peter beinart, let's begin with you. your response to the congressional hearing and the grilling of the three women presidents of m.i.t., harvard, and upenn and the resignation of upenn president mcgill as well as the chair of the board of trustees got bock who announced her resignation then resigned himself. >> this really isn't about those individuals. it is about the fact that given the extraordinary slaughter that is happening in gaza, there is a movement on college campuses and across america for a cease-fire and to end american complicity in that slaughter. and in response to that, the effort is now to try to limit the ability of people who want to protest u.s. policy and support palestinian rights from being able to organize on college campuses. so the reason you're going after these presidents is to try to set a precedence and bring in people who will be much tougher on restricting the ability of students and faculty and others who want to organize politically against this war in gaza. this is what this is about.

. >> peter beinart, thank you very much, i appreciate time. that is tonight's read out.in

peter beinart is auor of the buyenobook on substack, contributed to another piece in the times today path to peace in gaza, and they both join me now. let me start with you on this -- it's been a challenge, i think, you might want to read from it. you say, most of our organizations have been operating gaza for decades. we can do nothing remotely adequate to address the level of suffering without an immediate and complete cease-fire and an end to the siege. the aerial barnesav rendered our jobs impossible. the withholding of water, fuel, food, and other basic goods has created an enormous scale of need that aid alone could not offset. we get images of places in dire humanitarian straits a lot in the world. there are several hotspots right now, including in sudan and other places. as an aid organization has experience in this, i've been struck by doctors without borders saying, there is something particularly afoot here. why? >> yeah, thanks. there are a couple things and i should say, save the children has been doing humanitarian work for over 100 years and all these hotspots and is d

to talk about all of this and more i'm joined by peter beinart, editor at large for jewish currents, the binary notebook on substack, and professor at the new mark school of journalism at cuny. and eddie glaude junior, an msnbc political analyst and james as mcdonald distinguished professor at princeton university. it's good to have both of you with us. professor, let me start, professor let me start with you. did you agree with president mcgill's decision to step down and, broadly speaking, they take ways of how this week is played out? >> i understand, for personal and professional reasons why she decided to step down. she is committed to the university of pennsylvania, to do so in this instance i guess was to protect the institution. and i supposed to protect her self and her own reputation. but i disagree with the fundamental context in which all of this is happening. the first thing we have to say is anybody who lends credibility to -- somehow being the defender of free speech, of attacking those who are anti-'s about the, i think you can just look at her record. the notion of t

>> -- and peter beinart, thank you both, appreciate it. that is all in on this tuesday night. alex wagner tonight starts right now. good evening, alex. >> thank, you my friend, we have a lot to get to this evening. thank you tom for joining with me tonight. this time of year, four years ago, democrats were preparing to impeach donald trump for withholding aid to ukraine in an attempt to get political dirt on joe biden. the republicans were not surprisingly outraged. but there was one republican congressman in particular who had a very specific reason for opposing trump's impeachment, a reason that he repeated over and over and over. but >> the founding fathers, the founders of this country, warned against single party impeachment. they said it would be bitterly divisive, protect perhaps irreparably divisive for the country. the founders of this country warned us against the single party impeachment, because they feared it would bitterly amber helps irreparably divide our nation. >> the founders of this nation warned against a single party impeachment. you know why? you guys gu

. >> peter beinart, thank you very much, i appreciate time. that is tonight's read out. all in starts right now. all in>>> tonight on all in -- >> in america tonight, you would never abuse power as retribution against anybody? >> except on day one. >> the indicted republican front runner makes it official. >> he says, you're not going to be a dictator. i said, no, no, no, except on day one. >> tonight, donald trump stand back and stand by for dictatorship moment. >> the lesson of donald trump out the last several years has taught us, we have to take them seriously and take him real. >>> and a requiem for the last young gun -- >> eye and they want to ask the question, i never quit. >> a stunning resignation of the only speaker ever fired from the job. >>> and my interview with the great rob reiner, the life and legacy at the incomparable -- >> i would say he mattered, but only if i can help people understand that is true of all of us. when all in starts right now. >>> good evening from new york, i'm chris hayes. as we begin the official start of the 2024 election season,

to talk about all of this and more, joined by peter beinart at large for jewish currents, author of thebstack and professor at the new york school of journalism. but -- msnbc political analyst and -- distinguished professor at princeton university. great to have both of, you gentlemen, with. us professor, let me start with you. do you agree with president mcgill's decision to step down? and broadly speaking, your takeaways from how this week has played out? >> well, i understand for personal and professional reasons why she decided to step down. she is committed to the university of pennsylvania, to do so in this instance i guess was to protect the institution. and i supposed to protect her self and her own reputation. but i disagree with the fundamental context in which all of this is happening. the first thing we have to say is anybody who lends credibility to -- somehow being the defender of free speech, of attacking those who are anti-'s about the, i think you can just look at her record. the notion of that question being asked in that context, a yes or no question, in my mind is ju

peter beinart is author of the buyer notebook on substack, contributed to another piece in the timesh to peace in gaza, and they both join me now. let me start with you on this -- it's been challenge, i think, you might want to read from it. you say, most of our organizations have been operating gaza for decades. we c d nothing remotely adequate to address the level of suffering without an immediate and complete cease-fire and an end to the siege. the aerial barnes have rendered our jobs impossible. the withholding of water, fuel, food, and other basic goods has created an enormous scale of need that aid alone could not offset. we get images of places in dire humanitarian straits a lot in the world. there are several hotspots right now, including in sudan and other places. as an aid organization has experience in this, i've been struck by doctors without borders saying, there is something particularly afoot here. why? >> yeah, thanks. there are a couple things and i should say, save the children has been doing humanitarian work for over 100 years and all these hotspots and is doing s