and it goes back to my comments at the beginning of the hearing that we need to be very direct to our local law enforcement counterparts. so they understand exactly what their expectations are. >> i yield back. thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator tillis, you're recognized for your questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. mr. roe, do you have a picture -- i think i was watching your testimony earlier -- do you have a photograph of the vantage point from the secret service snipers -- >> i do. >> and both -- there were two, is that correct? >> that's right, stage left and stage right. >> i don't know if you have a vantage point of both of them or not. i know you had one for the one who ultimately shot -- >> that's the vantage point of the sniper who neutralized the assailant. >> is it a similar vantage point for the other -- would they have also been impaired in terms of actually seeing him until he popped his head up? >> so the sniper on the stage

right side, senator, they had an obstructed view because of that tree. >> they had an obstructed view. >> so the one thing, and this discussion that i don't believe that a sniper saw someone on the roof 20 minutes before just doesn't make sense to me. it sounds like the one who took the shot probably saw him for the first time about a split second before he pulled the trigger. is that -- >> that's my assessment, senator. >> i'm more -- well, first off, i would like to clarify the requests that have been made of a lot of people so we get the information in a good form. i think it would be helpful, at least all the back to november 25th of 2022, when president trump announced that he was running for re-election, i think it would be helpful if we could get a matrix of any request for additional security, the resolution of that request, was it honored, denied, downsized? if you could give us that, i think that's going to be the

best way, versus giving us mounds and mounds of papers. i know you're looking at the same thing. i've heard from you that any subsequent request -- field requests are being honored. i believe that that's true. is that your testimony? >> yes, sir. >> okay, thank you. i'm more worried about the 24 to 30 seconds between the time, i believe, local law enforcement officer was hoisted on the shoulders of another police officer, saw a person armed, less than 200 yards away from the president, who i believe jumped down. what happened in those 24, 30 seconds? i mean, obviously, there's no such thing as a panic button. you know, the first thing you'd think is you hit panic, you cover the president, get him off stage. none of that happened. what happened? is it just that i hear a text message -- what actually happened in the 30 seconds where a law enforcement officer knew that a gun was pointed in the direction of the president from a fairly short range.

what actually did those folks who did have knowledge of exactly what was happening and could probably infer what was about to happen, what did they do? and mr. abade or mr. roe, either one based on your interviews. >> thank you, senator. from the interviews, the officers in the immediate vicinity were operating with urgency at that point to get to this person, but he was on the roof. the officer who had looked over the edge-based on what i've been told, the shooter turned toward him with the rifle. that's what the officer observed. so he was under threat himself in that second. so he had to rereet and step down to get back to the ground in order to protect himself and keep himself safe from potential rifle fire. but once he got to the ground with other officers, there were butler county, other officers, pennsylvania state police. they were moving around, trying to find -- >> i think clearly, we've got an operational problem here. because we had more than 20

seconds to have somehow cut through all the crap and communications, whatever impediments were have to be removed. i mean, it's pretty clear to me -- first off, that law enforcement officer -- i love law enforcement, i wear the black and blue pin every day. they do great work. secret service did phenomenal work on the stage. but they failed, because their job is to protect the public. and they needed to put themselves in harm's way to stop him. now, i'll let the interviews go through, but that was a massive failure -- there were at least two law enforcement officers that knew a guy was about to pull the trigger at the president and you know, i'm just not really happy with the fact that we couldn't have communicated, covered president trump, and tried to secure the situation. i'm going to let the investigation go through. but i think it's very -- or go forward. but i think it's very important to point out that we can't let a scenario go in the future where

20 seconds can lapse, when a law enforcement officer within two football fields of a former president of the united states has material knowledge that somebody is about to get shot at on stage and we don't have instantaneous response. in the old days, maybe you would just shoot a gun in the air, i know for a lot of reasons why they do that, but there had to be something they could have done. mr. roe, i think you've been forthcoming in your answers. i know you're frustrated. i've seen you twice now. you're clearly embarrassed by what happened. you don't think there's any reasonable explanation. and to my colleagues who are worried about communication, they should spend time in their local governments and state legislatures to understand just how bad communication is between law enforcement and first responders. we need to invest in this infrastructure. that was also a part of the failure. but if you can please get to me and get to this committee a chronology of requests, accepted, denied, and the reasons for it, i think that's

going to be very helpful. >> i will, senator. thank you. >> thank you. >> senator blackburn, you're recognized for your questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to each of you for your patience and for being here today. director rowe, i want to come to you first. because a countersniper has decided to speak out about the culture at your agency and i think it is very telling. and he sent an email, and i'm going to quote from that, if this agency needs to change, and if not now, when. the next assassination in 30 days? but here's what i want to talk with you about. because in this email, he says and i'm quoting again, the motto of the usss is cya. and every supervisor is doing it now. that's the end of his quote. so you're the guy in charge.

and you're one of those supervisors. you've been a career guy there at the secret service. the public has lost trust in the ability to execute the mission, to protect, and i want to know how you feel about the fact that employees in your agency are worried about covering their behind and not worried about protecting a former president. >> thank you, senator. so i am hurt by that email, but not in the way you think i'm saying it. i'm hurt because my people are hurting right now. we need them -- >> so why did somebody delete email. >> i'll get back to you on that. >> the agency deleted the email. >> may i address your question? >> please. >> i'll get back to you as to

whether the email was deleted or not. my agency is hurting. emotions are raw. i actually want to hear more from that duty officer, that technician. in his email, he referenced that he had spent time serving our nation as a united states marine, that he is a 20-year professional of the secret service. i am committed to being a change agent. meaning, i am committed to reeve reviewing some of these things. i looked at the points in his email very quickly as i was on my way over here this morning. i want to have further conversations, not only with him, but also the countersniper supervisors. >> if i may step back in, sir. >> yes, ma'am. >> so you want to talk with him, what about other whistleblowers. what about this culture? are you going to allow these whistleblowers to speak out? because it is troublesome if somebody went into the server and deleted that email.

and i would hope you will get to the bottom of that. >> i will. >> be able to provide some answers. because this is, as you have heard from both sides, this is a situation that cannot be allowed to happen again. >> yes, ma'am. >> ever. >> mr. abbate. am i saying your name properly? we've heard it pronounced three different ways. >> abbate, senator. >> okay. you had mentioned a social media account that espoused anti-semitic views, but you did not say what platform that was on and what the user name was. and this is crooks that we're discussing. >> yes, senator, that's crooks. i didn't want to comment on it, because we haven't fully confirmed yet, and i thought as soon as we confirm and certify -- >> would you supply that? >> yes.

>> and also the age at which he had those feelings. and then we understand that the gab account is pro-immigration, pro-lockdown leftist views, is that accurate? >> i haven't seen it directly, but i believe, from what i've been told, that is accurate. with the gab account -- though that's been publicly revealed through the cio and other things, we're still working to certify and verify that that's his account, also. but it does have differing points of view, it would appear. >> okay. and what age? and how fresh is that gab account? >> the gab account, based on my recollection, the comments in there or the messaging is from about 2021, i believe. >> okay. and the other preceded that, maybe he was age 14? >> yes, senator, the other account we talked about was in the 2019/2020 time frame.

it would have been in a couple of years right before the gab -- >> right before that. are there other accounts that you all are currently verifying and receiving information from? >> we are. as i mentioned, we've issued a bunch of legal process and we're still awaiting returns from a number of the companies to include other social media companies as well. >> okay. well, my time has expired. thank you for your patience today. thank you for the information. we look forward to getting more information and director rowe, we are going to hold you to being a change agent, because things at the secret service absolutely have to change. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. and i want to thank our witnesses for your testimony here today. certainly, what happened on january -- or excuse me, july, july 13th, could and should have been prevented from what i have

heard today. i'm certainly grateful to our witnesses for their candid answers and for helping to provide additional clarity and new information about the circumstances surrounding this attack. acting director rowe, some of what you have said today conflicts with the information and accounts that we have received from local law enforcement, that we have had the opportunity to talk with. they have been voluntarily, and i would say, expeditiously cooperating with our bipartisan investigation, which we certainly appreciate. but we now need to speak with secret service agents directly, who are directly involved, and i would say that you need to make them available, as soon as possible. those interviews can't start weeks from now or months from now. time is of the essence when memories are fresh and you can get the information that is most important to us. so my question for you, as we

wrap up this hearing, acting director rowe, will you commit to having those agency agts available for this committee, to improve as soon as possible, in a matter of days, not weeks, matter of days -- >> hello, i'm chris jansing. for more than three hours, a fiery hearing on capitol hill that went on and on, asking so many questions, senators lashing out at law enforcement officials, for what they described as inexcusable and indefensible gaps in security that led to the assassination attempt on former president donald trump. the acting head of the secret service, ronald rowe, admitting that the incident was a failure on multiple levels. but rowe, along with fbi director paul abbate also admitted that 17 days after the incident, they're still working to fill in the gaps surrounding critical questions. those include the gunman's motive and why more than an hour was allowed to pass between when 20-year-old thomas crooks was identified as a suspicious

person, and he opened fire on the former president. republican senator mike lee asking about what happened right before the shots rang out. >> i want to know what you can tell me about what happened during that final two-minute period, where a whole bunch of people in the crowd saw and were shouting, "he's got a gun." >> no information regarding a weapon on the roof was ever passed to our personnel. >> how is that even possible? >> i want to bring in nbc's julie tsirkin, who's covering the hearing on capitol hill. bobby mcdonald is retired supervisory special agent with the secret service and a lecturer on criminal justice at the university of new haven. with me here in studio, national law enforcement correspondent tom winter. tom, how is that even possible seemed to be the question of the day. if i had a word to describe what i heard, it was incredulous, but what did we actually learn? >> if you were watching msnbc at

10:00 a.m. eastern time, the exact questions that we were hoping that senators would get to, the exact questions that were asked, and i think it's now provided yet more questions about this incident, specific to that gap of time. we now know, based on the testimony provided here today, that there's a critical 30-second period where local law enforcement hears from their own people, because they saw him with their own eyes, this guy has got a gun. and from that moment until the moment shot ring out, there's approximately a 30-second gap. and the ultimate question here, that is apparently according to the testimony today, radioed out. so at some point, it is actually communicated, not just that they saw them, but it was radioed out on their radio frequences, local law enforcement, that this person sonnet roof with a gun. what happens from there is the critical question. and i don't think we got the answer today, because we know that there's a command post. there's an area where you have local law enforcement and the secret service sitting together. those radios don't talk to each other. the secret service, not getting into a ton of detail that could

compromise their ability to protect the people that are currently running for office. they run on an encrypted frequency. that's their own radio network. but the whole point of having a command post is so that you have the ability, local law enforcement to turn to you, if i'm working for the pennsylvania state police and you're secret service, chris, to turn to you and say, hey, my guys are talking about the fact that we've got somebody on the roof with a gun. for you then to relay that to the secret service so action can be taken. i think the question here today remains, why wasn't action taken. why wasn't trump taken off the stage. why didn't the secret service join him on the stage? obviously, incredible bravery that the secret service is required to undertake in that situation, to put them between a bullet and the former president. but that is what is required. and i think that's something that they say they're still trying to find out. so that's something that jumped out at me today, as far as the fact that we know that there was a gap and that there was a radio communication that was made. >> let me stop you there, because i want to go to bobby on that question. if i can, bobby, so, if you

know, if you know that there is a man with a gun, who makes the decision to take the shot? if a sniper sees him, does he take the shot? does he have to go through the command center? what happens, even if it's 30 seconds, what should is their s.o.p., without revealing any operational that could, as tom rightly points out, endanger anybody in the future, what should happen here? >> good afternoon, chris. tom is exactly right. i couldn't have explained the command post situation any better than he just did. this is exactly the issue that will have to be cleaned up at the secret service. that information, especially with regard to a shooter within a situation that's only 150 yards away from the former president, with a high-powered rifle, that was seen by multiple people, multiple witnesses, multiple cell phone videos, was able to get there and pull that shot off.

that information through our command post mechanism should have been passed within seconds, within that mechanism, to various people who needed to know, and that information passed on to the customer. the customer in this case, is the former president's detail that would have hopefully helped him that stage and not put him out there in that line of fire. the fact that it appears that they did not get that information is one of the key elements here, thankfully, after one shot and unfortunately after killing of a patron and injuring two others, we were able to neutralize the shooter. we got far too long in this process before that information got to where it needed to get to. that is a very troubling issue >> julie, you watched this entire hearing. talk to us about the tone of it. and it also seemed to me there are a lot of marching orders, a lot of questions that both of the men said they would get back to the senators with answers about. >> yeah, exactly, chris. and i also was able to talk to a lot of senators, as they went in

and out of this hearing here, notably, as you heard gary peters allude to at the end there, he told me that this is just the beginning. they are going to hold many transcribed interviews, including with kim cheatel, the outgoing secret service director who's responsible for what happened on that day, they want to talk to her, too, even though she's not in this position anymore. another thing that was very clear to me, there is not a lot of daylight, this is rare, between democrats and republicans, when it comes to this issue. this was something that was echoed by many republicans, many democrats. they are really on the same page here, in fact, already building out their next step here, in letters that they going to send, in concrete questions that they have still for ronald rowe who is the acting director here of the secret service and they are going to get to the bottom of this. and of course, third here is that you have a couple of senators, some senate republicans, up for re-election, who, of course, are not satisfied with rowe in that room. one of those was senator josh

hawley, who had a very testy exchange, frankly, with rowe. take a listen to this. >> you're asking me, senator, to completely make a rush-to-judgment about somebody failing. i acknowledge, this was a failure -- >> is it not prima facie that somebody has failed! a former president was shot! >> this could have been our texas schoolback depository. i have lost sleep over this for the last 17 days -- >> then fire somebody to hold them accountable! >> i will tell you, senator, i will not rush to judgment, people will be held accountable, and i will do so with integrity and not rush to judgment and put people -- >> unfairly persecute sclmd. >> we have people who are dead! >> we have to be able to have a proper investigation into this, senator. >> what we heard from hawley there seemed to me like an outlier, from even the other republicans on the committee. a lot of them have said that at this point, rowe has taken over, they want him to continue and

finish the job. he did come into this hearing with many more details, with many more answers. of course, more time has passed as well with pictures, with photo evidence, really trying to show the senators and lawmakers on this panel that they are taking this serious. he even said in his opening statements, chris, that he will do a full accounting, he takes full accountability. he is embarrassed for what happened on that day. but when it comes to a rush to have the judgment here, it is clear, even as senator blumenthal had told me, a democrat, that there needs to be a systemic reform of this agency, top-to-bottom, he told me that this isn't just a one and done situation. and you see that not only in this situation, but also with the task force that has been formed in the house, by partisan members on both sides of the aisle, trying to get to the bottom of this, trying to also see whether the secret service needs more resources. there was one instance where they talked about the agency having double the number of resources they have had in

recent years. >> julie tsirkin, robert mcdonald, tom winter, thank you. we would love to talk more about this, but we have breaking news from overseas. the idf has carried out a strike targeting a hezbollah commander in beirut. it follows that rocket attack from lebanon that killed at least 12 people, mostly children. nbc's matt bradley is on the ground for us in beirut. what more do we know? >> reporter: yeah, we don't know a whole lot, chris. but news is coming in fast. you're seeing, i think, some of these images that we're seeing from that neighborhood in southern beirut. this has long been a stronghold for hezbollah. and now, if you recall, this was the reprisal attack by the israelis that happened three days ago, that the israelis say that was launched by hezbollah, which is based here in lebanon, mostly in southern lebanon and in that neighborhood right off my right shoulder in the southern part of beirut. according to some reports, this was an israeli strike that

targeted a senior sort of gathering place, with kind of a governing body for hezbollah. we haven't got that confirmed, but what we do know from the israelis is that they did have a specific target in mind. they said that they were targeting the head of the operations for the sheba area, which is another part of essentially syria or lebanon or israel, depending on who you believe, that is now occupied by the israelis, and they say this man, that he was in charge of targeting from this area. and that this was -- he was there for the target of this israeli reprisal attack. so ali mohammad aheha. we don't know if he was killed, or how many casualties there were. this happened really in just the past hour. there are a lot of other questions here, whether or not this is going to satisfy the israelis that they have exacted retribution against hezbollah. this has been a question that

has been bouncing around since that deadly attack on the soccer pitch that killed a dozen people, now 13, all of them children and teenagers, whether or not israel is going to be satisfied or whether this is the beginning of a barrage of counterattacks against hezbollah. that's a question that only the israelis will be able to answer in the coming days. chris? >> given all the conversations about threat of a wider war, what has been the mood on the ground? >> reporter: well, what we're hearing here, among the lebanese, the mood is normal. everyone is unworried that anything is going to happen very seriously. we haven't been down south yet, the hezbollah stronghold. those are the places in the south of this country that seem to be badly damaged, really devastated by the conflict between hezbollah and the israelis. and already, there's been hundreds of thousands of people who have been displaced from their homes in southern lebanon. for them, this risk is very, very real. and very pressing. but here on the streets of central beirut, you wouldn't know that there was anything

going on. this is really a risk for the wider middle east as well. if there is a wider war here that involves hezbollah and the israelis, that could drag in iran and the united states, which is already for several months been parking naval assets off the coast for just such an event as this. this is why this is so threatening if there were to be such a war, it would be like the war between israel and hamas and the gaza strip, it would be one that the burden would be carried mostly by civilians in the region. chris? >> as it often is. i want to bring in general barry mccaffrey. look, i suppose hezbollah and iran may see the threat of a wider war as a deterrent to israel, but how real do you see threat? >> tlaefls excellent reporting on the emergent situation from matt. if they did strike a shoreup, there's been a massive loss of lives of leadership in

hezbollah, it could be the spark that sets off what could be the wider war. the wider war could be cataclysmic. there are 100,000 or more hezbollah fighters. they may have as many 170 rockets and missiles. it's the biggest non-state army in the world. it's organized in combat experience from fighting in syria. so it would be clearly a massive war that would go on for a year. the israelis would be forced to go in on the ground in lebanon and rye to take out hezbollah. as matt says, it may well bring in other combatants to particularly the iranians. so it's a huge threat. i'm sure right now, we have secretary blinken and secretary austin trying to cool us. i might remind our viewers,

though, that those 12 children that were killed, that was unlikely to have been a targeted strike. it was more likely going after israeli defense force monitoring sites on mt. herman. so i don't think it was a deliberate provocation by hezbollah, just an errant missile, undoubtedly. in addition, we've got to remind ourselves, this was the golan heights. these are really syrian drews people. they weren't israeli civilians. it's a complicated mess. i hope the israelis are careful in what they do. >> so if i can, there's also simultaneously, general, a state department briefing going on. and of course, they're discussing this and they dodged on whether or not there would be any u.s. support for israel, an all-out war. let me read exactly what was said. i'm just not going to get into hypotheticals beyond saying that our commitment to israel's security is ironclad and unwavering and the threat that

israel faces from hezbollah is very real, as real as the events that we saw unfold this weekend. but our focus continues to be on diplomacy, but i wonder whether you think diplomacy can work in this situation, how influential the u.s. might be in this situation. >> i think it would be pretty influential. secretary blinken's got great contracts throughout this region, a war against hezbollah would be devastating to the israelis and to lebanon. i don't think the iranians want to come in on a conflict like this. if they did, and they closed off the persian gulf, we should have no doubt about it that the u.s. would be involved in this conflict. but i think everyone's going to shrink back, hopefully it would be an incentive in the coming weeks, sealing a deal on the war in gaza. that's really the spark that's

continuing to disturb the situation. so -- but, chris, no question about it, we're on the edge of a precipice. that is a very dangerous situation. >> the deputy spokesperson for the state department also said that we do not believe that all-out war is inevitable. but was asked if israel gave advanced notice to the u.s. would not answer that. just saying that they've been if continuous discussions with both israeli and lebanese counterparts since that incident over the weekend. would it have been usual for israel to give advanced notice? >> yeah, i think it would have been. and in this case, they may have elected to not do it, striking at downtown beirut, and striking at potentially, as matt reported, a meeting of the center hezbollah leadership is an extremely exotic event. it's out of the ordinary. it's been a red line that the israelis have not crossed and to

go after the name of the person who allegedly planned this strike on the children, okay, that might be explainable. but if they snuffed out a bunch of the senior hezbollah leaders, this is an unnecessary provocation, in my mind, by the idf. >> how long will it take us to find that out? more definitively? and what are you going to be looking for in the coming hours or at least the coming day or so to tell us where this might be headed, general. >> well, again, i think all of the diplomatic forces at work are to bring us back from the edge of a war. there can't be any good argument on the idf side for prosecuting a wider conflict in lebanon. they've been involved for nine months now, fighting in gaza. they're tired, their stock of munitions are running out.

the u.s., they've lost the international war with, you know information war. so the israelis should not want a wider war. and particularly over a provocation of this nature, where it seems apparent to me that it was an accidental missile launch. and it wasn't israeli civilians that were killed. they were syrian drews. so the israelis should really pause and think through this one carefully. that will be the push by the united states to get them to back off of this. >> i want to play, general, what defense secretary lloyd austin said about this conflict when he was asked about it earlier today. >> i don't believe that a fight is inevitable. israel will do what it needs to defend itself. and it's demonstrated that time and again. we've committed to helping israel defend itself, do whatever it takes. and certainly, that's not a scenario that we would like to see occur. we would like to see things

resolved in a diplomatic fashion going forward. >> we know diplomacy is what they want to see, what they hope to see, but what is happening behind the scenes to prepare if diplomacy doesn't work? >> well, at one point, the israelis had called up 500,000 reservists. most of them have now been returned to their civilian occupations. but if this thing starts to get out of control, the israelis will have to go to an entire mass mobilization. the last time they fought hezbollah in 2006, the israelis did not do well. their ground combat forces fought to a standstill, and in that era, hezbollah had around 15,000 fighters. it's now it's alleged they have more than 1,000. and even more importantly, hezbollah can put at risk all israeli cities. and it wouldn't be a short one-week bombardment. this might go on for months or a year. so the idf should be pretty

darned careful about what they do, because if it goes critical on them, they'll have to fight a war for their existence. >> i also want to bring in hajar kmally. she served for the first two years of the syria crisis. it's always good to see you, and i wonder what your take is on what we're seeing unfold right now. >> thanks so much, chris, i worked on counterterrorism financing, where hezbollah was in any portfolio. this was a message from israel. you kill these kids on a soccer field, we know exactly where you are and we're not afraid to go after you and we'll kill you. and so the message is there. they killed somebody -- i'm not trying report this as fact. i cannot verify it, but the reports i've seen from israel is that this is happening. the number two or three hezbollah commander. and the message is, we're not afraid to go after you. we know exactly where you are,

and all of uh have to watch your back. and the reason they're going after somebody like him and not, for example, the leader of hezbollah, is because that would automatically launch, probably, a very wide full-scale war and rope in iran. so we're trying get you back in response for the soccer field attack, and hopefully it won't launch into something greater. but the fact is, they targeted this in a suburb of beirut. it's 10 to 15 minutes out from the center of beirut. it is 10 to 15-minutes drive from the airport. it's sandwiched in between. i offer that because i think it will end up affecting flights, obviously. and that said, it's a very dense area. and so the building that collapsed because of this or the part of it that struck again, i don't want to speculate here. i would imagine that between the hezbollah leaders or leader who was killed and any civilians that may have been caught up in this as well, would likely prompt hezbollah to respond.

i think they feel very compelled to respond and be hard not with an attack like this. >> general mccaffrey, we were just talking about 2008. in 2012, you can correct me if i'm wrong, you know better than i do, hezbollah went to war to stop rebels from president baa assad and the islamic state, they didn't want them spilling over into lebanon. but does this seem more precarious, more dangerous, potentially than that was? >> yeah, i would think so. and by the way, all of these tribes, when you go after the leadership people only, it doesn't change capabilities of the enemy force. leaders can be replaced frequently in about an hour. that includes anybody's military, never mind a deeply engrained compartmentalized terrorist organization. so you get a lot of provocation, but you don't change the basic nature of the conflict. so whatever the israelis accomplished, and if they struck

the name of the person who planned the operation, okay, that's probably an appropriate political signal, but what we're on the edge of is seeing a war in which all of israel will be at risk. and to start this kind of a war, when it was over what seems to me, obviously, an errant missile strike is taking a huge risk for a small gain. and by the way, the syrians, as you mentioned, are also a potential combatant in this war. >> yeah, let me ask you the question, then, hagar that i asked the general before you joined us, which is this. simply, what are you watching for in the coming hours, coming day or two that will give us an indication of where this might be going? >> sure. it depend on how hezbollah responds. like i said, i don't think that they will not respond. that's very unlike their character. the question is, are they going to lob some missiles at some

empty land in israel in the north or are they going to target something that's more dense, populate something that's more of a sensitive military infrastructure or troops and soldiers, israeli troops and soldiers. depending on that response, it will indicate how -- the extent to which this war will expand. and whether we're going to see another 2006-style war, where you had a lot of fighting, for about six weeks, between israel and hezbollah. it encompassed not just the south of lebanon, but beirut very heavily, and key infrastructure in lebanon, bridges, roads, the airport runway, of course. to see that level and escalate it there depends on how hezbollah chooses to respond. and we know from other past attacks, where israel has targeted hezbollah leaders, and also the iranian leader that it has targeted in damascus just a

couple of months ago now, that these attacks elicit a response. they don't do them in a vacuum. israel knows that. israeli friends of mine right now tell me that they've been told to go home. and that the country is put on high alert. again, that's coming from friends and we're being told on the street to go home. that's what i've heard. they do clearly expect some kind of a response. it just depends how they respond and how much damage is caused by that response to know if this escalates further or if intentions are reduced by other leaders and partners who are trying to make sure that they urge it. >> let me go back to matt bradley. maybe you can give us a little further historical context, but tell me if i'm right, compared to this lathe violence, it's been fairly contained to along the blue line, the u.s. designated blue line between israel and lebanon, that is what, three or four miles.

>> reporter: the u.n. blue line, is simply as we know it, would be the border between israel and lebanon. it is one that is quite heavily armed. of course, we're seeing a state of war. one that if it wasn't for what was going on in the gaza strip, would be the headlines. there have been hundreds of people killed and many of civilians and this is what we're seeing again three days ago, what started all of this. hezbollah was behind the attack on that soccer pitch that killed now 12, i believe, 13, now, people, all of them children. the question is going to be, as we just heard, whether or not there's going to be a inflation hezbollah, or whether or not israel is even done with their retribution against this attack that killed all of these young people. that is the question that is going to continue bouncing around for days. the thing is, there's been, as you know, chris, a huge amount of diplomacy going on in the region, trying to get the israelis to contain their

response to hezbollah. to react, the united states has said time and time again, including today, we heard from the secretary of defense saying they stand behind israel, but they want israel to give the kind of retaliatory strike or attack that won't necessarily set off a wider war. this could have been it. we've seen this in the past. back in january, the israelis targeted a hamas leader, and with a similar type of strike. one that was a drone attack, it was very precision-based, and that killed this major leader in hamas, who was also in charge of liaising with hezbollah. both of these groups, hezbollah and hamas, they are both backed by iran. so whether or not israel is done, whether or not israel is satisfied, that's a question for the politicians there, because they are under substantial pressure from the israeli public, and especially those families who live in the northern part of israel, who want to go back to their homes. and they've been heaping on pressure on to benjamin netanyahu's government to try to get him to push back hezbollah, from, as you mentioned, the blue

line, to try to create a clearing area with they won't constantly be attacked by hezbollah weapons. but at the same time, hezbollah is in a position where they are going to need to show some sort of mettle, some sort of backbone here. and this has been a constant issue for hezbollah, which considers itself, and is widely considered throughout the region to be the leader of the resistance against the israelis. they are by far the most powerful non-national military in the world. they function like a military or a state within a state here in lebanon. they are going to have to respond to this on some level. the question is whether or not that response is going to invite yet another retaliation and whether or not that could spiral into a region-wide war. as i said, both hamas and hezbollah are both backed by iran. iran has a lot of skin in the game. and iran has already been exchanging in an unprecedented way over just the past several months, fire with the israelis. if the iranians are dragged in, if the war with hezbollah

amplifies, that could also drag in the united states, which now has sparked just off the coast of israel and lebanon and has for the last several months. this is a very, very dangerous and volatile situation. the reason why this hasn't been making headlines up until now is because of the violence, appalling fighting that's been going on in the gaza strip. but if this breaks off in a real way and becomes unhinged from a lot of the rules have that be governing the exchange of fire between hezbollah and israel for the past several decades, this could be a war that could dwarf the one we're seeing in the gaza strip and one that could go out of bounds between israel and lebanon and envelope the entire region. >> thank you all so much. we'll be right back. >> thank y aoull so much we'll be right back. you're faced with a choice. ride it out with the tradeoffs of treating? or push through the pain and symptoms? with ubrelvy, there's another option. one dose works fast to eliminate migraine pain. treat it anytime, anywhere without worrying where you are or if it's too late. do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors.

allergic reactions to ubrelvy can happen. most common side effects were nausea and sleepiness. migraine pain relief starts with u. ask about ubrelvy. learn how abbvie could help you save. i'm andrea, and this is why i switched to shopify. it gave me so much peace of mind. if we make a change, my site's not going to go down. and just knowing that i have a platform that we can rely on, that is gold to us. start your free trial today.

with bugs, the struggle-is-real. that's why you need zevo traps. zevo works 24/7 to attract and trap flying insects. for effortless protection. zevo. people-friendly. bug-deadly. dave's company just scored the comcast business 5-year price lock guarantee. high five! high five! -i'm in a call... it's 5 years of reliable, gig speed internet... five years of advanced security... five years of a great rate that won't change. yep, dave's feeling it.

but it's only for a limited time. five years? -five years? introducing the comcast business 5-year price lock guarantee. powering 5 years of savings. powering possibilities.

we have breaking news. we are going to wait for the white house to see if they have any comment on the fact that israel carried out a strike in beirut, saying it had targeted a hezbollah commander, blaming that commander for a strike that killed 12 children and teenagers in the israeli-controlled golan heights this weekend. let me bring in colonel jack jacobs. colonel, israel has successfully targeted not just, in this case, but before, hezbollah leadership meetings and movements, obviously, it says something about the robustness of their intelligence operation. does that fact, does -- do those

capabilities give hezbollah pause as it considers what it does in response? >> it will give them pause, but they are still going to have respond in some way to keep faith with the faithful and to satisfy iran, who doesn't want them to stop doing what they're doing. israel's got a problem in that it's in the process of a fighting a two-front war. netanyahu, in particular, and the idf, have difficulty, because they've committed themselves to destroying hamas, and they're actively fighting down there, but if they've got the fight also hezbollah and protect that border, it's going to be extremely difficult. they're going to have to call up more reserves. they have 350,000 reserves that they had stand down because it was deleterious to have all of those people in uniform. they'll have to call a bunch of them back. trying to strategize holding hezbollah at bay on the one hand and also getting rid of hamas

and getting hostages back on the other. this is extremely difficult for the idf and for netanyahu to do, chris. >> well, with let's talk about the idea the that we've heard. we heard it earlier from the defense secretary, we heard it at the state department briefing. obviously, the united states wants to do everything it can possibly do to de-escalate this situation, to work on this diplomatic, but galant, israel's defense minister, said hezbollah had crossed a red line. how much will words be able to answer what happens and how much of it will have to be action? >> well, there are always going to be responses, so hezbollah will respond in some fashion. it's perceived by the idf to be proportional, there won't be anymore. or there won't be an escalation of the attack that we fear. but invariably, there'll be an

escalation by one side or the other. the use of the diplomatic instrument, by which the united states have been working and its allies have been working very, very hard to deploy gets strained by the exchange of fire like this and it makes it much more difficult to get people to sit down and agree to any kind of reduction in hostilities. nevertheless, the fear that there might be a much wider war, and here we're talking about attacks on iran, for example, or incursions on the ground by the idf into lebanon, which they've done before. the diplomatic discussions have been and will go a long way to alleviating the possibility that they will happen. even so, just one wrong move by one side will escalate this very much out of control, chris. >> jack, stay with us. i want to bring in nbc chief foreign affairs correspondent, andrea mitchell. i know that you have been

working the phones, andrea. what have been you been hearing about the significance of this and do we know the status of the hezbollah commander who was targeted? >> we're not sure of the status. and i think it will take a while, and just to point out that these things do take time. we talked to a senior israeli official on saturday, for instance, about a previous hit involving a hamas leader, which was a week hold. and they were checking dna. they still did not know for sure. they thought that they had him. that said, that's mohammad -- sorry, dief. but what we don't snow whether they actually got this commander, the hezbollah commander. but they were hitting in the beirut suburbs. this is very they were hitting clearly not just a military target. so this is an escalation, but it's in retaliation of course against this hideous alleged hezbollah strike according to the u.s. and the israelis that

only hezbollah could have done this attack that killed 12 children on a soccer field on saturday afternoon. and they said they were going to retaliate. they had a national security meeting with the prime minister after he got back from washington on sunday. and they said they were going to hit hard. clearly what they did preliminary, chris, was not what we considered the robust response. so they were working on this. they had intelligence and may or may not have gotten this guy. he was the number two commander in hezbollah who was supposedly in charge of this attack on saturday. now, we should point out that hezbollah denied it but nobody believed that denial. the u.s., they had clear mind that the rockets used for hezbollah rockets. the iranian produced rockets. in terms of what jack, who knows this area so well, the

escalation that lloyd austin, secretary of defense in the philippines, secretary blinken on his asian trip, talked to the egyptian leader today, everyone is trying to dial this down so it doesn't become a second front. a second front is something that both netanyahu and the defense minister gallant have been talking about. they've been under a lot of pressure to go after hezbollah. 60,000 israelis, chris, have been evacuated from their homes since october 8th. they want to get back. there's a lot of pressure. hard right pressure as well as pressure throughout the population to go after hezbollah. do something about this northern front. and the constant rocket attacks. not all out war, but rocket attacks, coming and ordered from iran, hezbollah's sponsor. hezbollah is not just a terror group. it's part of the lebanese government. they're in the parliament. part of the political process. they have territorial control

over a good deal of lebanon. the last time israel and lebanon were at war, lebanon was almost totally destroyed and it was a tremendous cost. but israel at the time was not a second front also with gaza, in gaza. and that is what has been so troubling to the u.s. that if this thing does become a direct, all out war between israel and hezbollah, iran may not be able to come back. reported to be 150,000 rockets in the, you know, ammunitions that hezbollah has. this is not gaza. this is not, you know, leaders under ground in tunnels. this is an armed military force that could go into combat against israel and the, everyone in northern israel and beyond are completely vulnerable. that's what american officials and others around the world have been trying overtime since saturday to try to deescalate.

in fact, since october 7th, to stop this from becoming a second front. >> yeah, let me pick up where andrea left off if i can, colonel. because as "the new york times" has reported, members of the israeli security establishment told the cabinet this week it was not a good time to think about engaging in a war with hezbollah. we heard from general mccaffrey reminding us they had called up about 500,000 reservists but then sent them back. i mean, being where israel is now in this ongoing war with gaza, talk a little bit about how that informs where this goes next and also, i just want to go back if i can from the control room to what we were seeing. this is the latest video that we've gotten from hezbollah's almanar tv. this was a statement that was translated. again, this is by hezbollah television. saying the building targeted by the israeli enemy in the

southern suburb has collapsed. the building was adjacent to the bomb on hospital which was damaged by the strike. ambulances have transported a number of casualties to the hospital. the reason i bring that up, whether you're in israel or you're in lebanon, there's also the pressure that comes from the people who live there. so put that all in context for us if you can, jack. >> well, it makes it extremely complicated and difficult for israel to respond. makes it quite easy for hezbollah and iran on the one hand, but difficult for israel. israel has pushed the envelope risking a program of the international community with the way in which it is assaulted hamas. and of course, this is not to say that that's not the, it wasn't the way to go about it, but they committed themselves to

destroying hamas. no other way to do it than the way they had done it given their intelligence capability. but it does make it more difficult for israel engender the kind of international supports it require to carry on which it may need if it gets engaged in a wider war with hezbollah. still, israel will persevere in that regard. what general mccaffrey said is really important to remember. israel has relatively small population. it lives in a very, very difficult and dangerous neighborhood. has a lot of enemies on all sides and needs to keep a fairly substantial military establishment not only on the ready, but actually on the front lines. putting a lot of people down to fight hamas down in gaza pulled

requirement, real genuine requirements up from the border from hezbollah. hezbollah and iran took advantage of that and the result is what we see now. to the extent israel can demonstrate it is willing to put people back in uniform, take them out of economic productivity inside israel and put them in a position where they can defend the border with hamas and if necessary, with hezbollah. and if necessary, to threaten hezbollah over the possibility of entering lebanon against them. to the extent that they can do that, they probably will do that. then it remains to be seen what response with these visual threats, what kind of response they'll get from hezbollah on the one hand and iran on the other. but it does put everything on a knife's edge in the first instance because it becomes very, very close to having the kind of war that neither side wants as we heard from andrea and others.

and second, because israel cannot keep large numbers of troops in uniform on the border ready to fight, ready to defend, all the time. it's deleterious to the country generally. deleterious to morale inside yesterday and to their economy. so to the extent that israel can demonstrate that this is it for now, that it has the capability to do more, but it will not. and to the extent that hezbollah says okay, we're going to, i think we'll fight back and we'll retaliate, but it will not be the kind of thing that will engender a real large scale response, further response, from israel. to the extent all that can happen. and with diplomatic efforts from all corners taking place behind the scenes. if that's possible, if that all

happens, then the situation will be diffused. but remember, like we discussed before, it's a difficult neighborhood. everybody hates each other. and if it does slow down, if it does quiet down, quite frankly, it's only going to be for a while, chris. >> we do see the people who have poured out into the streets of beirut's southern suburbs. this is a very dense area. dense civilian population. we are getting our first reports. this via reuters who cites state media that one woman was killed. seven wounded. in the idf strike on hezbollah's commander in beirut. the status of that commander as of yet unknown. our breaking news coverage of this israeli strike continues right after this short break.