this is cnn. what went wrong? a fast-paced investigation into how a door plug blew off an alaska airlines plane 16 feet 16,000 feet above the earth. we are waiting to learn more after the faa grounded more

than 150 boeing jets. president biden warming against extremism as he visits the site of the 2015 charleston church shooting. another step in his re-election campaign where he says democracy is at stake. a growing mystery surrounding the hospitalization of the secretary of defense. how could so many people including president biden not know that lloyd austin was rushed to the icu? following these developing stories and many more right here at "cnn news central." it is the top of the hour. i am brianna keilar. investigators have never covered a critical piece of evidence as they are trying to figure out why a chunk, a key chunk of an alaska airlines plane tore off midflight. the ntsb says the missing door plug that fell from the plane shortly after taking off from portland was found in someone's yard. federal officials say two cell

phones that were likely flung from the plane were likely found in the turnover from investigators. >> we are learning that alaska airlines restricted the plane from playing over the ocean on flights after its pressurization warning light went off three times before friday's incident. let's bring in mike valerio who is in portland. the public is playing a huge role in this fast-moving investigation because a schoolteacher named bob apparently found the plug in his yard and your team is now hearing from the man who found one of his cell phones that apparently came off of the plane. what else are you learning? >> first of all, bob is taking the internet by storm. the hero of the hour about 9 p.m. last night. we had a news conference from the ntsb. everybody is there laptops up and the chief of the ntsb, the chair of the ntsb says nobody move. we have breaking moves news.

called everybody in and said bob, the schoolteacher found a 63 pound chunk of the plane in his backyard. sent two photos. something we are waiting for. our photos of that door plug is the biggest piece of the photo. you are right. in addition, smaller items. can you believe it, not one but two cell phones that fell from 16,000 feet. at least one of them was found in good working order. listen. the ntsb went all over the airwaves saturday and yesterday calling for people in the cedar hills community. it is about a 15 minute drive away from where we are standing at portland international airport. to walk around their neighborhood and start looking for this storm plug. this man, shawn bates, who you hear from in a few seconds, uses that as an excuse to go out, take a nice weekend walk, and he finds the iphone. listen to what he told us.

>> the ntsb had asked people to go and report anything that looked like it had fallen out of the recent alaska airlines accident. thankfully, no one was injured or got sucked out but they did lose some belongings. they are still looking for the door. i found a phone sitting on the side of the road that had apparently fallen 16,000 feet. i was of course a little skeptical. this could be thrown out of a car, someone dropped it while they were driving. i found it. it was still pretty clean, no scratches on it. sitting under a bush. it did not have a screen lock on it. i opened it up and it wasn't airplane mode with the travel confirmation and baggage claim for alaska 1282. >> lo and behold, an amazing discovery. as we talk about the latest with what the ntsb is thinking

about in terms of how this happened, we're going to push in looking across the runway. this is the aircraft in question, flight 1282. in the fog in the mist, winter in portland, everybody. after being at all of the ntsb, there are three buckets that are starting to come into focus as to how this happened. the first one, this could of been according to the ntsb investigators. an issue with installation of a door plug at boeing. the second bucket could have been, perhaps, a maintenance issue. at some point when the aircraft was owned by alaska air and the third bucket that could have, perhaps, as you mentioned in the introduction of the story, a pressure into issue inside the cabin. they are not sure what bucket. perhaps in another area that they are yet to discover, not what they do have that door plug in their possession, they are expecting another news conference within the next few hours. you get more information later this afternoon. >> really incredible that no one was hurt. so many interesting to this. 16,000 feet and not a drop a

crack on the phone. thank you so much. similar boeing planes remain grounded nationwide for emergency inspections, which the fha says will include looking at. all of this causing major air travel disruptions with flights canceled today. let's dig teacher with tom foreman you joins us live at the magic. talk this through the key steps that the ntsb is going to take the figure out how all of this happen. >> basically what they are going to do is look at the timeline of events. how it happened. this is a new plane. it only started flying in october. you are not talking about the traditional years of wear and tear, maybe something built up over time. what they are going to be doing is exactly what we are talking about. they are looking at the components involved. say how does actually break loose? the are relating things leading

to it. that is why finding the door so important. ntsb brings all these together and re-creates everything. how did it come together. was it pressure. to the dining room and you sealed it all up, that is what this is. it is not a door, it is a place that is meant to be permanent, not to be removed unless you want to. >> unfortunately, not the first boeing incident involving the 737 and the max eight as well. >> absently. if you look at some of the recent incidents in the past few years, very troubling for boeing. we had these fatal accidents in indonesia and ethiopia. we have had other incidents involving the max nine. all of which have raised alarm bells. these are all different. every aircraft is different from the other one. all these cancellations as to

look at what they have here. big album for boeing. crashing down there. >> in your experience, tom. it could be a multitude of explanations for this. what you looking at closely to see that would point as to how this happened? >> the only thing to do is relying the experts. they are very quick to say you cannot draw associations until you know they are associations. they had these three warnings, pressure warnings in december and january indicated that there was something wrong with the pressure in the cabin or maybe something went wrong with the sensor in the cabin. and maybe it had nothing to do with this. they are very careful about saying let's look at all of these elements. let's look at the force of what happened, the sequence of what happened, when it happened, where it happened, and then say what actually happened to

something else. they will gradually put together. it will take time. then we will have a clear indication of why this went wrong. all of us who have to fight have faith in what's going to happen moving forward. >> appreciate the expertise, thanks so much. >> joining us to understand or try to understand all of this, we have cnn transportation analyst mary scioto. she is the former inspector general for the apartment of transportation. mary, currently has ongoing litigation for a crash in 2019, we should mention. federal investigators now have this missing door plug that fell from the plane. what kind of information are they going to be able to determine with this missing piece? >> with the missing piece, it's going to be very vertical pieces of information as to what is the shape of the fasteners? when you look at the pictures, the circles were the fasteners would have gone or the letters still look pretty intact.

they were completely round, they look in great shape. they do not look to be defective. by getting the door and other pieces, they will hopefully be able to pinpoint exactly what the failure point was. remains to be seen if the fasteners both in laches are still in a piece but from what was on the plane, those attach points look to be pretty pristine, pretty intact. another professor got to cut apart a 727 and round holes were not still around after a lot of pressures or incidents and years of service. that is going to be important to look at those two pieces very carefully. >> as tom pointed out, this is relatively new plane. three separate occasions before friday's incident. what you think of that? could there be a correlation? >> i do.

you cannot jump to conclusion and call investigation. shouldn't do that. air safety and air accidents, things just are not coincidence. if you had a problem with this door plug not feeling properly or is not latched properly, or didn't have all the fasteners you might have indications that you are not pressurizing properly. we have learned that the pilot headsets were ripped from their heads and didn't work after that in the court cockpit door was slammed into the bathroom door. this was a much more violent event than initially thought. this was a catastrophic depressurization. those are a lot of things that will take into consideration but yes, i think. i am not an investigator so i can say this.

i think. >> when an airplane is having repeated pressurization problems in such close proximity and time, in late december and in recent days, just a few days ago. it makes you wonder why it was this plane flying? >> exactly. it is allowed to but the airline did limited flights over water. they said they could not make the route. federal aviation administration has lots of to continue to fly with an issue and what you cannot. we can only assume that the aviation regulations pertaining to alaskan airline operations allowed it to continue to fly. otherwise, obviously it is

where the aircraft and a huge faa violation. >> another thing about the story that is, the ntsb is saying that the cockpit voice recorder was completely overwritten. walk us through what that means in how that might impact the investigation. >> when you are getting ready to fly a plane, when you power up the plane, pilot do the walk around in the plane does not have its power on often. when you get in the cockpit, you turn on the power, and you power up the plane. that voice reporter start reporting right there and it keeps reporting until the plane is powered down. we basically turn off the power. since it got back on the ground and got on the ground very quickly once it was powered off, that reporting would've stopped right there. if someone, the power is still on and keeps recording for two hours, it will record right over what was there before.

this is a mistake. whether the mistake was made by the airline and they didn't power down or the mistake was made by the ntsb who powered it up and had it powered when they started their investigation, that remains to be seen. the critical information was lost but in this case, you can make up for that loss because can tell you what happened. it was a mistake. fortunate that no one was hurt. i appreciate your perspective, thanks. >> thank you. still to come. former president donald trump says he is protected under presidential immunity. he wants a criminal conspiracy case against him in fulton county, georgia thrown out. does his you have any lugs? were going to discuss from a former federal prosecutor. miseries secretary of state threatening to kick resident biden off the ballot there as

payback from trump being removed from other two states ballots. he is going to join us live in just a few minututes.

a former president donald trump navigating a slew of legal issues, now trying to get his case in georgia thrown out. today, his lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the election case in atlanta, saying that trump has presidential immunity and was conducting official acts when he was investigating unfounded election tampering allegations back in 2020. the d.c. appeals court will hear the same argument in court tomorrow. we have former federal prosecutor renato mariotti with us now. okay, romano. trumps lawyers invoking the supremacy clause of the u.s. constitution. they have done this time and again hoping to steal him from federal prosecution. also saying, though, that state- level justice systems cannot interfere with federal duties. is he saying that calling georgia to find the votes is his duty? >> that is what he is saying. it is not a very good argument. i could call it a novel argument because it is never been made before. just so our viewers understand,

the federal government has a very limited role in the oversight of state elections and even federal elections which are conducted by the states. our actual federal election system is actually conducted, for the most part, by state officials. electronic voting systems. it is laughable in its face but it is, nonetheless, a novel argument. >> we have seen him use this time and time again. until he can't use it, he seems to want to use it. is it a delay tactic? >> i think it is partially a delay tactic. it is partially an opportunity to advance an argument that since it hasn't been rejected, theoretical cancer can be accepted. i also think, you mentioned a moment ago. this case is before the federal

court of appeals and the district of columbia right now. the georgia courts, of course, are in a different system. you might be open for some consistency that could be open or get this case at the supreme court. that is really what i imagine is on his mind right now. >> tomorrow in federal case against trump, the d.c. appeals court is going to be appealing arguments about the same question, as i mentioned. as you said goes all the way to the supreme court but how do you expect the federal ruling will affect the georgia state case? how quickly? >> i think there's going to be a federal ruling very quickly. the d.c. circuit court of appeals has a very expedited schedule. because there is a trial in the district of columbia right now that is on hold, a case that is on hold. there is a question whether the

supreme court takes the case or whether they let the ruling stand by the d.c. circuit court of appeals. if they don't take the case at all, this would be a case we call persuasive authority for a court in georgia. in other words, the court in georgia would look at what the judges in d.c. decided that they would not be bound by what they decided. if the supreme court ultimately takes the issue, that might add a couple months to the schedule, if not more, but when the supreme court comes out with the ruling, there will be portions of that ruling controlling. >> renato, great to have you. thank you so much. >> miseries publican secretary of state is threatening to take resident biden off the states 2024 presidential ballot as payback for maine and colorado's ruling that donald trump's actions leading up to the capitol hill insurrection disqualify him from the primary

ballot. posted that the rulings are disgraceful in the underlying the public. thank you so much for coming on with us. i want you to walk us through your legal reasoning. the reasons for your opposition to the decisions in colorado and maine. why do you think they are flawed? >> thank you for having me. it is not just that i think they are flawed, they are flawed. in maine, you had not a court, not a statewide elected official on an appointed bureaucrat that decided she did not like one to be on the ballot so of her own, she removed them. >> state constitution. it mandates that the secretary of state hold a hearing to determine whether a candidate should be on the ballot. that is the process for maine, though. >> okay, that is the process that you would like if one of your children was being

prosecuted for a crime in maine. >> i do not want to interrupt, i just want to point out, i do not have kids but that is what is in maine's estate constitution. that is not according to me, it is what is in the constitution for maine. >> the constitution of the united states is the criteria for individuals to run for president. the main constitution does not do that. >> it gives the states the ability to determine how their elections are run. >> does not give them the authority to add conditions to whom a run for president. the supreme court has held that multiple times. what we saw happen in maine it was a total lack of due process, a total misunderstanding of the 14th amendment, and a decision made by someone that is not even an attorney, much less a judge. if you look at colorado, once again, there was no due process. there was not the right to

cross-examine all witnesses. the president did not have the right to call the witnesses that he wanted a call. there was hearsay evidence that was allowed and he has never been convicted by a court of jurisdiction and of course, the 14th amendment on his language. if you read it, you will see it, does not apply to him. it is that clear. i am happy to go through the 14th amendment if you want. my real concern is this. my real concern is that colorado and maine have decided that they, themselves, can suddenly throw off the little parties or political individuals that they don't like . that is not good for our country. that is not good for legans to do that, it is not good for democrats to do that. we should not have secretaries of state making that decision. if they are going to, apply it evenly. >> i want to get to that but i

do believe when it comes to due process, the former president's team had the ability in colorado to be part of that hearing and present evidence, as they did in maine, they chose not to present evidence to the secretary of state in maine and she, ultimately, decided to get them off the ballot. the are going by the process of the state constitution, though. i understand your point about the supreme court is not decision. >> was hearsay evidence allowed in the colorado and maine cases? simple question. was it? yes it was. >> i am not in the position. i have not gone through all the evidence myself to answer the question. nevertheless, my point -- the point when the question was to get your perspective on why you felt that these legal arguments didn't work. you mentioned that the 14th amendment does not mention the

presidency. you mentioned that you believe that president trump needs to be convicted in order for it to apply to him for insurrection. in other words, you think that when the supreme court takes this up, they are going to side with president trump. is that correct? >> they are going to side against people being thrown off the ballot in this matter. the brief that i will be filing with the united states supreme court is not going to say that president trump was a bad person. it's not going to say that he is a good person. what it is going to say is that this extra judicial means of removing people from the ballot is catastrophic to our country if it is allowed to continue. if democrats can do it, you know that republicans will do it. if republicans will do it, democrats will do it more. >> to that point, secretary, in order to remove president biden

from the ballot, according to your state constitution, you would need to go to court. >> no, not at all. >> your state constitution actually states that the secretary of state lacks authority to assess qualifications of a candidate to determine whether to place a candidate's name on a primary ballot. that is according to section 115 387 of your state constitution. >> sir, what i am saying is if the supreme court out of colorado -- >> which went to court to. >> sir, you are not listening. >> let's just be clear. first of all, you have always said you were not an attorney and you do not know what happened in colorado. >> i know what happened in colorado. what i said was that i did not read through all of the evidence specifically to be able to qualify whether there was hearsay or not. to get back to my question, you said that you would decide to

remove joe biden from the ballot in your statement. according to your state constitution, which i just read you from, it says you need to go to court. i am asking you what you think the strongest argument is. >> and i continue to try to answer your questions and you continue to try to tell this stuff that just is not true. >> you made an accusation about me not knowing something. i am trying to clarify it for you. you can answer the question or continue to deflect it. one of the strongest argument you would make in court to remove joe biden from the ballot? go! >> what has happened is -- >> what i said in my statement was if this comes the law of the land -- >> -- but estate can choose according to their state constitutions? i'm just trying to clarify the point. >> the united states constitution is supreme over state constitution. i hope you at least understand that. >> i do. >> i have to talk a little bit about the colorado case.

in colorado, that lawsuit started because there is a law that prohibits the election authority, the secretary of state from doing something they are not supposed to do. that is how the lawsuit started. that same law or a similar law applies to me in missouri. if anyone can say so and so is not supposed to be on the ballot and it is wrong for you to put them on the ballot, then we are going to see secretaries of state elections authorities, maybe even county? across this country, moving people from the ballot. i think that is a terrible thing. i am against that. what i said was if the supreme court allows it, that slippery slope is going to happen. they need to stop it from happening to everybody. >> i am sure the supreme court

will sutter settle whether you can remove someone from the ballot or not. i am wondering, though, what would be your justification for removing joe biden from the ballot in missouri? has he engaged in your mind insurrection? >> there have been allegations that he has engaged insurrection. >> how so? >> please let me finish. >> you cannot say something and not back it up. >> i am continuing. are you scared of the truth? >> i am not terrified of the truth at all. >> what allegations? >> president trump has never been in a court of law. >> sure. what did joe biden do in your mind that equate insurrection? what allegations are you talking about? >> i have seen allegations from the lieutenant governor of texas that says joe biden has

been part of insurrection for rebellion. the governor of florida said the same thing. >> what is the governor of texas say that joe biden was causing an insurrection on? >> if you're going to make the claim, give me some specifics. the governor of texas or florida and not actually say what they are arguing? do you know what they are arguing? >> what i am telling you is this. they made allegations in all it took for former president trump to be taken off the ballot in colorado and in maine were allegations. we should not be a country that removes people from the ballot based on allegations. i think you can agree with that. >> i think it depends to a degree. >> so your guy --

>> joe biden is not my guy. you do not know who my guy is. >> it does not matter. >> the point is, it is not clear whether the 14th amendment is self-executing or not. in other words, it does not matter to a court at that point whether there was a conviction about insurrection or not. that is a debate for the supreme court to have. >> if there is not a conviction? >> a judge decided so in colorado. >> it was not a judge in maine, it was just the secretary of state. >> because that is the way the constitution in maine is laid out, sir. >> the constitution in maine gives the secretary of state the ability to decide whether or not -- >> as part of the process, yes. something they did disqualifies them. the secretary of state is the first in a legal process of deciding whether that person belongs on the ballot or not. it is in maine's state constitution. i think you should probably read it before you make claims

about the main secretary of state in their process. we got to lead the conversation there but you are welcome back anytime, sir. >> thank you. >> have a good day, sir. stay with more "cnn news central." we will be back in a few.

get over here kids. time for today's lesson. wow. -whoa. what are those? these are humans. they rely on something called the internet to survive. huh, powers out. [ gasp ] are they gonna to die? worse, they are gonna get bored. [ gasp ] wait look! they figured out a way to keep the internet on. yeah! -nature finds a way. [ grunt ] stay connected when the power goes out, with storm ready wifi from xfinity. and see migration in theaters now.

in new detail in the controversy surrounding the hospitalization of the nation's top defense official, cnn has just learned the pentagon did not tell the white house the secretary of defense lloyd austin would be going to walter reed medical center for an elective procedure on december 22nd. it was that undisclosed procedure that ended up leading the complications for austin. an official statement saying austin suffered severe pain and had to return to walter reed on

january 1st and was admitted to the icu. the next day, the joint chief of staff chairman was told about austin's hospitalization but he is not in the chain of command. also, on january 2nd, deputy defense secretary kathleen hicks taking up some of lloyd austin's duties but it was not until january 4th, three days later that she and president biden learned of the details that lloyd austin was actually in the icu. the pentagon says one reason for the delay is that austin's chief of staff was also stick. six. he wrote the book sacred oath, memoirs of a secretary defense during extraordinary times. you have said somebody dropped the ball on secretary austin. who is it up to beside him to alert the white house if his key aid is sick?

>> i think in ordinary circumstances, it would be his chief of staff who had the responsibility to convey the message to the white house. but also to others in the chain of command. in this case, i guess she was not capable at all of doing so. the question is who else within his inner sanction was able to do that? i do not think all the details have come out. when you lay out the timeline, somebody informed the chairman of the joint chief of staff on january 2nd. why didn't that same person inform the deputy secretary of defense who is the second in command, who should have known because chain of control. it calls into some question about the relationship and who did what. who was in power, not empowered to make notifications. >> is the protocol clear? is it pretty clear here? >> it was during my tenure.

my chief of staff was the interlock are between myself and the white house in most cases. also between myself and the secretary of defense. that person is a key job. one of the most important jobs in the pentagon. that person or their deputy has to be empowered and be able to make those notifications. to the president, and especially when you are in the middle of the situation in the middle east, you are constructing strikes in baghdad. that becomes a release really tricky situation. you want to be able to as the president, to pick up the phone and say what is going on? what do we need to do? the next course of action? other options? not to know it is really troubling. >> i want to ask you separately. today we saw president biden continuing to make his case that the 2024 election is about democracy. you have said that former

president trump is a threat to democracy. you told my colleague over the weekend jim acosta that trump will install. do you worry if trump is re- elected that he will try to use the military unlawfully? what are your concerns? >> yeah. i am concerned about who he will install in various apartments. you could look at some other key positions such as the director of the cia. the question the way you asked it, i do not know what that means by unconstitutionally. i think military officers are bound to only follow orders that are legal, ethical, and moral. you will have some type of braking action there. at the end of the day, it is the secretary, in which we were just talking to about secretary austin. by the way, i hope he is doing far better. running from the secretary to the commanders. if it comes with regard to other parts, the same is true.

that is my concern there. >> if he were to have a loyalist in their who just is a mouthpiece, and it sounds like you really do have faith in the military. how do you think the military would handle it if given unlawful orders by civilian leadership? >> i think, for the most part, most of them would refuse unlawful orders and they would be faced with resigning or being fired by the president. my concern was always not that is much as. for example, the situation i faced was calling up the national guard. an insurrection act to be used against protesters. for the most part, none of that is illegal. certainly not unconstitutional but in my view, it would be a very inappropriate solution to an issue that the president may be trying to address. those are the trickier questions that are legal but inappropriate. >> what happens then?

if there is someone who will just pass that order on? >> yeah. that is the challenge. what the military is trained is to follow the orders. that is grounded you in the beginning of your career. i spent four years at west point. i know what the military ethic is, the professional expectations. they are bound to follow orders. we want our military to follow orders. when i was in office, i always thought was important for the civilian leadership, myself were the ones that needed to defend the beautiful military against immoral orders but inappropriate ones as well. make that stand to the president and his staff to say we are not doing this or we should not do this. this is a better way to do what you want to do that does not cross any boundaries. that is why the civilian positions are critical. >> they certainly are. secretary, it is great to have you. thank you for being with us for this discussion. >> thank you. still ahead, new weight- loss drugs may revolutionary

for many people but not if they cannot afford them. before you look at cheaper alternativeses, let's tatalk ab their r safety.

it is the new year and a lot of folks are lighting up their new year's resolutions, including, for many americans, they want to lose weight. powerful weight-loss drugs like mozambique, those could be more in reach than ever. with celebrities like oprah winfrey, supply is becoming a problem and so was the price. >> you get mozambique and she's like you can do that. most employer insurance plans

do not cover these popular medications. that forces some people to make risky choices when they are looking for alternatives. let's talk about that. it is really a medical conundrum. we have meg terrel to take us through that. what happens if patients don't have coverage for this? where are they going? >> well, it can be incredibly frustrating for patients, if they lose coverage for these medications and sometimes, that means they lose access to the drugs. we've seen clinical trial results that on average, patients tend to gain weight back weekly if they stop taking these medications. you can see this clinical trial, generally patients lose weight when they are on it but when they split, those that got off the drug and went on placebo gained the weight back. we hear from patients. sometimes they try to switch to compound that versions. versions of drugs that are allowed to be made by pharmacies when the drug is on the shortage of list but they

are not as tightly regulated by the fda. there can be safety concerns and the fda has warned about using those. >> why are employer insurance plans so reluctant to cover the drugs? you think that ultimately, they have healthier people who these drugs can be expensive, they cost almost $1000 or almost $1000 each, before any discounts. they want to be able to save money over the long term it takes a long time to see those benefits get realized, so that cost equation can be difficult for them. >> a very good point. thank you so much for that. houston, they have a problem, they say they are dealing with an anomaly, the histstoric missision now could in jeopapardy, we will havave t ahead.

(vo) with fargo, the new virtual assistant from wells fargo, you can instantly know what you spend on things like food. (dad) fargo, what did i spend on groceries this month? (son) hey dad, can the guys stay for dinner? (dad) no. (vo) want faster, easier banking? you can, with wells fargo. (vo) with fargo, the new virtual assistant from wells fargo, you can instantly know what you spend on things like food. (dad) fargo, what did i spend on groceries this month? (son) hey dad, can the guys stay for dinner?

(dad) no. (vo) want faster, easier banking? you can, with wells fargo. we are getting new details about a major setback for the fee first u.s. launched mission to the moon since the apollo program. >> kristin fisher is here with the details, what is going on is this mission done? >> it is not over yet but it's not looking good. it started off looking good early this morning got to see the first inaugural launch of the launch alliances, the brand- new balkan rocket, this rocket in development for some time but it actually performed beautifully, a rocket that will be designed to send national security payloads into space, the pentagon watching this launch, the rocket did well. the problem, with the lunar lander that is on top of the rocket. built by a company called based

in pittsburgh, called the peregrine lunar lander, and a few hours after it separated from the vulcan rocket they ran into some issues, now we know it is one of the worst things that you can encounter in spacecrafts. that is a propellant problem. they put out a statement about an hour and a half ago, i will read it. it says, unfortunately it appears the failure within the propulsion system is causing a critical loss of propellant. the team is working to try and stabilize this loss but given the situation we have prioritized maximizing the science and data. we can capture and we are currently assessing the alternative mission profiles that may be feasible. so, that is not good. a critical loss repellent a big problem. they are now looking at alternate mission profiles. the goal, to make this the first spacecraft to land on the moon since the apollo program program in 1972, the first private company to ever do this, not a u.s. government

mission. now that very much in jeopardy. >> so this thing is heading where then? >> that is what they are trying to figure out. we don't know how much propulsion is leaking, how much fuel is leaking, they don't even know how close you can get to the moon. i can tell you there is one group of people that will likely be very happy about this development and that is the navajo nation, the largest group of native americans in the united states because they were very upset that one of the payloads on this lunar lander carried cremated human remains, which is something that these two companies do, they were going to offer a first of its kind lunar burial, but the navajo nation was very upset, they said that this desecrated a sacred space to their cosmology, and culture. so, they fought for it and they supported advances in spaceflight but they did not remains landing on the moon. while everybody else in the

space industry is not liking these developments, i bet the navajo nation does. >> this now ends the debate, we hope they make the best of the d tour. kristin fisher, thank you so much. only one week to go, and every hour accounts for republican candidates, courting voters in n iowa, espepecially donaldld trump, ththe fronont r facicing legal f fights. a new wrinkle in onene case, we will breakak it down when we co backck on the "cnnnn n news cec