>> jacqui: all new at 2:00, the white house set to take questions any minute now with a special guest at the podium, national security adviser jack sullivan. whether he confirms reporting that president biden has signed off on sending controversial weapons to ukraine. >> mike: explodes mid air, releasing dozens of smaller bombs. general keith kellogg told us one of these can cover a whole football field. it could put the u.s. among the allies, france and germany said they will not follow suit. concern, greater risk to civilians. >> jacqui: glad to be with you, mike. >> mike: john and sandra is the day off. if the biden administration goes through with this, it would be a

significant shift. >> jacqui: it would be, a year ago i asked the white house about russia using the weapons. jen psaki said -- >> we have seen the reports, if that were true it would potentially be a war crime. jack a war crime. see how the white house explains the shift in thinking. tom cotton applauding the move, saying it's long pastime we give ukraine equal access to the same weapons that putin is using. >> mike: first to america's crime crisis. >> jacqui: a heartbreaking story out of our nation's capital as a former afghan interpreter for the u.s. army who served for nearly two decades assisting americans in afghanistan was senselessly shot and killed while working as a lyft driver. he escaped the taliban less than two years ago, moving his family to what he thought was safety. >> mike: the father of four was killed monday shortly after

dropping off customers. security video capturing four suspects running from the scene. >> jacqui: do we have any idea of leads here? >> this is a tough one. police are saying they are making progress on the case, $25,000 reward for information but no arrest yesterday. we do know investigators are looking for four young men in connection to the murder. the 31-year-old grew up nearby bagram air field in afghanistan. at the age of ten he assisted u.s. troops, later becoming an interpreter. he fled to the u.s. with his wife and children during the chaotic departure in 2021, he then fled philadelphia after "the new york post" reported he was robbed at gunpoint there. matthew butler is a special forces veteran who had served alongside him. >> i don't have words for it. it's unfathomable how senseless

this is for somebody who came here for the express opposite reasons. >> he was shot and killed in his car early monday, less than a mile from the u.s. capitol building. and you can hear a single gunshot and what the suspect said after. watch. suspect just said you just killed him. another responds back he was reaching, bro. d.c. metro police acknowledge the suspects are likely young. >> it's definitely a tragedy and that dovetails into the conversation we had about our young people out after dark, right. >> gofundme has already raised about $145,000 at last check. probably up to 150 right now. it reads he was immensely proud to be in the u.s. and grateful

for the safety and opportunities that would be afforded to his four young children. and those children range in age from 15 months to 13 years old. he had just started a tow truck company, that was earlier this year, he was driving lift that night for extra bills. >> jacqui: makes you sick how many ways this man was failed after giving so much for this country. >> three times, the withdrawal where he was left essentially behind, philadelphia, he thought he would be safe, he was not, he was robbed at gunpoint. and here in the nation's capital, blocks from the capitol building, his life was taken. >> you don't have any words hearing that. alex, thank you. >> mike: jake sullivan will join karine jean-pierre at the podium, expecting a range of questions sending cluster

munitions to ukraine and ongoing investigation into the cocaine found at the white house five days ago. house republicans slamming the discovery as a shameful moment for the white house. >> set aside the cocaine, a white powder could have been anthrax or some other type of chemical gets that close to the heartbeat of our government. that is a massive security failure. >> less than two minutes to the briefing, griff jenkins is live at the white house. secret service has not named any suspects, right? >> no suspects named yet, good afternoon, mike. maybe we'll get some answers in this briefing, it has been five days since the cocaine was found in a cubby area sunday afternoon and we know in this area that is heavily trafficked it was near the west executive entrance just off of the situation room, jacqui well knows where this is. it's an area, an entrance used

by vip, senior staff, dod, doj and the like of that, and really this lack of clarity and hard information on it has led to not only speculation but lawmakers demanding answers. house oversight committee chairman james comer sending a letter to the secret service wanting a briefing and a lot of other answers. he writes this, simply saying congress funds white house security procedures and the secret service has a responsibility to maintain effective safety protocols. this incident and the eventual evacuation of staff now clearly raises concerns about the level of security maintained at the white house. comer's letter comes after senator tom cotton sent a letter wanting answers and several questions listed about security breaches, including whether this has happened before or is an isolated incident. speaking of tom cotton, he just released a statement jacqui mentioned in the last hour about the cluster munitions and we are waiting to find out what jake

sullivan will say but of course this is a decision that is a shift in position for administration, meaning countries, allies, and of course as we saw, jen psaki saying it would not happen, and we see now jake sullivan walking out to the podium. cotton, by the way, paraphrase it says it's a decision that he supports and one he's long supported and believes it's the right decision but already the white house getting pushback from democrats, ranking member on the appropriations committee saying it's a terrible mistake. >> mike: live to the briefing where karine jean-pierre is talking about our colleague, evan evan gershkovich. >> the team works on the cases from all angles. our message to evan and to paul is this, keep the faith, we won't stop until you are home.

now with that, now with that we have as you know the national security adviser to the president, jake sullivan, who is going to give a preview of his trip to the nato summit, as you all know, starting out sunday, and take any other questions that you may have. jake. podium is yours. >> thank you, karine. good afternoon, everybody. thanks for bearing with me today. i'm going to start by laying out the plan for the trip that's upcoming this weekend and then because there have been numerous reports on the provision of cluster munitions a few words on that at the top and then happy to take your questions. president biden said on day one of his administration that the united states would revitalize our alliances and reengage with the world to meet the great challenges of our time. and on sunday the president will depart for his next major trip overseas at a time when we have indeed -- >> mike: briefing reporters on upcoming presidential travel.

we will get back to the briefing when he gets to the meat of some of the issues we are tracking but right now just talking about upcoming presidential travel and back to the briefing for more pressing topics when they come up. jacqui. >> jacqui: u.s. attorney in charge of the hunter biden investigation has failed to hand over materials to congress relating to the alleged retaliation against irs whistleblowers. republican lawmakers have demanded an investigation stressing the importance of protecting those who came forward from unlawful retaliation. where does all this go from here? kim strassel is a wall street journal opinion columnist and fox news contributor. kim, thank you so much for being here. i read your piece, a bunch of questions for you on it. but i want to begin with what hunter's attorneys have said, you know, about the letter to jason smith. talking about the whistleblowers, ok. basically saying that they violated the spirit of tax laws

that protect private taxpayer information saying that they were biased and they had a political agenda, and that they may even have broken laws. and abby lowell writes releasing the transcripts of and exhibits of self-styled irs whistleblowers may be claiming that title in an attempt to evade their own misconduct, misinformation campaign to harm clients, recitations of mischaracterized facts by disgruntled agents. what do you say is going on with that, what is the strategy they are doing? >> well, in theory this letter from hunter's lawyers is meant to criticize the committee for the decision to release these transcripts. now, i would note by the way the precedent for releasing tax information was actually set by democrats in december when they took the first step of doing this to donald trump. but let's be really clear. these letters are aimed at

smearing the whistleblowers themselves. these people have come forward, they are very credible, brought forward detailed information and the lawyers as they cannot come ba the that information instead have decided to smear the messengers, so innuendos and suggestions the whistleblowers had motives for doing this, and also accusations of more serious nature that they may have released grand jury information, that they were potentially leakers in some media stories. none of this is proven but designed to undercut their credibility and get the attention off of them because they are doing damage to hunter biden. >> jacqui: and to your point, these whistleblowers would face prosecution if they were to have given false testimony so you can assume that to their knowledge they are telling the truth, whether there is something else they didn't know that proves the

case to be otherwise who is to say. but isn't that hunter's only defense at this point? to go after them? >> well, right. yeah. i mean, this is the only -- the only shot they have, and again, that's really highlighted by the degree to which this letter relies on innuendo. there's nothing in here that is factually based. there is a suggestion they might have lied in their testimony. both men as you note were warned by the committee heads prior to testimony that any falsehoods could be criminally prosecuted. one of the whistleblowers, the anonymous one told in his transcript that he was not a leaker on this case. the other one, gary shapley has since submitted an affidavit to the committee saying he was not the source of any information that came out in a washington post article last fall talking about prosecutors getting ready to bring charges against hunter. and you know, the lawyers, if they are going to sling this

stuff out there, they should have to provide some evidence. especially because we have laws protecting whistleblowers against retaliation and simply by sending this letter and making such accusations they are putting targets on both of these men. >> jacqui: i know we were going to talk about david weiss missing the deadline and hope we can revisit it, but the briefing, jake sullivan is talking about the munitions. >> russia has been using munitions with high dud or failure rates of between 30 and 40%. in this environment, ukraine has been requesting cluster munitions in order to defend its own sovereign territory. the cluster munitions have far lower dud rates than russia is using, and third, closely

coordinating with ukraine as it has requested these munitions. ukraine has committed to post conflict demining efforts for harm for civilians, and regardless whether the united states provides the munitions or not because of russia's widespread use of cluster munitions. we have to help demining no matter what given the munitions perpetrated by russia. bottom line is this. we recognize the cluster munitions create a risk of civilian harm from unexploded ordnance. why we have deferred the decision for as long as we could but there is also a massive risk of civilian harm if russian troops and tanks roll over ukrainian positions and take more territory and ukraine does not have enough artillery, that is intolerable to us. ukraine would not be using these munitions in some foreign land.

this is their country they are defending. these are their citizens they are protecting, and they are motivated to use any weapon system they have in a way that minimizes risks to those citizens. so with that, i would be happy to take your questions. >> thank you so much. wall street journal. i was hoping you could comment on news earlier this week the russians may be open to a preserved swap for evan gershkovich and a question for you about how the uprising by the wagner group may in your view impact russia's leaders' willingness or lack of willingness to make a deal that would release evan. >> so first as karine mentioned, today is the 100th day of detention. and president biden and the security team, embassy in

moscow, secretary of state, myself have been trying to bring him safely. i met with evan's employers at the wall street journal and the family to talk about the latest efforts to bring evan home. third, we did see the comments from the kremlin that there have been contacts between the u.s. and russia regarding evan and other unjustly detained americans. it is true and we have said that we remain in contact with russian authorities at high levels on these cases to try to figure out a way to bring unjustly detained americans home, including evan. we have also made clear for months now, even before evan was detained, as we were dealing with paul whelan, that we are prepared to do hard things in order to get our citizens home, including getting evan home. i do not want to give false hope. what the kremlin said earlier

this week is correct, there have been discussions. but those discussions have not produced a clear pathway to a resolution and so i cannot stand here today and tell you that we have a clear answer to how we are going to get evan home. all i can tell you is we have a clear commitment and conviction to bring him home. with respect to the recent actions by prigozhin and the fallout from that creates new openings or opportunities, i can't say that i have perceived that directly but of course this is a story that continues to be written day-by-day, so we will have to see how things play out in moscow. in the meantime, laser focused on doing everything both directly with the russians and then with other allies and partners around the world who are invested in his safe return to try to get him out as soon as possible. >> president zelenskyy said

[indiscernible] >> as you know, the united states strongly supports the open door policy which says ukraine and nato can make a decision together about its pathway towards membership and an important moment on that pathway towards membership because the united states, nato allies and ukraine will have the opportunity to discuss reforms still necessary for nato -- for ukraine to come up to nato standards. so, this will, in fact, be a milestone but ukraine still has further steps it needs to take. >> so no indication [indiscernible] >> ukraine will not join nato coming out of the summit. we will discuss what steps are necessary. >> and cluster munitions, what convinced president biden it was the right time for the cluster m munitions, given the allies' concerns, and ukraine is running out of unitary artillery rounds -- >> first, we have been looking

at this for quite some time and weighing this basic question of civilian harm. the challenge of cluster munitions as you know is that even at low dud rates there are some unexploded ordnance that is left and that could potentially pose a risk to civilians down the road. so we did not immediately come out of the gate and provide this but had to balance that against the risk to civilian harm if ukraine did not have sufficient artillery munition. we are reaching a point in this conflict because of the dramatically high expenditure rates of artillery by ukraine and by russia where we need to build a bridge from where we are today to when we have enough monthly production of unitary rounds that the rounds alone will suffice to give ukraine what it needs. so as a result, this is the moment to begin the construction of that bridge so that there isn't any period over the summer or heading into this fall when ukraine is short on artillery and being short on artillery, it

is vulnerable to russian counter attacks, the thinking behind the decision. we consulted closely with allies in deciding to do this, and some allies who are not signatories to the oslo convention embraced it with open arms, said this is absolutely the right things to do. even allies who were signatories to the oslo convention, while they cannot formally support something that they have signed up to convention against, have indicated both privately and many of them publicly over the course of the day that they understand our decision and fundamentally they recognize the difference between russia using its cluster munitions to attack ukraine and ukraine using cluster munitions to defend itself, its citizens and sovereign territory. so we feel this will in no way disrupt the strong firm unity we have heading into the nato summit next week. >> to follow up on the cluster munitions, last year in the

march, described munitions as exceptionally lethal weaponry that has no place on the battlefield. how do you square those comments with this decision and has ukraine provided you with assurance or guarantees in terms of civilian areas, not use them in a certain radius of civilian areas for example. >> ukraine has provided written assurances it's going to use these in a careful way to minimize risk to civilians. and by the way, ukraine, the democratically elected government of ukraine has every incentive to minimize risk to civilians because it's their citizens, it's ukrainians who they are trying to protect and defend. this is not ukraine taking these and going and using them in the middle east or in southeast asia or in some far awayland. they are using them on their territory to defend their territory. so we believe they are highly motivated to do this, and beyond being highly motivated they have, to directly answer your

question, provided these assurances to us. in terms of the ambassador's comments, and other comments that have been put about, let me just say the use of cluster munitions by russia in this conflict is completely unacceptable, on multiple counts. first, they are using them to attack a sovereign country in flagrant violation of international law. second, they are using them specifically to strike after civilian targets, not only military targets, also in flagrant violation of international law and with this weapon system as well as other weapon systems we have identified war crimes by the russians. third, there is a difference between the type of cluster munitions used by russia and the type we would provide to ukraine. ours have a 2.5% maximum dud rate, the dud rate of the russians is 30 and 40%, and i will read it to you, the department of defense assesses

during the first year of the conflict alone russian fired cluster munitions deployed from a range of weapons systems have likely expended tens of millions of submunitions or bomblets in ukraine. and the final point, when i talk about what russia is doing with cluster munitions i'm not making an argument that says they do it so we'll do it. the argument i'm making is that russia has already spread tens of millions of these bomblets across ukraine territory. so we have to ask ourselves, is ukraine's use of cluster munitions on the same land actually that much of an addition of civilian harm, given that area has to be demined regardless. when we look at the situation today as opposed to a year ago, and when we look at what ukraine would be doing with these weapons as opposed to what russia is doing with the weapons, we see a substantial difference. it doesn't make it an easy decision and i'm not going to

say it is easy, it's a difficult decision, it's a decision we deferred, a decision that required a real hard look at the potential harm to civilians. and when we put all of that together there was a unanimous recommendation from the national security team and president biden ultimately decided in consultation with allies and partners and in consultation with members of congress to move forward on this step. >> jake, are you satisfied with the pace and progress of the ukrainian counteroffensive? >> i'm standing here in washington, d.c., i'm not on the battlefield, my life is not on the line so for me to say i'm satisfied, not satisfied -- what i would say is it is hard going, the russians are dug in, they have thrown a lot of defense and man power and munitions at this and the ukrainians have bravely, systematically been punching and pushing forward and will continue to do so. they also have a substantial amount of capacity they have not yet committed to this fight, so

the story of the counteroffensive is far from written and we will support crane along the way. >> you said ukraine provided written assurances how they would use the munitions. when was that provided and can you provide more details on what are those assurances? >> they provided them in the context of their written request to us for these munitions. they reached out and requested them. i could not give you the exact date, but some weeks ago and in doing so, the assurance they provided was they intend to use these munitions in a way to minimize the exposure of civilians, so outside of civilian areas and outside of areas that civilians traffic, that is to say on the battlefield where they are presently both trying to defend their territory and to move forward. >> specific locations, though, where lines are the assurances or the administration say only use them in these specific locations. >> this is going to be an ongoing conversation. it's impossible to set down a map and define this with the

level of specificity that maybe your question implies. but it does mean the conversation needs to be ongoing, just as it is with every other weapon system we are providing ukraine and so far we have found when ukraine provides assurances to the united states about the use of its munitions is followed through on that in terms of the limitations and constraints it has placed on those, and we expect the same in this case, and i just want to underscore again, i know i sound like a broken record, but the idea that ukrainian men and women fighting for the armed forces of ukraine want to willy nilly use those in a way that will harm ukrainian citizens somewhat implied in the questions i find at odds with their fundamental desire to protect their countrymen and put their lives on the line. >> do you know prigozhin's location? >> i do not. >> follow-up on ukraine and then a second question related to that. is it the u.s. view that president zelenskyy should attend the nato summit and how

might his presence affect the outcome of discussions? >> so we would welcome president zelenskyy at the nato summit, president biden would welcome the opportunity to meet with him at the nato summit. the nato summit will dive into the question of the relationship with ukraine, both the question of the pathway towards future membership and the question of an ongoing partnership that has existed for several years request, and there will be important practical announcements in that regard at the summit. so president zelenskyy's attendance at it would be very much welcome. >> eastern european nations want nato allies to beef up their security on the eastern plain, especially with mr. prigozhin, exile in belarus, shares a border with lithuania. is the u.s. going to announce new security guarantees at the summit. >> we have the guarantee for

poland and baltic states, article 5 of nato. we intend to defend every inch of nato territory. and put our money where our mouth is in terms of enhanced u.s. deployments in poland and the baltic states, and i met with the poland national security adviser. the first and main topic of conversation was the evolving threat from belarus. the question whether wagner will end up there, an open question, and assertions of nuclear deployment on belarus, and the role and complicity of belarus in russia's aggression in ukraine. we have been taking account of going back to the start of the conflict and we look at everything from the positioning of nato forces to the prepositioning of various stocks

and ammunition in the eastern flank. that will be a continued discussion, but this is evolving picture so i don't think it's the place we put the final story line down. it will evolve as we go forward. >> thanks, jake. does the u.s. support eliminating the need t for ukraine to do a membership action plan benchmarks they have to meet to qualify for nato membership? >> we are looking at that question, that is an active question whether ukraine has moved beyond the need for map, that's under active consideration. >> just one on bilat with erdogan. is it [indiscernible] the president is planning to have or a bilateral meeting to discuss sweden's nato membership? >> i don't have anything t announce today but president biden and president erdogan will

talk. >> munitions, germany has opposed them. does that suggest any cracks in at alliance? >> what i saw germany say was three things. number one, confident the united states took the decision carefully and weighing all considerations. number two, russia has used these in an intolerable way to attack ukraine and three, every weapons system ukraine is using is defending its people and retake its own sovereign territory. if you read what the german chancellory and spokesperson put out, they are a signatory to oslo, they don't transfer -- they don't have or transfer cluster munitions but nothing in what they said sig there are any cracks in nato unity. quite the contrary, we believe there is understanding of the fundamental challenge ukraine faces and our collective desire

to ensure we are providing ukraine with what it needs. >> when it comes to -- >> can you tell us specifically when the president signed the authorization and also we have seen over the course of this war how there were some no-go topics, f-16s, cluster munitions, both of those are moving forward. is there a line the u.s. won't cross. obviously the president said no u.s. personnel inside. or does it suggest to zelenskyy whatever he needs he will get. >> the president has been clear from the beginning of the conflict about two things unwavering. first, the united states is not going to war with russia in ukraine and united states is not providing weapons to ukraine to attack russia. we do not encourage or enable attacks on russian territory from ukraine. the question of weapons systems has evolved as the conflict has evolved. those two fundamental preseps were true from the start, and

true tomorrow as well. i can't give exact specifics, i'll let the internal processes have their sanctity, approved it after a unanimous recommendation from his national security team. >> you said that nato is stronger than ever at this point. what does it say that there are two nato members who have been holding up sweden's ability to join the alliance for more than a year now. >> so the last nato ally to come into alliance before finland, i believe it was montenegro, and took something like 19 months to come in. a lot of people's perceptions of the asession process are shaped by how fast we moved to get sweden and finland ratified here in the united states on a bipartisan basis, how fast finland came in, and then how it has only been a year since

sweden sought membership and we are confident sweden will come in in the not too distant future and there will be unanimous support. and in terms of what it says about nato's strength, here you have two historically nonaligned countries who for decades did not join nato. seeking to join nato. i think there is no clearer indication of the strength, attraction and cohesion of nato than that. >> thank you, jake. so i understand your point about reforms that ukraine still needs to do in order to fast track its membership. also your point on map, but kind of broader from that, my understanding is that the president believes a fast track membership for ukraine is an invitation rather than a deterrence to war with russia. he has several times expressed concern for nuclear escalation. can you first confirm whether my understanding is correct and if

so, being can you explain the calculus behind the president's decision on that, what led him to that conclusion? >> the president has repeatedly said there is an open door, that there is pathway for ukraine and ukraine needs to take additional reforms to complete its work toward nato membership. that is true today, will remain true. the president has been clear we are going to support ukraine as long as it takes and provide them an exceptional quantity of arms and capabilities, from ourselves and facilitating those from allies and partners but not seeking to start world war iii. we believe we have been able to mount a vigorous concerted effective dynamic response to russia's aggression in support of the brave people of ukraine. >> former u.s. officials have

held secret talks with ukraine and russia for a peace deal. >> i appreciate this question. i think the reporting suggested something that in fact has not happened. my understanding is there was a meeting at the council on foreign relations with the foreign minister of russia. that meeting did not include participation from the united states government. the united states government did not pass messages through that meeting. united states government did not seek to pursue diplomacy, direct, indirect or otherwise through that meeting, period. there were also contacts between private american citizens and russians. that has been happening not just in the last year, but for the last 75 years, since time and memorial. the united states government is not using any of those contacts to pass messages, to promote diplomacy, direct, indirect or otherwise, and any suggestion to the contrary is untrue. >> south korea -- and the

japanese prime minister contaminated water in the 1970s time. do you know -- yesterday secretary general visited south korea and said that he would not take responsibility for the contaminated waters. what is the united states position on the iaea report of contaminated water on fukushima. >> the secretary general report was based on the international institution and leave it at that. and the rok government made its own statements and reaction to that we thought was

constructive. >> south korea and meeting, meeting will be had in seoul pretty soon this month. do you have any contents of the meeting, who are going to be attending the meeting? >> i don't have anything to announce. i did speak with my south korean counterpart last evening to discuss preparations for the meeting. an important meeting, high level participation by the united states, this is an important issue on which we place priority and watching the nuclear consultative group is a specific outcome of the washington summit, and outcome of the historic washington declaration and you will see in this meeting that we are quite serious about taking this effort forward. last question. >> jake, five days after the cocaine was found in the white house, congressional republicans seem they are very close to launching some sort of formal investigation. from a national security perspective, what was your reaction when the drugs were found, and b, was there any risk

to security, either the president, your staff, anybody that worked in the sit room for it to be so close to where you work. >> first i would refer to the secret service when it comes to questions of the security of the president, i won't speak to that. second, a point about the situation room, a lot of questionable reporting on this. situation room is not in use and has not been in use for months because it is currently under construction. we are using an alternate situation room in the eisenhower executive office building. so the only people coming in and going out of the sit room in this period have been workers who are getting it ready to go. by the way, its on time and on schedule to be back on station here in the not too distant future. no, there was no issue with the situation room relative to this. and finally, look, we have rigorous drug testing policies at the white house. and drug use policies. we take those seriously. we'll let the investigation

unfold. if it involves someone from the white house the appropriate consequences will ensue. if it involves a visitor who came in and left it, it raises a different set of questions that are less relevant to my line of work so i will leave it at that. but i do not believe at present as things stand at the podium we are facing a national security threat, ongoing national security threat. exactly, facing other national security threats. yeah, last one. >> secretary general of the u.n. said good progress of sweden joining nato but still gaps. how would you assess the likelihood on sweden's membership. >> i will make no predictions. president biden met with the swedish prime minister here in washington to express solidarity with sweden for application for membership.

we believe sweden should be in nato as soon as possible and love to see it happen. it is possible it does, possible that it doesn't happen until some period after, but we believe it will happen in the not too distant future and the gaps can be closed, everything can be resolved, there is fundamentally good will from all the parties to get this done. it's a question of time and i can't predict whether that will happen next week or system point in the ensuing weeks. and with that, i said it was my last question. thank you, guys. >> jacqui: all right, you've been watching national security adviser jake sullivan at the white house in the briefing room, talking about efforts to bring home the detained wall street journal columnist evan gershkovich and news of cluster munitions to ukraine, but mark meredith pushed him on the cocaine investigation revealing that when they said the drugs were found in a cubby hole near the situation room, jake sullivan revealing the room is not in use for months, it's

under construction, and the secure meetings were happening across the way. >> mike: and cluster munitions to ukraine, something you pressed jen psaki on last year, and now they are saying they are evening the playing field because the russians use them already. >> jacqui: and general keith kellogg, we were discussing earlier how this administration would make the shift from first arguing that it was potentially a war crime for russia to be using cluster munitions and today deciding to provide them to ukraine, and sounds like they have thought this through, saying that ukraine wants to use them on their own territory, which will have to be demined anyway, because russia is using them, and they are incentivizing to lower risk to their own civilians, any chance this decision pits nato allies against each other because the u.s. is pretty much alone in the

decision to support this kind of a bomb to ukraine. >> yeah, jacqui. good to be back with you. look, tempted to write a book "war for dummies," and wars are nasty, people are going to die in the war. i think when they talk about the unexploded ordnance rate, it's higher. there is a round called m4a31a round, 155 millimeter round, has acknowledged dud rate of about 14%. don't worry about that. worry about how you prosecute the war and the nato allies the same thing. look, wars are not pretty, people die in the wars and you want to prosecute to the best ability to win this war, and that's what we should be doing. we are late to the party, the united states, on providing some of this equipment. we were late providing the abrahams, we have not provided,

necessary air support they need, the reason why this is good, 5-1 advantage with conventional munitions, five times more effective and covers a broad area, and it's how you use it and you can actually use it in a certain area to seal your flanks to penetrate the russian lines, the deep bunkers they built, and the ukrainians are trying to get into a war of maneuver and they can't right now, they are unable to penetrate the lines and when you are on the defense you have a 3-1 advantage, so the defense is how you want to fight, if you can punch through it, able to get into the rear areas and fight a war of maneuver, i would not worry about frankly the uxo, unexploded ordnance, it will be

there, but worry about how you prosecute the fight and we are providing this, i believe we are providing it late, it will help them as long as they use it correctly and amount of artillery they use. >> mike: and they put in writing how the munitions would be used. thoughts on that. >> i would say don't worry about the writing. i would have told the ukrainians use it to the best you can do it regardless of how it's going to work out. war is not nice, it's a very dirty business to be involved in and what you are trying to do is win the fight, it's that simple and having a written document saying we are not going to use it here or not use it there, is actually foolish. i said i'm going to write a book called "war for dummies" and maybe give it to the white house. they are clearly not prosecuting the war the way war should be fought. you want to fight to win, it's that simple and they need to do

that by providing the necessary equipment in a very timely manner and we have not done that. >> jacqui: you are not alone general, and sounds like a shortage of other types of artillery motivated this. thanks for sharing your expertise. retired general keith kellogg, thanks so much. >> mike: moms for liberty setting sights on a nationwide effort to help elect school board candidates in 2024. they will start endorsing at the state board level and elected superintendents, part of a strategy to defendant parents' rights in the classroom but the media is painting it as a takeover of school boards, calling the group extreme and dangerous. caitlyn jenner, former california gubernatorial candidate and fox news contributor. welcome. >> my pleasure. >> mike: how the mainstream media refers to the moms for

liberty group and i'll get you to react to it. >> not since the daughters of the confederacy a conservative women's organization as influential. >> wrong side of history and present danger to the fellow americans. >> what is mom for liberty, right wing victories that launched in florida as so many conservative bad ideas do. >> mike: why are parents standing up for the children viewed as a hostile force? >> i think it's absolutely crazy. this started back at loudoun county, almost been like two years ago, and we remember all the parents standing up. i said back then one thing you don't do, and probably one of the most powerful political forces in the country are moms. don't upset mama bear, she will good to hell and back for her children and it started there, and out of that have come different groups and women for liberty is one of them, seems to

be the strongest one right now. and of course when you come out for parental rights the left has been doing this for years. i mean, let's -- when i was a kid i used to stand up every morning in school and say the pledge of allegiance. that went bye-bye years and years ago. and slowly the left has just chipped away at parental rights to where we are today, to where the parents don't have any rights. i applaud women for liberty and what they are doing. i think we are making the turn to get our schools back and get our children back, and of course they are going to have all kinds of issues with the media, and with the teachers' unions, with school boards, they got a big fight on their hands but these women seem to be the ones that are going to be fighting. >> mike: it's campaign season, a bunch of candidates running for president. ron desantis, the governor of florida, put out an attack ad against former president trump. mentioning you by name, let's

play a sample of that. >> caitlyn jenner were to walk into trump tower, and want to use the bathroom, you would be fine with her using any bathroom she chooses. >> that is correct. >> in the future, can transgender women compete in miss universe? >> yes. >> mike: your thoughts being mentioned in the attack ad. >> first of all, i've been trying to get on fox news for the last week to be able to respond to this but have not had an opportunity 'til right now, so thank you for doing that. but thank goodness for twitter. you can respond on twitter and it is immediate. and you know what we found, we had millions of people on our side. the log cabin republicans came out with a strong response against the video, even a couple of gay desantis influencers came out against the video.

honestly, desantis is dropping in the polls, and that's not how you win elections. mike huckabee said you don't win elections by subtraction, you win by additions. desantis was on tomi lahren to defend the video, he defended trump is the pioneer of radical gender ideology. that is so untrue, so unfair. any common sense person, any common sense person in the lgbtq community stands against radical gender ideology, and we all have to stand up against that. it's a big loss for desantis, a win for trump. >> mike: caitlyn jenner, thank you very much for your time. great to have your perspective on that. we'll be right back.

did you know most dish soaps don't remove all the grease, even with scrubbing? (whaaat?) i just cleaned those. try dawn platinum. it removes 99% of grease and food residue. that's why dawn is trusted

to save wildlife affected by oil. dawn platinum cleans to the squeak.

>> flight delays and

cancellations made the fourth of july travel more stressful for millions of americans. a woman had a meltdown over an imaginary person on a plane. watch this. >> i'm telling you, [bleep] off and there's a reason why i'm getting the [bleep] off. everyone can believe it or not. i don't give two [bleep] but i'm telling you right now, that mother [bleep] back there is not real. >> canal viral incident taking place as the plane was departing dallas. passengers were forced to deplain for three hours. one of the passengers:carrot top. joining us more now, hi! what happened? >> how are you? well, like you saw, the strange thing, you know, you don't look at people getting on the plane. they're getting on, boarding.

nobody looked to be out of sorts. then sounded -- someone from the back of the plane was yelling at somebody about their bag. as she got closer, she was next to me. she said that guy is not real. i thought it's a bad domestic fight. she brought this guy on a date and he's not real. he promised her a weekend and whatever. derailed and -- to get her off, we all had to get off. they thought there was something else going on. we sat off the plane about four hours. i got news that she tried getting back on the plane, which was fun. the whole news thing about imaginary person ended up the last couple days or so. i have never seen more people -- i don't think sully was interviewed this much about an airplane than people have been asking me every day like what happened. i don't know. >> carrottop, are you thinking what is she smoking and does this give you new material for

your next gig? >> well, definitely new material. it was just -- it did happen so fast. i thought there was just -- i don't know who she was -- she kept saying that guy is not real. i thought she was probably talking about me or my hair. the guy's hair is not real. everyone was calm and cool. i have to be honest, i've never been -- american airlines handled it perfectly. calmly got her off the plane. they spoke to us and got us off the plane. we missed the fireworks. that's about all. >> to be fair, we don't know what she had going on. she might have had a condition that she's suffering. but to your point, i wanted to say this about something like that to a man i've dated in the past. you're not real. it's funny you thought that, too. >> that's my first initial thought. i thought uh-oh, she brought some guy and didn't go well.

he's not real. turned out to be an imaginary person. >> carrot top -- >> we had a guy come to me and think i wasn't on the plane. why would i want to make that up when this happened? >> thank you for your time, carrot top. glad it was a safe trip. >> yeah. crazy. thanks. >> take care. >> it's a sport that has taken over america. pickle ball will continue growing filling space in vacant shopping malls. madison alworth is serving up this story live in stamford, connecticut. madison, what did that space used to be? >> so we're in the stamford town center, which is a mall. it looks like a mall. everything about it. you flip this way, what used to be a saks fifth avenue is now pickle ball america. this is the largest pickle ball arena in the northeast. one opens monday. once used to house clothes and toys and all of that.

now we have pickle ball. i want to bring in jay. this guy made it an. jay, tell me, how long did it take to convert this saks fifth avenue? >> we took over the mall about 4 1/2 months ago. we worked fast. 13 courts. >> you guys will have 27 when all is done. why choose a mall? why go this route for pickle ball? >> the mall was in the center of town. it had great bones. we could maximize the number of courts we could get. >> what last the reception been in stamford is not alone having empty stores in their mall. >> we've gotten calls, about ten a day from different malls and strip malls around the country that they want to copy what we're doing. >> i can see why. it's a ton of fun. you can play pickle ball. the sport has taken off. back to you.

>> thanks. good job on the pickle ball court. thank you, madison. have fun. >> she can do it all. she does an interview while playing pickle ball. i'm just hoping that the bosses don't expect that as a regular thing in the field. >> skills. >> i can't do that. all right. thanks for joining us. i'm jacqui heinrich. >> i'm mike emanuel. "the story" starts rights now. take it away, trace. have a great show. >> thank you. good afternoon. i'm trace gallagher in for martha maccallum. right now on "the story," the biden administration confirming the u.s. will send controversial cluster bombs to ukraine. a weapon that they once call "a potential war crime." each one can release hundreds of smaller bombs over a wide area to hit lots of targets at the very same time. they could also kill civilians. the white house says they will send weapons less likely to leave unexpected duds on the ground to lower the risk and adds the move does not bring the u.s. closer to