call traffic. in addition, a coalition of state attorneys general also sent warning letters of potential civil litigation and we'll keep you updated on this story in this election cycle. we have another break. we'll be right back. we have another break. we'll be right back.

♪♪ we're building a better postal service. all parts working in sync to move your business forward. with a streamlined shipping network. and new, high-speed processing and delivery centers. for more value. more reliability. and more on-time deliveries. the united states postal service is built for how you business. and how you business is with simple, affordable and reliable shipping. usps ground advantage. las vegas grand prix choose t-mobile for business for 5g solutions. because t-mobile is helping power operations and experiences for hundreds of thousands of fans with reliable 5g connectivity. now's the time to accelerate your business.

thank you for spending part

of your wednesday with us. we are so grateful. "the beat with ari melber" starts right now. hi, ari. >> hi, alicia, thank you so much. i'll be reporting inside the supreme court as we hear this long-shot challenge to try to bar trump from the presidential ballot in certain states. that effort is a legal long shot because trump has not been charged or convicted of insurrection. while the court weighs that issue tomorrow it will soon decide whether to intervene in the related case about prosecutor jack smith putting trump on trial for trying to overthrow his own 2020 loss. now that case is where jack smith won big yesterday, a key court ruling that citizen trump is indeed subject to prosecution and is answerable in court for his conduct. now if this were a movie, these rulings and cases right now colliding might almost seem too coordinated like the second or third act