hi there, everyone. it is 4:00 in the east. there is breaking news this afternoon on the rapidly deteriorating situation in afghanistan. president biden saying he has no regrets about his decision to withdraw. now stands against the picture of a humanitarian kries that is threatens allies and their families and now risk being abandoned and killed. washington post reporting on collapse of the afghan military in the face of taliban aggression. senior officials and hundreds of afghan government forces in the country's west and south surrendered to the taliban overnight thursday. after the militants over ran three key cities inching the country closer to collapse. the biden administration forced to surge troops to the country to secure kabul and aid with the evacuation of embassy staff. "the new york times" reports, as the taliban capture capitals,

the pentagon is moving 3,000 marines to afghanistan and another 4,000 troops to evacuate the embassy and u.s. citizens in kabul. here is the urgency to leave afghanistan immediately using available commercial flight options. if you cannot afford to purchase an airline ticket, contact the u.s. embassy for information regarding a loan. given the security conditions and reduced staffing, the embassies ability to assist u.s. citizens in afghanistan is extremely limited. even within kabul. there are haunting echoes of the evacuation of saigon in 1975 being voiced by supporters and detractors of the current president and harsh critique of the treatment of our friends and allies in afghanistan. david ignatius boats, for president biden who had hoped for a orderly withdrawal if fr

afghanistan, the chaos carries the image he wanted to avoid. and if the saigon parallels century disturbing enough, the new yorker offered this, when i spoke on this with experts who have decades of afghan experience between them, about the weeks events, they were contemplating more apocalyptic. full of determination to build a modern functioning state out of the post 9/11 rebel. or perhaps al qaeda isis 3.0. the possibilities from large scale human rights to a new center for jihadist terrorism is blood curdling. the situation in afghanistan and what that means for u.s. allies as well as afghan women and girls is where we start this hour. ozzy media, and contributor

catty kay and also here today former state department official and current contributor rick stengel as back and mark jacobson is here. he served in kabul as a deputy nato representative and was a senior adviser to ash carter. mark, i start with you. your reaction to what is unfolding. >> it is really hard to find words. i said just the other day that my concern is that this is not just going to look like syria but more like rwanda. i think the actions of the administration right now are a bit shameful. and i only say that given what we've seen in the last 24 hours. the president has owned this. and he made a decision that he views is the right one. but the disassemble and the refusal to use words like abandonment and evacuation and that is what it going on says that people are not comfortable with this decision. i'm also very concerned about

the speed at which the taliban are reretaking the country and i wonder was this a policy failure, where intelligence assessments were clear that it is going to be this quick or did we miss something entirely? >> well, obviously the idea that we might have missed something, days before the 20th anniversary of 9/11, is particularly ominous. let me show the president's address to the nation a few weeks ago on this topic, rick stengel. >> the taliban is not the north vietnamese army. they're not remotablely comparable in terms of capability. there is no circumstance where you see people lifted off the roof of a embassy of the united states from afghanistan. it is not at all comparable. >> do you stand by those records, rick stengel, and do you think president biden does? >> i would agree with what he said.

i mean first of all, i want to pay tribute to the men and women of the u.s. military who over the last 20 years had spent blood and treasure in afghanistan. it was a noble mission. as mark said. but what we're seeing here is a tragedy. it is not an american tragedy, it is an afghan tragedy. and after 20 years, we thought they would be able to defend themselves, we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars there and it hasn't quite worked out as we thought. if it is just the speed that this is happening, then that is an optical problem. but the real problem is the one that president biden has said which is we're not there to nation build. the taliban are stronger now than they've been any time since 2001, that didn't happen under his watch. and he's speaking for the american people when he says that americans do not want their

sons and daughters to go to afghanistan and die to try to preserve the regime that is there and so it is i very, very hard decision. you're sitting in the situation room and presented with really unpleasant choices and i think he's made the best choice and he stood by it. >> i don't think anyone is dedebating the decision to leave. i think what mark was alluding to was the words. let me read it again. the taliban is not the south of the north vietnamese army. they're not remotely comparable in terms of capability. there is no circumstance for you to see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy of the united states from afghanistan. it is not at all comparable. david ignatius disagrees with that. susan glasser reports and mark stands by the comparison to rwanda. i'm not debating whether or not we go. frankly both candidates for president of the united states

of america agreed on very, very little. but they were both for a complete withdrawal from afghanistan. i think we're here today talking about how we leave. and whether it is honorable or disgraceful, rick? >> i mean, if you agree that we need to leave, and you agree that the mission was accomplished long ago, that we're not there to nation build, then i don't understand what is dishonorable about it. is it happening faster than we would like? yes. but it is still the right decision and i think the american people regard it as the right decision. i don't understand the question. i don't see the analogy to vietnam as comparable. >> let me play for all of you. >> rick -- >> go ahead, mark. >> i'm sorry. rick, i think you're missing something here and it is hard for me to disagree with you. but there are -- >> everybody else does. i don't know why -- >> there are ways to exit that wouldn't have exacerbated the problems there.

for example, the commitment to withdrawal could have been coupled with a commitment to continue to use u.s. air power in support of the afghans and not just with deadline. we've always known and said that is the capability the ansf don't have. that would have allowed for withdrawal that was a bit more ordered, measured and giving people time to deal with the issues of refugees, to perhaps give the ansf a chance for the afghan government a chance along with our air power to force the taliban back into the table for some sort of durable cease-fire. and you said we hadn't accomplished a lot. i think of how hard the obama administration worked to try and get the taliban to the table. they're at the table. the military pressure was working and then we left. >> go ahead and respond, rick. >> well, they're not at table at the moment. they were at the table during the trump administration and the

trump administration made a deal with the taliban that was a very weak deal that wasn't strong at all, that didn't have any claws in it that forced the taliban to do that. they violated almost every aspect of the deal since 2020 when it was done. so biden was left with a terrible hand. and there was -- >> why did he double down on it? >> doubling down -- >> why did he double down on it? >> again. doubling down on the hand strikes me as if he was going to be sending more troops to try to keep the taliban at bay. as opposed to saying look we've made a decision to have an honorable withdrawal here and we're going to pursue it. the speed with which it happens seems to me, that is an optical issue. that is not about a substantial issue. >> there are serious questions about whether he had bad intelligence and -- or i don't think that anyone thinks that

putting the president of the united states out there and the secretary of state out there to say we have 60 to 90 days and i talk to former senior intelligence official who said if the taliban haven't taken over by the 20th anniversary of 9/11 he would be extremely surprised. nobody predicted this. if they did, they didn't share it with the american people and they're suffering from the sense that they haven't leveled with the public or our allies. katie kay, i want to bring you in. this is one of our interpreters struggling to get his family and himself out of afghanistan. >> the secure situation is getting worse on the ground and the taliban is making a lot of progress there. so specially with my family, as you see the progress they get worried and worried, like every time. and they keep calling me every hour of the day and night and they just want to know about their fate, how they're going to get out of afghanistan or are they going to become the next target for the taliban. so far i have not heard any

feedback from the -- as far as pulling my families out of afghanistan and bringing them into a safe haven of the united states. >> katie kay, nobody believes that this part of our withdrawal has gone smoothly. what are you hearing? >> yeah. i mean, when you use words like optical, rick, it makes it sound like this doesn't matter what is happening on the ground there. that it is just somehow a communications problem for the administration. and yet there is a crisis, a humanitarian crisis looming in afghanistan. we're seeing it at the moment in kabul with refugees sleeping on the streets and women already facing huge repercussions with people who work for the american administration facing potentially huge repercussions with taliban leaders saying the people who worked for the afghan government or for the u.s. forces there, they didn't give up western values and therefore they deserve to be killed and you're facing the prospect of a blood bath. this is more than optical. this has serious ramifications. first and foremost for the people in afghanistan.

and admits what is a tragedy there, perhaps it is callus to talk about the influence around the world. but when the u.s. seemed to abandon allies, that has a consequence for the united states and for u.s. security. clearly it did. you have british mp's in parliament looking at a non-u.s.-led mission to stop a humanitarian disaster and a full scale civil war. allies of the united states, close allies of the united states are now effectively saying the u.s. cannot be relied on because of is happening in afghanistan. that is a problem for america. it is clearly first and foremost a problem for people in afghanistan. 3,000 troops were holding the peace there. they were making life tolerable for thousands of afghanistans and america have lost forces on a large scale over the course of the last couple of years.

so i think there are serious questions about whether this was the right moment for america to pull out. clearly questions about the intelligence. and questions about what this does to america's reputation in terms of whether it stands by its allies and abandons those people who have put themselves at great risk to help american forces in afghanistan. >> katie, i spoke to two senior officials and admiral john kirby is our next guest and i look forward to him, but both things can't be true. either they have a failure of intelligence and information on the ground and that is scary because the whole reason to leave was 9/11 won't ever happen again or it certainly won't be planned in afghanistan. or they didn't level with the public. what does your reporting suggest the answer to that is. >> if the failure was intelligence and we've heard pentagon officials and white house officials say that afghanistan will not once again

become a sanctuary for al qaeda and they are confident that afghanistan will not become a place for al qaeda. but if they underestimate it, the talibans' ability to sweep through afghanistan. what else do we not understand about afghanistan and the pros pecks of al qaeda to once again use afghanistan as a launch pad. >> and i think that that is the anxiety. if we're again underestimating the taliban and if the country has again become opaque to us. >> just understanding the country in the situation, as well as we have been saying that we have been understanding it. >> so let me put up a map that shows how quickly the taliban have recaptured all of this territory. rick, i want to come back to you. catty mentioned the use of the word optics. do you want to change your word choice or do you stand by this, that is an optical problem.

>> no, what i meant is that the optical problem was the speed with which it is happening. this is a terrible situation and not what anyone would have wanted. and by the way, the administration has talked over and over about its efforts to help translators, to help humanitarian workers and those of us, i'm sure all of us are on the the screen have been to afghanistan and saw the incredible work that afghans did and service of american troops and american humanitarian organizations. yes, we have to stand by them. we have to do our best and we're trying to. that is a terrible situation. but, again, i come back to this idea that if we agree that our time in afghanistan has come to an end, after 20 years, instead of fighting a 20 year war, we were fighting 20 one-year wars and it is time to withdraw. they were advising president obama to do back in 2009 and

2010 and it is the right decision and we have to extricate ourselves in the best and honorable way possible. >> mark i want to put up a treat that you put up earlier that is upsetting and searing. about why we were there. this is what we fought for. that is what we're abandoning. i want to show a tweet that has been removed from twitter but it was captured by axios before it was taken down. jonathan swan tweets this. from a state department official captures a private feelings of many others. the official is molly montgomery and her tweet reads, i woke up with a heavy heart thinking about the afghan women and girls i work with during my time in kabul. they were the beneficiaries of the gains that we made and now they stand to lose everything. and now we are powerless to protect them. it is not just, you know, women

and girls are no longer equal. the taliban is brutal. they will likely be murdered. they've already in provinces that the taliban has taken back lost their ability to use phones and cell phones. speak to the price they'll pay for the way we're leaving? >> they're going to lose their live. if they're not married off to the taliban, they're going to be kept in their homes. they're going to be punished for minor violations of what the taliban's interpretation of sharia law. what really is heartbreaking here is that so much was done to put afghanistan on a path where the next generations could modernize and liberalize and i use that term loosely, i understand it may not translate quite well for the afghans, but to give themselves an opportunity to be a viable nation with a vibrant economy,

the culture that was like it had back in the '60s and '70s if you look at the pictures there. if you want to withdraw and there are certain things that you need to do. and part of that means putting in place the mechanisms so that the withdrawal does not turn into a scramble for the exits. and i just think that is where the biden administration fails. they failed to anticipate the psychological impact of the president's words. president biden when he speaks, the afghans listened and that was we are leaving. no military support, no air support, we'll throw some money at you and we wish you luck and we feel for you. but we're out of here. and the psychological impact of that, i think, contributed to again the pace of the speed of the collapse we're seeing. >> catty, i want to bring you back in and read you this

reporting from the new york time. as u.s. leaves afghanistan history suggests it may struggle to stay out. many factors that contributed to the islamic state rise are present in afghanistan adding that policymakers would be naive to think that such problems would not spill over borders even if the u.s. wants to disengage the rise of forces such as isis and the taliban, forces that are radical and able to de stabilize the whole region and they will eventually affect u.s. interest. i wonder if we have been talking about these issues, i worked on them and you've covered them for a long time. i wonder if you feel that this is an ominous way to depart? >> i'm honesty not sure what has changed in terms of afghanistan's likelihood of becoming a sanctuary for extremist groups in the last 20

years. we know our reporting on ground has shown for the last year and a half that isis has been making end roads into afghanistan. that they are there. that they are present there. now the taliban may only be focused on afghanistan and not have international objectives and goals. but isis certainly does and al qaeda certainly does and those groups are already present in the country. and with the collapse of the u.s. forces leaving under the afghan government forces, i just don't see how this changes. you look back, nicolle, it is hard to say america has been there with other forces from around the world for 20 years. what is really been achieved? we gave afghan women and girls the prospect of some sort of freedom for 20 years. and then we took it away again and then it is gone. we've given the country, made it

inhospitable to al qaeda and isis and then we took it away again. all for several hundreds of billions of dollars and american lives lost and international lives lost. i think it is very hard as we sit here now to say this was not a huge failure both for the united states and the foreign forces that were there and for the people of afghanistan. >> catty, mark and rick, i'm going to ask you to stay put. after the break, a very short one, i promise, john kirby will be our guest to give us a view into the biden administration's perspective on everything that has happened in the last 24 hours. with this hour, they are still standing by every aspect. afghan withdrawal plan that is prompting at this hour international outcry and perhaps an impending humanitarian calamity. plus the sergeant at arms in texas is descending on the representatives still boycotting the legislative session to block

that voting legislation from becoming law. and the strictest vaccine mandates we have seen to date are being enacted in the city by the bay. san francisco and more cities could be set to follow suit. all of those stories and more on "deadline: white house" after a quick break. don't go anywhere. quick break. don't go anywhere. number one in reliability, 16 times in a row. most awarded for network quality, 27 times in a row. proving once again that nobody builds networks like verizon. that's why we're building 5g right, that's why there's only one best network. i'm so glad you're ok, sgt. houston. this is sam with usaa. do you see the tow truck? yes, thank you, that was fast. sgt. houston never expected this to happen. or that her grandpa's dog tags would be left behind. but that one call got her a tow and rental...

...paid her claim... ...and we even pulled a few strings. making it easy to make things right: that's what we're made for. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. get a quote today. so...i know you and george were struggling usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. with the possibility of having to move. how's that going? well we found a way to make bathing safer with a kohler walk-in bath. it has the lowest step-in of any bath. it has handrails, a wide door, and textured surfaces. so it gives you peace of mind.

and you would love the heated backrest -and the whirlpool jets -and the bubblemassage. and it was installed quickly and conveniently by a kohler-certified installer. a kohler-authorized dealer walked us through every step in the process and made us feel completely comfortable in our home. and, yes, it's affordable. looking good, george! we just want to spend as much time as possible in our home, and with our grandkids. they're going to be here any minute for their weekly spa day. ooh, that bubblemassage! have fun! stay in the home and life you've built for years to come. call... to receive 50% off installation of your kohler walk-in bath. financing is available for qualified purchasers.

we are certainly concerned by the speed with which the taliban has been moving. and as we said from the very beginning, that this is -- and it still is a moment for afghan national security and defense

forces as well as their political leadership. no outcome has to be inevitable here. >> that was john kirby a couple of hours ago sticking to the president's message there on afghanistan as the president articulated this week. so this is now in the hands of the afghan leaders. kirby is speaking today as the u.s. has announced that 3,000 troops will head to kabul to begin evacuations of the u.s. embassy in the capitol. s it beginning as the taliban continue to take capitals across the country. and the department of defense secretary john kirby. thank you for spending some time with us. >> thank you. >> tell us what is happening on ground right now. what do you know that we don't? >> well, i mean, clearly and i've been watching, nicolle, you have been covering the advances that the taliban continue to make here. the situation in afghanistan continues to deteriorate from a security perspective which is one of the reasons why mindful of that and in prudent planning

we're going to hear the defense department help our state department colleagues as they now begin to draw down some of their civilian personnel in kabul. so we're watching this very, very closely. and we continue to have the authorities and we continue to have the capabilities to assist the afghan forces in the field through air strikes where and when feasible. so that is also continuing. >> will they be used though just to help get everybody down what is been described as the longest road to the airport or will they be used to help them retake some of the provinces that they've lost? >> the forces that we're flowing in now, the 3,000 or so, and most should be in place by the end of the weekend, are going with a very narrow focus, very narrow mission and that is to safeguard the draw down of our civilian personnel in kabul and to help with the application process, to help facilitate visa applicants as they begin to process out of the country.

that is the narrow focus. it is about safeguarding the people there at the airport and also our operations at the airport. >> and in your briefing today you described the speed with which the taliban is taking over and we've got a map at how much territory they've actually taken over. it is concerning. because the intelligence didn't predict it or why is that concerning? >> it is concerning because for two reasons. one, there is an element of time here. and i mention that earlier. the speed with which they're doing it. certainly that is deeply concerning. but also we're concerned because we're not seeing the level of resittance out of the afghan national security forces that you would expect to see given the advances that the taliban are making. so it is two fold. but i'll tell, it is not like we weren't watching this or aware of this. even before the biden administration took office, the taliban was making advances, certainly that has accelerated in recent weeks. we're not arguing against that. but it is not like we haven't

been mindful of that, been watching that and been preparing for that. i talked about today, this plan to send the 3,000 troops in, those plans weren't just created in the last 48 hours. we've been contingency planning for potential outcomes here in afghanistan for a long time. so we've been mindful of this. >> when did the planning start to get interpreters out? they seem anxious there is not time to get them and their families to safety. >> we've moved several thousand out of the country. we know there are many thousands more with families that are going to be applying for the process to get out. we are prepared to help with that. i talked about that earlier today. we could move thousands of people out of the international airport once we get the prigs up and going and we'll be able to do that and the planning for this goes back many, many weeks. we know particularly here at the defense department that we have a moral obligation to help those who have helped us and we're

note walking away from that. >> you use the word moral obligation, a colleague at the state department feels like we've abandoned our moral obligation made to afghan women and girls. how do you feel? >> i've been in afghanistan. i did a short stint there as well and i think a lot of people here at the defense department feel strongly about the service that we all rendered in afghanistan. there was a purpose to go. and that purpose was to make sure that afghanistan couldn't be a safe haven for attacks upon the homeland. and if you look back 20 years, we're heading into the 20th anniversary of 9/11. and there hasn't been one, not of that level and emanating from afghanistan and the president had to make a tough decision as all commander-in-chiefs have to do. and one of them so to make sure that we can't let it be a safe haven again and how do you do that without perpetuating another 20 years of war. after 20 years of war there is only so much progress that you

could facilitate and the president made a tough decision that it was time to end this war. and by the way, we inherited a may 1st deadline that he very smartly tried to extend so that we could make sure that our draw down was done in a safe and orderly way. be we remain still think there is space and time for settlement to occur and remain committed to a by lateral effort with afghan forces and it is not less comprehensive from over the horizon. >> what is the message today to the veterans of the war in afghanistan they see the taliban, as you said in i concerning -- with concerning speed retake the country that they fought for 20 years to make sure could not become a safe haven to plan another 9/11. >> i've learned a lot. i'm a veteran myself. and i will not speak for all veterans. i will not do that. they each veteran of this war is

entitled to their oeb views and their opinions an memories of it and how they want to process the end of this war for the united states. and i want to respect that. what i could tell you is that the goal to go in there, to prevent afghanistan from becoming a safe haven, we were able to do that over the last 20 years. yes, there was great progress made and now the afghans have an opportunity, they have an opportunity after 0 years to come together, to lead. this is really going to be about leadership and whatever the outcomes are, nicolle, and therp not inevitable, whatever they are, we'll look back on it and know that leadership, political and military leadership by the afghans themself, that is what makes the sense. >> john kirby, i have a sense of what is on your plate on a normal day. this is not normal times. i appreciate that you made time to talk to us today. >> yes, ma'am. glad to be here. >> rick, i come to you first, your reaction. >> it is nice to have a serious

spokesperson back in the pentagon again. while i disagree with some of his choices terms, kirby has laid out clearly what the u.s. is prepared to do but it leaves some questions in terms of what else are we prepared to do. for example, john made very clear that there is the capability to provide air support for the afghans. if we want to get the afghans out in terms of the siv applicants then we need to use that air power. it is not just the capability, use it. the taliban are the edges of kabul province. victory after victory, where is the air power and why is it not being used. and secondly, i disagree with the notion that al qaeda is not going to have a resurgence or the ability to grow and isises well in afghanistan. i believe that secretary austin himself said that the estimates are within two years al qaeda might have the capability to use

afghanistan for international attacks. >> yeah, and i mean, rick stengel, john kirby said the accomplishment was for 20 years, another 9/11 style attack wasn't launched from afghanistan. that is because we were there making sure that it won't -- with that map shows so clearly didn't occur that the taliban didn't take over. and my question for you, rick stengel, is if you're the taliban, what are you planning for the anniversary of september 11th? >> well, look, it is very concerning obviously. nobody wants afghanistan to be like what it was before 9/11 as a terrorist space. but i come back to something that we talked about before. the taliban are mostly a local organization. they're a path to afghanistan organization. they want to take over afghanistan. they're not an international terrorist group in the way that al qaeda is or isis is. and so the idea that you have

this kind of international terrorist organization running afghanistan i think is a bit of a misconception. i don't -- i'm not privy to the intelligence or what the secretary said about isis or al qaeda reconstituting themselves. but afghanistan has not been for 20 years and people don't anticipate that it will be, a terrorist haven the way there are other places in the world that are terrorist havens, where, by the way, we don't have troops on ground. that's historically been the situation for us. is how we've tried to stop terrorism through the group, not through having boots on ground but through intercepting it before it begins. >> catty kay, such a braid of i think painful sort of ptsd inspiring issues for the american military, for american allies, for the afghan allies who helped us, our interpreters for the women and girls and anyone that is worked on this

issue or covered this issue, but you said something earlier that is at the heart of this. it is about america's word and the world is watching. and i wonder with that vantage point what you think the world is thinking today. >> i think they're thinking this is amess and america is leaving in disgrace and without much honor and not looking very powerful. if you're sitting in moscow or in beijing tonight, this is not america's finest hour. and any time america shows weakness, any time a white house is having to listen to comparisons with the vaccination of the embassy in saigon, however accurate or inaccurate those might be is not a good day for an american administration. and if you think they're not watching this from moscow or beijing with a certain amount of glee, they're your very much mistaken. >> thank you. there were no three people better suited to have this

conversation today than all three of you. thank you. up next for us, republicans in texas sending the sergeant at arms after those democrats who are holding up the passage of restricting voting rights legislation. we'll bring you the latest on the standoff as it stands this hour next. e standoff as it stans hour next. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

hey google, turn up the heat. ♪ ♪ ♪ ugh, there's that cute guy from 12c. -go talk to him. -yeah, no. plus it's not even like he'd be into me or whatever. ♪♪ ♪ this could be ♪ hi. you just moved in, right? i would love to tell you about all the great savings you can get for bundling your renter's and car insurance with progressive. -oh, i was just -- -oh, tammy. i found your retainer in the dryer. ♪ -oh, i was just -- -oh, tammy. someone once told me, that i should get used to people staring.

so i did. it's okay, you can stare. when you're a two-time gold medalist, it comes with the territory.

republicans in texas are ramp up the fight for voter suppression there. the sergeant at arms went

door-to-door to attempt to serve warrants at homes to achieve a quorum to pass the bill. no arrests were made and they are unlikely to have a quorum. joining our conversation, the reverend al sharpton host of politics nation and the president of the national action network and from "the washington post" and political analyst donna edwards is here. rev, i know you call these folks in the trenches with you, fighting for voter rights legislation, but the truth is their strategy is still working. >> their strategy is definitely working. they're keeping the house and the senate in texas from reaching a quorum even though the senate after the filibuster went ahead with the texas. but they're keeping the limelight and spotlight on the issue. and it is working because now we're seeing even in washington, there are serious discussion

about coming back, dealing with voting rights when the recess is over. and certainly as we escalate with the big national march august 28th, all of this will continue to keep this in the national eyes of the public and say why are we dealing with restrictive voting laws. so i think that the texas democrats and others are doing what is right. and i think that the republicans that are in the senate and the house in texas are beginning to play the role that many segregationists played in the '60s. they have become so insensitive and so emotional about trying to move the restrictions that they're losing touch with where public sentiment is. >> donna, i started the show yesterday on the filibuster and the efforts of the texas democrats. and i think that the rev is the activist and the visionary.

i come from the dirtier side of politics, the tactics and the operational side. think they're shaming national democrats. i think chuck schumer looks terrible compared to the democrats in texas who are in the minority and have gone -- i describe it as coloring outside of the lines, they've risked their health and stood 15 hours for a filibuster that ended the way it did and the passage of the republican bill. why aren't democrats in washington who are in the majority using any of these tools? >> well i refuse to answer that question for you because i think it is really despicable that senate democrats have not stepped up to fill in this gap and leaning on the shoulders of the texas democrats who are courageous and understand what is at stake and i think senate democrats need to come to the table on this. and really, if you look at what is happening around the country,

unless senate democrats get in there and do the hard work of creating voting rights legislation that pushes back on these state laws and that really enables state legislators to do their work and in states like texas, then democrats are going to bear the brunt of that. and so i can't answer why it is that senate democrats haven't stepped up and i do think it is really shameful that a couple of senate democrats are standing in the way of doing what is right to protect the voting rights of people in texas and across the country. >> you know, rev, when i worked in politics as a staffer we have an expression, you can't be more up ses than the principle and i feel like the ex republican at the table i can't be more upset with the democratic party except it is not fostering domestic terrorism and interesting in

combatting vaccine disinformation. so i'm rooting for them. but why isn't you on the front lines and corporations who were very quick to send out messages talking about how inclusive their products and services were after george floyd was killed and why are not as concerned about when all of the customers and services are from community of color could suddenly lose the right to vote. why isn't there a big tent political campaign to push back against 389 voter suppression bills? >> i think you're right. and i think the question you raise is a question that many of us are raising. but we're raising it while we're mobilizing and moving forward. we're going to have a big tent. but we're not as angry and as threatened as we are by this in terms of our rights being threatened, we have to be proactive. we can't just sit and mull in our anger and stew in our outrage. we have to organize. we must remember, nicolle, the

voting rights act in the first place in '65 didn't come from the senate or the white house. it came from people up. and we focused that energy on making sure that the public, the masses are mobilized. that is the way we're going to be able to get this done. if we defend the democrats in the senate, the fact of the matter is, anger is, they're not even looking at the fact that they will not be in the majority if they don't join with us. >> right. >> they will be the minority in the senate and in the house unless they do this. so if you don't want to do it for the civil rights reasons of blacks and browns if, you don't want to do it because it is morally right, you should have at least enough political self-preservation to do this because if they could do what they're doing, they will wipe the democrats out next year. so if you don't want to fight for me, fight for yourself. but we're all drowning in the same ocean. >> so, i'm going to make a shirt

for myself that said stewing in my anger. because that is how i feel about this issue and i'm just sitting day after day stewing in my anger. i'll wear it. the rev al sharpton, thank you. donna is sticking around because up next, america's largest cities are looking to impose stricter vaccine requirements since hospitalizations spike in several largely unvaccinated countries -- states across the country. that is next. tes across the country. atth is next

at pnc bank, we believe in the power of the watch out. that's why we created low cash mode, the financial watch out that gives you the options and extra time needed to help you avoid an overdraft fee. it's one way we're making a difference. low cash mode on virtual wallet from pnc bank. low cash mode on hey lily, i need a new wireless plan for my business, but all my employees need something different. oh, we can help with that. okay, imagine this... your mover, rob, he's on the scene and needs a plan with a mobile hotspot. we cut to downtown, your sales rep lisa has to send some files, asap! so basically i can pick the right plan for each employee... yeah i should've just led with that... with at&t business... you can pick the best plan for each employee and only pay for the features they need. if you have this... consider adding this. an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan from unitedhealthcare. medicare supplement plans help by paying some of what medicare doesn't... and let you see any doctor. any specialist.

anywhere in the u.s. who accepts medicare patients. so if you have this... consider adding this. call unitedhealthcare today for your free decision guide. ♪ ♪all by yourself.♪ you look a little lost. i can't find my hotel. oh. oh! ♪♪ this is not normal. no. ♪♪ so? ♪♪ right? go with us and find millions of flexible options, all in our app. expedia. it matters who you travel with. [peaceful music plays] [soft cymbal crash]

♪ ♪ [peaceful music plays] this bathroom is too cute! this one is too cool! [ grunts ] this one is just right. [ grunts ] oh! find your just right at kohler.com.

at this point in the pandemic a surging, almost entirely preventable pandemic of the unvaccinated, a growing number of cities and schools and now the united states supreme court have rejected the idea that anything is more important and more necessary than life saving vaccine policies. yesterday san francisco announced the country's most stringent vaccine mandate yet. they will require proof of full vaccination for all customers and all staff at indoor restaurants, at bars, entertainment venues and gyms. that starts one week from today. san francisco going a step further than new york city's required proof of at least one dose. it is a matter of protecting our citizens. nearly 80% of the eligible population in san francisco is fully vaccinated, and protecting their businesses from more closures, many that have already started to require proof of vaccination from their patrons. joining our conversation,

dr. irwin red lenner, founding director of the national center of disaster preparedness and msnbc public health analyst. i have family still in san francisco and the first thing i thought was, well, everything will stay open there. my friends' kids will stay in school, my sister will go to the gym, everything will stay open. what does it look like sort of from a public health vantage point to see the country bifurcate, vaccinated states and communities will have a very different sort of nine to twelve months ahead than the unvaccinated ones. >> yeah, nicolle. this is kind of an incredible moment because we're watching here the toxic, partisan politics inject itself into what should be a strictly public health response to this major crisis. i don't know what politicians have to do and why we've gotten to a point where there is such a

bifurcation. there shouldn't be. what happens in florida or mississippi, alabama or california or new york should be exactly the same. we still have the same variant running rampant all over the country, and it is very clear that it is the unvaccinated that are perpetuating this crisis in really terrible ways. but here we are, and i think we are going to have to unfortunately keep riding this until we get every state on board with implementing rational policies, which include right now, i hope, mandatory vaccinations in more places than we have right now and making sure that people are wearing masks and keeping separated where appropriate, nicolle. >> the idea of a vaccine mandate was bolstered by a decision from the united states supreme court yesterday. let me read a little bit of that context because i wonder how it will be covered on right wing media. this could be really powerful if they're committed to getting their viewers and their sort of right-leaning institutions or

businesses that follow them to protect themselves. this is from "the new york times." eight students had sued the university of indiana saying the vaccine requirement violated their constitutional rights to bodily integrity, autonomy and medical choice. justice amy comey barrett who oversees the federal appeals court in question turned down the students' request for emergency relief without comment. she acted on her out referring the application to the full court and she did not ask the university for a response. both of these moves were indications that the application was not on solid legal footing. so, you know, anyone that sent a kid to school and had to submit their vaccination records knows there are all sorts of things you can't do without getting vaccinated, but this seemed like at this moment an important decision. >> yes, a really important decision, and maybe a surprising one to some people. but i think at the end of the day most of the supreme court justices do want to do the right thing, and here it is absolutely clear. they're getting to mandated vaccines is an essential part of

the strategy to have us really get rid of this horrible scourge that's over all of our heads. i got a ferociously aggressive letter from columbia university basically saying if i couldn't prove that i was vaccinated by september 2nd, don't bother walking on campus, and you could be punished with up to, you know, docking my pay and dismissing us. so i think it is -- crisis for as many institutions as possible to mandate vaccines. this nonsense about freedom of choice when it comes to vaccinating in a public health crisis doesn't make any sense. i'm so glad that that particular supreme court justice did the right thing and did it immediately without discussion basically, saying, this is not founded and you can't do it. so let's move on. >> when you look at sort of other public health movements, do you think we're at a tipping point in terms of sort of the legal permission structure and the public support? you know, how do we think -- what would be the dam-breaking

moment for vaccine mandates in this country? >> well, i think for one thing i really wish, you know, the biden administration would take on a much stronger position about the mandating of vaccines. i think they have more authority to do that than even myself previously thought. there have been many instances where the federal government is able to mandate vaccines even beyond what the president has already done, which is to mandate it for federal employees, for members of different agencies, for members of the military. there are powers that the white house has to really expand this mandate agenda over and above what the states want or don't want to do, and i think even if not doing that, nicolle, i really would wish the president and administration would take on a very strong, aggressive bully pulpit position and try to push everybody to accept these mandates. every institution, every state and so on. >> yeah, that's interesting, to

treat the messages to people that run institutions because so far it has been to the citizen, protect yourself, protect your family, speaking to the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, but that's important advice. just to the white house's effectiveness, i saw white house chief of staff ron klain tweeted earlier today this has been one of the highest days of vaccination, so something, either the mandates or the sort of hospital reports from the deep south, something is getting through to some people. so, dr. redlenner, we will continue to turn to you until it is getting through to all people. thank you for spending time with us today. the next hour of "deadline: white house" starts after a quick break. don't go anywhere. we're just getting started. any. we're just getting started has always been about. so as your business changes, we're changing with it. with e-commerce that runs at the speed of now. next day and two-day shipping nationwide. same day shipping across town.

returns right from the doorstep, and deliveries seven days a week. it's a whole new world out there. let's not keep it waiting. this past year has felt like a long, long norwegian winter. it's a whole new world out there. but eventually, with spring comes rebirth. everything begins anew. and many of us realize a fundamental human need to connect with other like-minded people. welcome back to the world. viking. exploring the world in comfort... once again. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ hey google, turn up the heat. ♪ ♪ ♪

what happens when we welcome change? we can make emergency medicine possible at 40,000 feet. instead of burning our past for power, we can harness the energy of the tiny electron. we can create new ways to connect. rethinking how we communicate to be more inclusive than ever. with app, cloud and anywhere workspace solutions, vmware helps companies navigate change. faster. vmware. welcome change.

♪ ♪ on the ground women are being killed. they're being targeted for doing what we asked them to do, what we encouraged them to do for 20 years, to join civil society, to get educated, to leave their villages, defy their fathers. don't we have a moral responsibility to do something for these people? just today the white house repeated the president is not going to change his position. people are being beheaded and that's coming from embassy kabul. >> andrea, we do have a solemn responsibility to the people of afghanistan, including the people who have work very closely with us over the years. in fact, the united states government is in part responsible for the tremendous gains that the afghan people have been able to achieve over the past 20 years. we have led the charge on every front to do all we can to ensure those gains are not squandered.

>> hi, again, everyone. it is 5:00 in the east at a critical moment for the biden administration with, as you just heard, questions swirling around this nation's moral responsibility when it comes to the collapse of afghanistan's government in the face of an insurgent taliban following the withdrawal of u.s. troops there. the associated press is reporting that the insurgents now hold half of afghanistan's 34 provincial capitals and control more than two-thirds of the country. the taliban's rapid offensive has them closing in on afghanistan's capital, kabul, where biden is now deploying 3,000 troops to help evacuate the staff from the u.s. embassy is located. in "the new york times" it is warned kabul could fall in as little as 30 days. "the washington post" writes, the moment highlighted the enormous gamble biden has taken in drawing down a conflict he believes has lasted too long and cost too many lives. the taliban's strikingly rapid onslaught is bolstering the appearance that the united states lost or gave up in

afghanistan, a prospect from which americans have historically recoiled. yet president biden is standing firm in his decision to end america's forever war. that's despite concerns over the safety and security of those left behind. the u.n. report from just a few weeks ago found this. quote, more women and children were killed and wounded in afghanistan in the first half of 2021 than in the first six months of any year since the united nations began systematically keeping count. determining america's responsibility as the situation deteriorates in afghanistan is where we start this hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends and special guests. pennsylvania democratic congresswoman and air force veteran, chrissy houlahan is here with us. john heilemann is back, executive producer of "the circus" as well as the host of the "hell and high water"

podcast. and contributing columnist to "the washington post" donna edwards is here. congresswoman houlihan, if you could start with your sense and what you have been told is happening on the ground. >> sure. thank you for having us to have this really important conversation this evening. listen, i think what we're hearing and what we are seeing happening on the ground in afghanistan is not surprising, unfortunately, but the speed with which it is occurring maybe a little more quickly than we had expected. so we have an obligation at this point in time as you have been reporting to really think hard about what our next steps are. is our next step to step in more militarily as we have seen with the president sending in 3,000 troops for the -- for the embassy or is it to continue to work on the other tools that are in our arsenal, the things that are more traditionally called soft power, those things like diplomacy or humanitarian efforts, working with our allies as well to make sure we can hopefully stop the progress of the taliban and it overrunning

kabul as you have mentioned. >> we spoke with john kirby in the last hour, pentagon spokesman. at his briefing today he described the speed with which the taliban is taking over provinces as concerning. president biden gave a speech to the nation in july where he promised it would never resemble saigon. are you so sure? >> so my father is a vietnam veteran, and so, you know, those words mean something to me and to my family, and i am worried. i think the american people should be worried, but i also think that we do have opportunities and time. maybe we think about issues and opportunities like close air support for kabul or for the afghan army. we also have opportunities to try to think about how we can be working more effectively with our allies. so i'm not quite there yet, but i do share the alarm and the sense of alarm that you are expressing as well. >> donna edwards, i want to go

clear. david ignatius makes the comparison, he is someone who is read widely around the west wing i am led to believe, and i think when he draws that parallel it means something to this administration. what should they be most concerned about? i know you have made several trips to afghanistan. obviously the former first lady, laura bush, took on this issue and spent a lot of time in afghanistan as well. what are your thoughts today? >> well, i mean it is deeply saddening. i think especially when you think about the progress that women and girls have made over the last 20 years and that it, you know, feels as though we have taken a 20-year step backwards when it concerns their progress, their education, their integration into civil society. at the same time americans have grown weary of our engagement in afghanistan, and i think that president biden in this move is reflecting that weariness. if we are able to maintain a

presence in our embassy there as has been thought, i think that there could be a way that we could use those tools that the congresswoman has described to figure out a way that we can continue to be engaged in a constructive way in afghanistan and its future. but this is all just so deeply disturbing, and i think about the women and girls with whom i worked over the last decade or so and wonder about what their fate is. >> john heilemann, i will apologize and claim the rooster making himself present, of course, at the worst possible moment, but i apologize to anyone distracted by him. i want to ask you about what has seeped out from the biden administration itself. "axios" reported on a tweet from a current state department official talking really in the same terms donna is, about her heart being heavy about all of the progress that was made. i also want to be really clear about what we're talking about,

what we're concerned about. both of the candidates for american president in 2020 were for getting out of afghanistan. the white house, and john kirby made this clear, too, the last president made a deal to get out in may. why are we so surprised with how quickly the taliban has taken over the country? was there a problem with the intelligence? surely we knew how capable or incapable the afghan security forces were, and i wonder where your head is on those two points? >> happy friday, nicolle. not a happy one in a lot of ways seeing this unfold. i think that the decision, the starting point is, as you and donna point out, is that this president and the former president were both aligned with where american public opinion is on this, on the question of continuing the war in

afghanistan. there is a large democratic consensus for ending this war and for getting out, and both of these presidents were with the public on this. so that does get to the question, the next question, which is how do we get out. i think what we've seen seep out from the administration is an accurate reflection in some of the tweet that jonathan swann that was up for a little while and then came down, i think there are a lot of heavy hearts in the biden administration. i don't think anybody undertook the withdrawal, the decision to withdraw, the president and anybody in the foreign policy apparatus of the administration, undertook this with any kind of nonchalance or with a lack of gravity or with the understanding there would be ugly stuff that would happen as a result. in the long-term calculus, what was genuinely achieved? kirby talked about this earlier

with you in the 4:00 hour, you know. there has been -- there will be long debates for years, decades, generations to come about the cost of the war on terror, but there's no doubt that as we sit here right now at this 20th anniversary of 9/11 that the threat of islamic terrorism around the world is -- has been greatly reduced. again, enormous cost, and that's a long discussion about whether there were -- there's no doubt that there were things that we did, that we sacrificed, mistakes we made along the way, but we're not under the same kind of threat of islamic terror that we were at its peak just less than a decade ago when the killing from terror i think peaked in 2014. it is down about half from then around the world, so that's a large accomplishment. the question of getting out, i think it comes down in a lot of ways -- so there's heavy hearts about this as we were discussing a second ago and people understood that it was going to be painful and that this was going to happen. no one, i think, by both public

statement and from all of the reporting of what the national security establishment of this hard believed on the basis of its intelligence, no one thought it would happen this fast. that is disconcerting, a point you made in the last hour. incredibly disconcerting, and disconcerting because it speaks to a potential failure of intelligence and because it starts to raise all kinds of questions about if the taliban can move back in this quickly and indplekt this kind of humanitarian damage at this pace where is it headed, and is there a possibility that the long-term gains that i was just citing in terms of the reduction of overall terror deaths around the world, islamic terror deaths in particular, is there some possibility that those gains could start to be rolled back if our intelligence on this key question is that bad and we are taking this much by surprise? just the last thing i will say, the notion that the administration was taken by surprise is evident.

they are sending 3,000 troops now across to secure lives and get people out of afghanistan. that was clearly not part of the plan. it was not part of the public messaging. it was no one's intention. we did not expect to be seeing that, and that i think speaks to the reality of the fact that there is great surprise at the speed and pace at which this has happened and the brutality of it, and that i think is worrisome for those reasons. it does speak to -- like maybe we don't know as much as we should know after 20 years in this country. >> congress woman chrissy haul woman, i would like to know what you would like to hear about the strengths and weaknesses of the afghan force? >> of course i would. i think that might be an

appropriate ask of the congress of the administration, but i also want to say, you know, here we are. we are where we are. although it is remarkable the speed with which the taliban has overtaken much of afghanistan, it is not surprising. i think that a lot of us were very worried, indeed, this would be the course that happened and here we are. we need now to work with what we can work with, and so we may decide to withdraw militarily as you all have talked about, a largely bipartisan popular move on the part of this president and promised by many other presidents before him, but withdrawal militarily is not our only option, our only tool. we also have the opportunity, as i mention, with diplomatic efforts, with humanitarian efforts and a responsibility with both of those to make sure we are taking care and protecting and supporting the gains we have made collectively as a nation and also as a planet. so i am not willing to be the er here on this particular situation. it is dire, but we have many,

many opportunities to hold the taliban's feet to the fire, to withhold support and aid from them because they're behaving as bad actors right now and we have the obligation and ability to deny them some of the really important tools that they need to be able to be a legitimate and recognized government. >> like what? explain. >> so if, in fact, they decide that they're going to take over with the force that they have, which is clearly against the geneva convention amongst other things, we have the opportunity to deny them recognition on the world stage, and our allies have that opportunity as well to do that. we have the opportunity to withhold aid and support. of course, those things are really draconian and really undesirable, but they are, indeed, not the way the taliban was posturing with us as we were heading into this period of time. they were posturing they would

be good actors. they were posturing they would come to the table and negotiate a peace settlement. they obviously haven't done that. we have the opportunity to try to hold their feet to the fire on these issues by not recognizing their government, amongst other things. but we also have an obligation to the people of afghanistan, many of whom, as we have all been talking about, women and children. many of those women are some of the most powerful allies we've had in the 20 years in afghanistan who have really been on the front lines in many ways, fighting for us and for their country. so it is complicated. it is an enormously complicated situation, but as we stepped into this conversation we all recognize it is something that the american people would like. it is the appetite of the american people to do this and to move forward on this, and it is our responsibility as leaders to do it as respectfully and responsibly as we possibly can. >> donna, a senior white house official said to me today something that was really blunt, but we are talking about where the public is where the last two administrations were. this official said that the

president is standing by the decision because he didn't want to send anyone else's son or daughter in to die in afghanistan. we don't go to war to protect women and children. i thought it was an interesting and brutal reality perhaps, but i also wonder if you think it cuts against this president's essential strength, which is empathy and the perception that he cares about everyone? i mean we're now about to witness really likely horrific things happening to some of our closest allies, people who went in and stood alongside american soldiers, american intelligence officials, american state department officials for 20 years. do you think that endangers this president politically? >> well, i think it is also clear that president biden is where he is today, which is where he has been for the last decade. so in that sense it is not a surprise that this is a strategy that he would embark on in the earliest months of his

presidency. what i do think is that the president recognizes that this is not easy, but it wouldn't have been easy, it wouldn't be easy in five years, it wouldn't be easy 10 or 15 years ago. and the american people and the american military cannot want more for the afghan people than the afghan people want for themselves. i think president ghani, this is an important moment for him to step up and for those afghan troops not to let down their guard, lay down their arms, but really to protect the last stronghold that they have in kabul and maybe kandahar in order to begin to rebuild a government and maybe negotiate at some level with the taliban. but this is not easy, and i think the president recognizes this but he also knows that it wouldn't be easy five years from now or four years from now.

>> congresswoman chrissy houlahan, former congresswoman donna edwards, thank you both so much for starting us off today on a day like this. i'm grateful. john heilemann is sticking around with us. when we return we will be joined by former cia director john brennan and retired four star general mccaffrey to talk to them about how we failed to see this coming. the speed with which the taliban has advanced has surprised everyone as we brace for the fall of the afghan government. plus, the urgent need nor the january 6th committee to investigate not just what happened on that day but the flood of new details we are learning about the disgraced ex-president's pressure campaign to overturn an election he lost. what we know about how long we can expect the delta variant to circulate in this country from other countries where it has already left as the white house marks the biggest vaccination day in more than a month. that's good news. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. millions of vs struggle to get reliable transportation

to their medical appointments. that's why i started medhaul. citi launched the impact fund to invest in both women and entrepreneurs of color like me, so i can realize my vision and give everything i've got to my company, and my community. i got you. for the love of people. for the love of community. for the love of progress. citi. as someone who resembles someone else... i appreciate that liberty mutual knows everyone's unique. that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. [ nautical horn blows ] i mean just because you look like someone else doesn't mean you eat off the floor, or yell at the vacuum, or need flea medication. oh, yeah. that's the spot. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ ♪all by yourself.♪ you look a little lost. i can't find my hotel.

oh. oh! ♪♪ this is not normal. no. ♪♪ so? ♪♪ right? go with us and find millions of flexible options, all in our app. expedia. it matters who you travel with. if you're 55 and up, t- mobile has plans built just for you. switch today and get 2 lines of unlimited and 2 free smartphones. plus you'll now get netflix on us. all this for up to 50% off vs. verizon. it's all included. 2 lines of unlimited for only $70 bucks. and this rate is fixed. you'll pay exactly $70 bucks total. this month and every month. only at t-mobile.

as the situation in afghanistan continues to worsen, u.s. officials are now preparing for afghanistan's capital to fall much sooner than they publicly predicted, perhaps within the month or sooner. this new assessment coming after several u.s. officials believe that kabul could be overrun within six to twelve months of the u.s. military departing with the potential humanitarian crisis looming, one of the glaring questions being asked of the biden administration and the intelligence community is how did we not know that this was exactly what would happen. joining us now former cia director and nbc senior national security analyst john brennan is here, plus retired u.s. army

general barry mccaffrey, a former national security council member, now lucky for us an msnbc military analyst. director brennan, first your thoughts to what you are seeing? >> well, nicolle, it is heartbreaking to see this disaster unfolding in afghanistan. the accelerated momentum of taliban forces and the collapse of the afghan government forces, and clearly the administration was caught by surprise at just how fast this was unfolding. because they're now redeploying troops back into the country. i think what the biden administration, unfortunately, badly underestimated was the psychological impact that the decision to leave and in an accelerated rate was going to have on the afghan people. i think it emboldened the taliban. it, i think, undermined the government forces and sapped their motivation. so we see this domino effect in terms of the provincial capitals that are falling. so now, as you point out, i think the biden administration has some real tough decisions to make as far as what they're

going to do to prevent the possible fall of kabul in a very short period of time. the fact that this is converging on the 20th anniversary of 9/11 i think makes it -- this all the more profound as far as the 20 years of effort that was put into trying to bring afghanistan out of the terrorist haven that it was, and now with what seems to be a rush to exit this unfortunately is now, i think, raising more questions about the decision initially, but then the decisions that the biden administration has to make from here on. >> director brennan, let me show you what the president said just a few weeks ago and ask you if you can sort of square what he was communicating with what the intelligence community might have known at the time. >> the taliban is not the north vietnamese army. they're not remotely comparable in terms of capability. there's going to be no circumstance where you are going

to see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy of the united states from afghanistan. it is not at all comparable. >> so let me just read a little bit of reporting to you, too, director brennan just from "the new york times." five current and former officials described the mood inside the embassy as increasingly tense and worried, and diplomats at the state department's headquarters in washington noted a sense of depression at the specter of closing it after the u.s. marines reclaimed the burned-out building in 2001. several people gloomily revived a comparison that all wanted to avoid, the fall of saigon in 1975 when americans stationed at the u.s. embassy were evacuated from a roof top by helicopter. what do you think the president was looking at when he said it wouldn't be like saigon, when his own state department and others according to david ignatius' piece today feel that's exactly the historical parallel? >> well, i think president biden

was really counting on a much more orderly withdrawal of u.s. forces and that the country would not disintegrate the way it is doing. unfortunately, what we're seeing now is this disintegration. we have brought in additional military troops to remove a large number of u.s. civilian personnel. i know that the department of defense has said they're not going to a full up noncombatant evacuation operation, but i don't think it is far off in terms of how the united states is going to try to bring american citizens and others, other embassy personnel as well out of harm's way because this situation is bad and it is going to get worse in the coming weeks and months. recent -- days and weeks. these troops are now securing the perimeter of the embassy, they're securing the perimeter of the airport, and they're hoping to withstand the taliban from encroaching upon the kabul perimeter. that would then put at great risk those planes and those

evacuation operations that are underway. general mccaffrey knows this very well, that, again, there's a psychological dimension to this, that despite the numbers of troops that the afghan government had under arms and the training that we gave them and the equipment, again, there's a psychology here that is now under way that is going to be very, very difficult to stop. >> general mccaffrey, i want your thoughts on all of that, but i also want to ask you if these troops that we're sending in are at greater risk because of the miscalculation about how quickly the taliban would take over the country? >> by the way, i think this is a full-off neo, it is an 8,000 troop deployment going into the middle east as well as initially into kabul international. we have another marine battalion essentially in the embassy, but four miles between the two of them. this is an all-out abandonment of our position. there might be an embassy presence there 21 days from now

or not. it is a period of great risk. we have no military options left, period. we're not going to be able to continue sending money to the ghani government, and, therefore, what we're watching is the end game. the taliban got a farcical treaty from the trump administration, essentially don't shoot at us and we'll get out of here. now it is playing out. so it is going to be brutal. it is going to be unpleasant to watch. i think president biden said, look, i have no political option from my party or support from the american people. i don't argue with that, but this is going to be a disaster for afghanistan and potentially the region around it. >> what obligation do we have to ensure the safety of afghan translators who aided our troops for two decades? >> well, it is not just the

translators. i mean the number they're touting now is 44,000 people we need to get out. it is much larger than that. anyone that worked in an instrumental way down to guards on the u.s. consulates in some of the outlying cities is subject to being summarily executed by the taliban, which apparently is now going on. though we have an obligation, we have no tools to deal with it. you know, nicolle, in the history of warfare nobody ever negotiated a way, an advantage they clearly won on the battlefield. so, again, you know, three battalions bringing the 82nd airborne, which is moving into kuwait as a backup force, you couldn't possibly hold kabul with that force. it is problematical in my mind that we can maintain a ground corridor four miles from the embassy to the airport. so i don't think the taliban are going to go after the embassy with the international

community, but who knows? so basically we've got to wrap this thing up pretty rapidly. it could all come apart in a week or in 90 days. no one knows. >> director brennan, if i hear you correctly, you are describing something more nuanced than a failure of the intelligence community to assess either the weaknesses of the afghan security forces or the strengths of the taliban, which seemed the same as they've largely been for the last 20 years. you're describing a psychological aspect that may have been lost between the two. can you explain that a little further? >> well, i worked very closely with then-vice president biden during the obama administration, and i know he was very interested in removing our soldier's out of harm's way in iraq and afghanistan. so, you know, his heart is certainly in the right place and i think he wanted to do that as quickly as possible. but, again, i think the announcement that we were going to continue to follow through with some of the commitments that the trump administration

made, and as general mccaffrey said, the trump administration did negotiate a farcical agreement with the taliban. but the biden administration had a decision, whether they were going to continue to go down that path or they were going to make adjustments. unfortunately, when it was announced we were going to get out, and we were going to get out before the end of august, i think, again, that sends a very strong signal to afghans including those that were on the fence, those who were not taliban and they were not afghan government officials or the afghan government, but i think when they saw that the taliban was going to be ascendant, when the afghan government's primary benefactor and supporter and military advocate and trainer was going to be leaving wholesale, that clearly sent a signal to a lot of folks, as general mccaffrey said, this is the end game for the afghan government. i don't think a lot of intelligence officers were surprised by how quickly this happened. but, again, this was a policy decision that was made. i think the u.s. military senior

officers as well as intelligence officials knew that there was going to be potentially this nightmare scenario which, unfortunately, is becoming all too real in front of our eyes now. >> so we are at the nightmare scenario. there are now questions about what we knew and when we knew it. our allies are at risk of execution. women and children and girls especially will certainly go back to probably worse conditions than 20 years ago. what else could this white house and this president have done, general mccaffrey? >> nothing. look, from a military and humanitarian perspective we could have stayed there for another 50 years. and had we said it was an open-ended commitment to the afghan people, i think the war would have dribbled down dramatically over time. politically that wasn't viable for the president of the united states, and so, again, i'm not

holding him responsible for this, but the minute you took out the u.s. special ops intelligence community, u.s. air power and presence on the ground, it was end game obviously. i might add a corrupt and incompetent government on top of that, a government that tried to build a federal national police and a federal national army in a balkanized society where people fight for their tribe and their home, not for a distant government. i don't think we have any options at all. girls and women are now at great risk. millions will flee into adjoining countries. the taliban don't give a wit about our recognition. there will be no u.s. aid to the taliban. they're counting on being supported by pakistan, china and russia to some extent, and the iranians will intervene to try to protect them to some extent.

so we have no options left as far as i can tell. certainly diplomacy, i was disappointed in the state department spokesman talking about this isn't abandonment, we're just right sizing our diplomatic core mission. this is all nonsense. i have been inside that embassy a lot of times, and inside the afghan presidential compound. they're living in a bubble. they're highly secured. they're about to be unsecure. ghani and his senior people are going to run for their lifts pretty soon. >> director john brennan, general barry mccaffrey, a clear-eyed, depressing assessment of the facts on the ground. thank you both so much for spending time with us dancht when we come back, what new revelations about the disgraced twice impeached ex-president's pressure campaign to overturn the 2020 election means to that select committee investigating january 6th. select committee investigating january 6th. 1 for network qualiy

in america according to j.d. power. number one in reliability, 16 times in a row. most awarded for network quality, 27 times in a row. proving once again that nobody builds networks like verizon. that's why we're building 5g right, that's why there's only one best network. i've got big news! now, nurtec odt is the first and only medication proven to treat and prevent migraines. don't take if allergic to nurtec. the most common side effects were nausea, stomach pain, and indigestion. ask your doctor about nurtec today! i'm so glad you're ok, sgt. houston. this is sam with usaa. do you see the tow truck? yes, thank you, that was fast. sgt. houston never expected this to happen. or that her grandpa's dog tags would be left behind. but that one call got her a tow and rental... ...paid her claim... ...and we even pulled a few strings. making it easy to make things right:

that's what we're made for. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. get a quote today. - i'm norm. usaa. w- i'm szasz.ade of, we're made for. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly; it's important. we walk three to five times a week, a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. if you have this... consider adding this. an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan from unitedhealthcare. medicare supplement plans

help by paying some of what medicare doesn't... and let you see any doctor. any specialist. anywhere in the u.s. who accepts medicare patients. so if you have this... consider adding this. call unitedhealthcare today for your free decision guide. ♪

we do have enormous amount as a committee to look into all of the effort to overturn the election in advance of the election, the efforts after the election and the events on january 6th. none of these things are disconnected from each other. >> a tangled web they weave,by deed. that was member of the house select committee investigating january 6th, congressman adam schiff, explaining that a full accounting of the insurrection will consist not just of the events of that day but the efforts of the ex-president leading up to it to subvert the will of the american people.

the testimony of former acting attorney general jeffrey rosen and former u.s. attorney in atlanta, mr. pack, reveal an even stronger portrait of a leader willing to use any means necessary including his own justice department to keep himself in power. in an interview with greg sergeant of "the washington post", congressman raskin declined to say whether the select committee will seek to hear from rosen and clark, the doj official who tried to overturn the results, presumably to avoid tipping the committee's hand. but he noted that these new revelations underscore trump's intent on january 6th with fresh clarity. raskin noted a few days ago that trump's pressure campaign on the doj could potentially lead to criminality. >> we want to get testimony from every material witness. there was clearly a campaign originated with donald trump but sweeping within it the whole executive branch to try to convert the department of justice into an instrument of the president's political will,

and that's an extraordinary thing that not only overrides the traditional boundary between what's political in the white house and what is law enforcement in doj, but it really threatens the hatchets. they were really attempting to get the department of justice to become essentially campaign actors for d.o.t.. >> joining our conversation, tim miller, writer at large for "the bulwark" and msnbc contributor. john heilemann is still here as well. tim, i put those together because you hear from adam schiff and from congressman adam schiff and congressman jamie raskin, two things that were elusive to robert mueller and all of the other countless investigators of donald trump's conduct. one is clear intent and two is criminality in his coverage duct leading up to the election. do you think they're getting closer to having something on either of those fronts where he is concerned. >>. >> well, look, i think the intent element of this is pretty open and closed.

you know, unlike what was happening with russia, the question was always, you know, not so much whether, you know, trump cared or even obviously we knew that trump wanted russia to help him. he said that publicly. the question was whether, you know, he had worked with russia, right. that was the whole collusion discussion. this is a different element with january 6th, right. like this is trump himself at the top of the funnel of the improper and illegal activity. i think that what has leaked out of the testimony from rosen with the assistant attorney general jeffrey clark, working with the president to try to undermine and ultimately overturn the election, and this is an absolutely astonishing testimony. it is kind of insane that a hack like clark could have, like, been in that position but that is really where we were during the interim because of barr's resignation because we were dealing with acting, acting, actings at the top of these agencies. so, look, i think that the select committee is going to have a lot to consider when it

comes to there, and i have been nothing but encouraged by what we have seen early from the select committee as far as pulling these threads. >> you know, john heilemann, i spoke to senate judiciary committee member senator dick durbin earlier in the week, and they are so effusive in their praise for jeffrey rosen, but i keep wondering what would have happened if jeffrey rosen had testified before the second impeachment trial or offered up what was really clear in his own head, was donald trump was crossing all sorts of lines, donald trump sought to oust him and put mr. clark at the top of doj, and donald trump had accomplices and a conspiracy to have doj declare the election corrupt and the "r" allies will handle the rest. >> i think, nicolle, unfortunately i think we know exactly what would have happened, which is that we would have ended up with the same

outcome which we ended up with, which i think is most of the votes against convicting the president in the senate were locked in. it didn't matter what the evidence was. although it is a pretty powerful case that was made by the house managers in the senate, we obviously have much more evidence now than we had then, but the evidence that was available at the time was not merely circumstantial evidence. there was all -- the president's public performance made it clear that he was guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. so i think republicans would have done what they were going to do. their votes were locked in. they were political votes. they were not votes based on the merits, and i don't think that having more powerful evidence would have changed the outcome. however, i do think there's no question but that this evidence that we're hearing is because it is firsthand and because it is deepening in a direct way our knowledge, our understanding of just how far the president went,

of just how much he was willing to do, of how much he was doing in private in addition to what he was doing in public, i think it is essential obviously to this committee's work that we get all of this material out in the open, that it be brought on to the record, that all of these people be compelled to testify, and that all of those who are -- and this has been my position all along and i think it is the position of many of the committee members, is that subpoenas are going to be necessary to compel everyone whom this evidence complicates to coming forward and testifying. i think if the committee does not go all the way there, it will fail in its duty, and, like tim, i am encouraged by the hard coreness we have seen so far on the part of these committee members. i think they're going in that direction. >> yes, and it is the two halves of the coin are coming together finally nine months after his nightmarish presidency is over. you have the committee has learned through two impeachments, you know, how to get their witnesses in front of them more quickly and you've got

some witnesses, as john is saying, firsthand witnesses to donald trump's abuse of power coming forward without the protection of a justice department claiming privilege. i wonder where you think, tim miller, both the 1/6 committee investigation into january 6th and then the criminal investigation that rumbles along, scott macfarlane tells us most of what we need to know in his twitter feeds and live reports, but do you think at some point those could intersect? several doj officials have suggested if he is not donald trump should be under criminal investigation? >> just first i will get to the criminal investigation on the subpoenas, look, we are hearing -- you know, we are talking to adam kinzinger who was happy to be added to the committee and the republicans added to the committee, and they're dead set to subpoena the white house officials and the relevant agency officials as part of the select committee. so i think that we know they're going to do it, and i think, like you just said, nicolle, the protection that they had from

the doj is not there any longer and there is a deep optimism among kinzinger, you know, who i have talked to and others that they're going to be successful in these subpoenas. as for the trump criminal side, i just -- i hate getting hope on this. i refuse to let myself have hope on a trump criminal investigation. i think it is really tough to find a jury anywhere that is going to not have a red hat on it, not have somebody that is going to be in line with donald trump. i think that it is going to be very hard to get people to testify against donald trump, to get above certain thresholds. so, you know,, look, i hope so, and i think that to me the criminal intent as far as the insurrection concern is abundantly clear, but i'm -- let me just say i'm skeptical and i don't want to provide over optimism for those who are sitting at home hoping, you

know, to see a perp walk at mar-a-lago. >> john heilemann, last word. >> well, i'm with tim. i just to clarify, you know, i think the question isn't whether there are going to be subpoenas issued but whether those subpoenas will be fully enforced and whether the members of the committee are willing to go all the way like throwing people into jail if they stand in contempt of those subpoenas. again, i've seen no -- i've seen no backtracking so far, but that's going to be the question because there are going to be people who are subpoenaed who whether they have the cloak of privilege or not are going to refuse to testimony, and i think the question is what then. that's where the test will be put to this committee. >> john heilemann, tim miller, thank you for spending some time with us on a friday. when we come back, kids, vaccine, back to school. the delta variant, all of that stuff, we will talk to an expert pediatric critical care physician about why the safety of our kids depends on a lot of the actions of the people around them. that's next.

the airport can be a real challenge for new homeowners who have become their parents... okay, everybody, let's do a ticket check. paper tickets. we're off to a horrible start. ...but we can overcome it. we're not gonna point out our houses, landmarks, or major highways during takeoff. don't buy anything. i packed so many delicious snacks. -they're -- -nope. would you say, ballpark, when group two is gonna get boarded? 2 hours and 58 minutes. progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents, but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us. someone should've left home earlier.

shingles? oh... you mean bill. but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us. he's been a real pain. again with the bill... what? it looks like a face. ...hearing about it 24/7 is painful enough... i don't want to catch it. well, you can't catch shingles, but the virus that causes it may already be inside you. does that mean bill might have company? - stop. you know shingles can be prevented. shingles can be whaaaaat? yeah prevented. you can get vaccinated. oh, so... i guess it's just you, me and bill then. i'm making my appointment. bill's all yours... 50 years or older? get vaccinated for shingles today. [john legend's i can see clearly now] ♪♪ make your reunion happen with vrbo. ♪♪ your together awaits. ♪♪

i've spent centuries evolving with the world. that's the nature of being your the economy.its. observing investors choose assets to balance risk and reward. with one element securing portfolios, time after time. gold. agile and liquid. a proven protector. an ever-evolving enabler of bold decisions. an asset more relevant than ever before. gold. your strategic advantage. people were afraid i was contagious. i felt gross. it was kind of a shock after i started cosentyx. four years clear. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections —some serious— and the lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. learn more at cosentyx.com. ♪ ♪

oh, focaccia! ah, there's no place like panera. enjoy the toasty, saucy chipotle chicken avocado melt on freshly baked bread. panera. order on the app today. i was drowning in student loan debt. then i discovered sofi. lower interest rate. my principal is going down. sofi is a place where you can start to tackle those money goals today. ♪♪ everyday the picture becomes all the more clear, all the more obvious, the people needed to get vaccinated. it is not the picture everywhere but some of the least vaccinated states like mississippi hit this today. the state reported 5,000 infections. the hospitals are warning of full icus there.

97% of the people hospitalized in the icu are not vaccinated. it is making it risky in their homes for children under 12, who don't even have the option to be vaccinated as they head back to school. joining our conversation is dr. michael anderson, at the children's national hospital at washington, d.c. so nice to see you again. thank you for spending some time with us. >> my pleasure. >> the white house contends that children are most at risk in unvaccinated homes. in homes where adults are not vaccinated. do you agree with that assessment? >> i truly do. there are deeply concerning data coming in of the number of kids getting infected with the deal delta variant. it is very contagious.

as you point out, kids under 12 don't have the option right now of getting vaccinated and we'll hopeful that'll be around by the fall. we can talk more about that. there is a responsibility in the household that if mom and dad or people over the age of 12 are not vaccinated, do it for the child. do it until you stop spreading this terrible disease and like wise, these variants only emerge when the virus has a chance to replicate. we are not going to stop the spread of this until we get more americans vaccinated. until we get to that goal of herd immunity. >> and tragically all these things happen in the same places. kids at home and parents are not vaccinated and communities where masks are not mandated and going to school where full tests are not required. could we talk about the other side of the ledger, we are going back to school for the third year in the pandemic.

there are a lot of schools who made it work. transmission in school was remarkably low and their tools. the cdc's website post, pulls testing once or twice, mask mandate and vaccine mandate. cohorts and pods as well as three feet distance. can you say anything reassuring. have any of those measures changed in light of the new surge? >> that's the checklist. we need to holdup those schools that do this well. you went through it like an expert. this can't be political. this can't be so tense. we are going in the third school year in this pandemic. we know what works. we know that masks help stop the spread. it is not political. we know that schools and you pointed out there are some schools across the country that really have this down. we know as pediatricians and parents and grandparents, we

want the kids in school. there are so many resources in school and so much that happens in person that does not happen in the two dimensional world of zoom. we got to protect our kids. you listed them well. every school system across the country should be glued to the cdc's website and read the american academy pediatrics guidelines. these are political guidelines and they're safety measures to protect our kids. we got to get them to the fall when hopefully vaccines are here. >> tell me where the heck the vaccine is for kids 5 to 11. i feel the timeline got pushed back. what's going on? >> there is a lot of back and forth between the manufactures and the fda and of course we want to do things that are safe, emergency authorization means that the fda is determined, the benefits outweigh the risk.

the pfizer and moderna are studying down to age 6 months. from what i can tell, it looks like pfizer will come forth with eua application for kids down to age five. probably down to six months after that and moderna is coming behind. we want to do things that are safe. we want to make sure we have enough data. the american academy pediatric put out pieces of, we also have to get this vaccine into kids. once again we are seeing more kids hospitalized with covid. you and i talked about the rare multi system inflammatory system in children. every pediatrician in this country is advocating for of course we want to be safe but we got to get this vaccine by the fall. >> every mom and dad as well.

michael anderson, thank you so much for spending some time with us. quick break for us. we'll be on the other side. k brs we'll be on the other side in america according to j.d. power. number one in reliability, 16 times in a row. most awarded for network quality, 27 times in a row. proving once again that nobody builds networks like verizon. that's why we're building 5g right, that's why there's only one best network.

at usaa, we've been called too exclusive. because we were created for officers. but as we've evolved with the military, we've grown to serve all who've honorably served. no matter their rank, or when they were in. a marine just out of basic, or a petty officer from '73. and even his kids. and their kids. usaa is made for all who've honorably served and their families. are we still exclusive? absolutely. and that's exactly why you should join.

thank you for letting us into your home during this extraordinary time. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. >> welcome to "the beat," i am ari melber. a string of victory for president biden. those bipartisan break through which are so unusual. many are actually having a hard time getting their heads around mitch mcconnell backing biden on the senate floor, which happens at