good to be with you. i'm katy tur from los angeles. we begin this hour with breaking news. a federal grand jury has indicted former trump white house adviser peter navarro. he was issued a subpoena in february to produce documents and appear before the committee in march but refused to do either.

nbc news has confirmed he's currently in custody and is set to make his first appearance in federal court just a few minutes from now. let us get to it. joining me now is nbc news nas political reporter sahil kapur, host of "the beat" ari melber and barbara mcquaid. pete, i want to begin with you. this is a bit tricky territory for the d.o.j., is it not? >> reporter: well, it didn't seem to be in his case, in the steve bannon case, though it took the justice department almost twice as long to decide whether to pull the trigger on peter navarro on two counts, one for refusing to give documents to the committee and secondly for refusing to show up and answer questions in person to the committee. he said to an e-mail in the committee that he was powerless to act here because of the executive privilege claim by

president trump. one of the problems for him, it seems to me, is that six days before he sent that e-mail, the supreme court rejected president trump's legal appeal in the case which involved the documents that were sought by the house committee that were in the possession of the national archives. you may remember that president biden waived executive privilege. mr. trump said i still have some executive privilege as the former president, but every federal court that looked at that rejected that. so that seems to weaken his claim that he had some executive privilege reason not to show up and he seemed not to cooperate with the committee by offering any kind of half measure of documents or appearing, which is one of the things that mark meadows did do, he did cooperate with the committee to some extent. that's what let the justice department to say he completely stiffed the committee and that's

a violation. >> what does the committee want to get out of peter navarro? what do they think he might know? >> reporter: this is the second indictment of a person the committee has tried to subpoena for evidence after of course steve bannon. one source i said to members on the committee are encouraged by the fact that indictment was issued. they have wanted the justice department to act more aggressively. they've been frustrated by what they perceived as a lax approach. the committee hopes this is the beginning of more to come. there's dan schovino and mark meadows. the justice department has not acted on them broadly. they want to know novarro's

role. he said he had lined up more than a hundred lawmakers, that donald trump was supportive of the effort and they want to know the full extent of that plot and knowledge and understanding and extent of the involvement that trump had. the fact that peter navarro did not even show up to the deposition, they view it as him thumbing his nose not only at this committee but congress's overall oversight role. >> ari, you had peter navarro on your show just last night. let's play a little bit of that clip. >> are you suggesting you'll be in a republican white house? >> you bet your ass i will lead the charge. i will take adam schiff and

jamie raskin and pelosi and biden and every single senior staff member in there and put them with subpoenas and we'll start with the impeachment of biden for what, ukraine, the southern border, all manner of things. >> explain to me what exactly he's talking about there and then, ari, give us your legal assessment of what it means today and what we should expect out of this hearing in a few minutes. >> that was him last night. we now know today that the indictment here that we've been covering had come down under seal just about an hour plus before he spoke. he didn't know that. no one knew that. it's under seal and then the news breaks today. what he was saying there is something he discusses in his new civil lawsuit that he views the january 6th committee invalid and makes threats about

abusing power to go after political enemies. it's not lawful as a politically motivated abuse of power or prosecution. that's part of what he views as his counterattacks and his threats. as for the core of this, as mentioned in our coverage here, katy, he keeps claiming that he has some sort of privilege, but it doesn't work that way. the former president would have to assert it, which he hasn't. as pete and i reported, the supreme court also has waived away a few ways this has come up, the idea that would be license to defy everything and now merrick garland justice department indicting on two counts saying you have to provide documents and testimonial cooperation. so what we're going to see today, this hour, is navarro arraigned over these charges and then as any defendant would be afforded, that proceeding and whether he's held on bail or released on his own

recognizance, that's how that works and then he, like bannon, will be awaiting trial. it's been unusual to see navarro to speak in public and at the same time say with a straight face to congress, federal prosecutors and now the courts that these are secret things he couldn't possibly discuss. >> the consequences here are steep. a year in prison for each indictment and $100,000 fine, up to. what do you expect to happen? >> well, as you say, it's for each count. there are two counts here. it could be done consecutively. it could be up to two years. i think one thing that is noteworthy is that earlier this week peter navarro himself leaked a grand jury subpoena served on him a week ago by the u.s. attorney's office in the district of columbia. it is quite possible that was an

effort to have him cooperate in the department of justice investigation. and then when he made it clear he wasn't planning to do that, then no reason to hold back any further. once you indict somebody in a criminal case like this, you sort of have given up on them as a potential cooperator. i think one of the reasons make mark meadows hasn't been charged yet is either it may be possible he's going to be charged in a bigger conspiracy or there's still hope he might cooperate. with navarro, as with bannon, once you charge them, they'll going to file things and delay things and this is about punishing peter navarro, making an example to protect congress's interest in its subpoena power. >> you led me to my next question. pete, meadows, the other criminal contempt referrals,

where do we know that stands? >> we know nothing, other than the fact that the justice department hasn't done anything, 171 days and counting since congress referred the matter to the justice department. now, his case admittedly is the most complicated of any of these because he was the adviser closest to the president and it's been longstanding view of the justice department under both republican and democratic administrations that congress has no authority to even require them to show up at all, the senior officials to the president, any more than congress could subpoena the president himself as a matter of separation of powers. plus, unlike some of these others, there was some initial cooperation from meadows and that also i think clouds the issue. apparently this is a very complicated one for the justice department to decide. as barb points out, maybe there are some things going on behind the scenes in which he's been the subject of some cooperation or some potential cooperation that would explain this long delay. >> it's also complicated and i

said this at the top of the show, it is complicated for the d.o.j. once they get involved in these political, partisan areas and indicting members of a former administration, it can be a slippery slope or it can open the justice department up to a criticism that they are partisan themselves and they're going after political rivals. am i wrong about that, pete? >> no, you're absolutely right. and remember how historically the justice department has responded to these requests from congress, and they dealt -- have dealt mostly in the past with subpoenas from congress for current members of the administration. and there the justice department has taken the view of we can't even refer those things to the grand jury because that's just a separation of powers problem we are not going to get into. so the decision to cross the rubicon with bannon was historic for the justice department.

>> these public hearings for the january 6th committee are coming soon. we're just, frankly, a few days out from the first one. how is this going to play into -- or should we expect this indictment to play into what we see next week? >> well, it's all related because when you talk to the committee and their investigators, they've done over a thousand interviews. the vast majority of people have cooperated in some form, including trump family members, rudy giuliani cooperating, we saw bill barr near there this week. they'll have a story to tell based on that evidence. i think from the committee's perspective, they need to lay out what more they feel the public should know about this historic, terrible insurrection and violent attempt to go into the congress and whether they found strong evidence that other people who may not have been on site somehow deliberately intended it to happen or to support that kind of violent overthrow of the government. and then second, they will decide whether or not they want

to say something more formal and final about the former president's potential culpability. donald trump was impeached over it and acquitted in the senate. on the flip side there are people affiliated with the trump administration and others who have concerns about how long this has taken and what they found say, okay, put up or shut up, what do you have and what is different or more important than the actual indictments of the people on site? we know that's the largest federal investigation ever and that's going on one path. the people who are more sympathetic to donald trump are going to say what else do you have, how much more time does this take? if the president was allowed to speak, allowed to complain and under, frankly, first amendment rules lie about everything, what else is there to say? with this set of hearings that can command public attention, this is one of those times where congress is going to step up and say here's what we found and the public can respond or not. >> here's what we found.

there was an insurrection on january 6th, here is what happened that led to it. remember what it was like in the moments while that was happening. and bring us back to the moments where i'm curious, where it seemed like there was agreement within congress, a lot of areas in congress, that this is the sort of thing that should not happen. last question to you, sahil. axios is reporting that michael lutig is expected to testify. who is he and what does he know? >> reporter: he's a judge. we do know it will be next thursday, it will start at 8 p.m. the committee promises there will be previously unseen material involving the events of january 6th and the leadup and the sources close to the committee familiar with its work say the goal is very simple, to make sure the public understands what happened on january 6th, the violence with you more importantly the larger plot to

overturn the election that undergirded the activities of that day. liz cheney talked publicly about wanting to emphasize the role of then president trump and trying to pressure the justice department to use claims of voter fraud that were unsubstantiated, if not wholly fabricated as a way to stay in power, even though he lost. it will be a mix of material that is already known, i'm told, but also unseen material woven together to create a coherent set of events about what happened in the minute to minute and why this happened. the how and the why will be crucial with those members you see on the screen right now telling that story next week, katy. >> michael, what do you know? >> he is a conservative lawyer, very prominent, retired judge from the fourth circuit court of appeals. he's not only an expert witness but a fact witness. when mike pence was trying to

figure out what to do, it was luttig who said to mike pence, it's absurd, it's illegal, you can't do this. it's not about the mob. that is a big distraction. it is about president trump applying illegal pressure to mike pence to get him to abuse his power as vice president and certify the election and luttig can someplace why it is illegal. >> and after mass shootings, the president has said it is time to do something. will we see anything? and 100 days of war with no end in sight. what president biden might have suggested ukraine needs to do to stop russia's prolonged attack. plus, what today's jobs report

tells us about the health of our economy. e, son, with a little elbow grease, you can do just about anything. thanks, dad. that's right, robert. and it's never too early to learn you could save with america's number one motorcycle insurer. that's right, jamie. but it's not just about savings. it's about the friends we make along the way. you said it, flo. and don't forget to floss before you brush. your gums will thank you. -that's right, dr. gary. -jamie? sorry, i had another thought so i got back in line. what was it? [ sighs ] i can't remember. why hide your skin if dupixent has your moderate-to-severe eczema, or atopic dermatitis under control? hide my skin? not me. because dupixent targets a root cause of eczema, it helps heal your skin from within, keeping you one step ahead of it. hide my skin? not me. and for kids ages 6 and up that means clearer skin, and noticeably less itch. with dupixent,

you can change how their skin looks and feels. and that's the kind of change you notice. hide my skin? not me. don't use if you're allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur that can be severe. tell your doctor about new or worsening eye problems such as eye pain or vision changes, including blurred vision, joint aches and pain or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop asthma medicines without talking to your doctor. when you help heal your skin from within, you can show more with less eczema. talk to your child's eczema specialist about dupixent, a breakthrough eczema treatment. this... is the planning effect. this is how it feels to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. this is what it's like to have a comprehensive wealth plan with tax-smart investing strategies designed to help you keep more of what you earn. and set aside more for things like healthcare, or whatever comes down the road.

this is "the planning effect" from fidelity. when it comes to cybersecurity, or whatever comes down the road. the biggest threats don't always strike the biggest targets. so help safeguard your small business with comcast business securityedge™ it's advanced security that continuously scans for threats and helps protect every connected device. the choice is clear. get unbeatable business solutions from the most innovative company. so you can be ready for what's next. get started with a great deal on internet and voice for just $49.99 a month for 24 months

with a 2 -year price guarantee. call today. attorney's office to pursue justice for everyone. but like so many of my colleagues, i resigned in protest because chesa boudin interfered in every single case and failed to do his job. the office is absolutely in disarray right now. chesa dissolved my unit prosecuting car break-ins. now criminals flock to san francisco because there are no consequences. we can't wait. recall chesa boudin now. . enough is enough. after 233 mass shootings this year, the president of the united states is taking a stand. and it's not just a vague call for common sense gun regulations. he says it's time to go back to the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

>> do something. just do something for god sake, do something. after columbine, after sandy hook, after charleston, after orlando, after las vegas, after parkland, nothing has been done. this time that can't be true. this time we must actually do something. >> republicans are already bashing president biden, calling his demand unconstitutional. we're going to get into the actual language of supreme court gun decisions in a moment, but first some statistics. the assault weapons ban was passed in 1994 according to one colombia university study. during that time mass shootings went down 37% and shooting deaths fell by 43%. when republicans refused to renew it in 2004, mass shootings went up 184% and deaths by 239%

in the ten-year period after. another study from stanford showed a significant increase in gun deaths after the ban was lifted, especially in more recent years. but the data is complicated and made so by all the loopholes that existed in the original ban. take it all with a grain of salt. since the ban expired, republicans have blocked almost every effort to reform gun laws. president biden hopes, though, that this time will be different. in the days since 19 kids and two teachers were killed in uvalde, there have been 20 shootings in which people were hurt or killed in the last nine days. in michigan, a house party in california, a downtown area in tennessee and at a medical building in tulsa, oklahoma. you heard about that yesterday. the spotlight on that violence seems to be pushing some in the gop to act, albeit on much more limited legislation. multiple bills are being netted

negotiated in both houses of congress. the committee will hear directly from survivors and parents of victims of the uvalde massacre. joining me is ali vitale. legislation, where do we stand with it? >> reporter: they are still very much in the cobbling phase. there are hopes when congress comes back next week they'll at least have enough of a frame woke it will be a more tangible debate on the senate side. yesterday the house judiciary committee came back for an emergency markup session. they passed a package of gun bills out of that committee. that will go to the rules committee on tuesday and get a full house floor vote either wednesday or thursday according to what sources are telling me. the house, though, still looking to keep the pressure on, as you mentioned, that scoop that we had this morning that the house

oversight committee will do its own hearing on gun violence, specifically spotlighting people in education and others who can talk about the impact of school shootings, but then of course people who have been directly impacted by gun violence themselves, specifically we're talking about families who were impacted by the uvalde shooting, one set of parents who lost their daughter is going to testify in front of the committee. they're also going to hear from a mother of someone who was injured in buffalo and perhaps what could be the most moving of these testimonies, one of the witnesses is going to be a 10-year-old girl from uvalde who was in that fourth grade classroom and said she covered herself in her classmate's blood so she could play dead and survive that shooting. a really moving week set up here on capitol hill as they try to do something on gun violence prevention, katy. >> absolutely horrifying. thank you very much. joining me is former rnc chairman and political analyst michael steele and adam winkler,

ucla professor and author. when this 10-year-old testifies and says i covered my myself in the blood of the dead bodies of my classmates, is that not going to move a republican to do something? >> if they're there, it should. the leadership should pay very close attention to the words of a young victim who can recount how she saved her life and tried to save the life of some of her classmates. that's what this boils down to. what makes this hour different from those that you outlined before now is you've got victims who are willing to insert themselves more directly in the conversation. in other words, this is my story, this is what happened to

me. i cannot -- you know, i had to have my family member cremated because we couldn't have an open casket ceremony. or this is what i had to do at the guns and the bullets entered my classroom with my classmates. these stories are going to be very impactful and very important. and republicans need to address them. they need to account for them. they need to juxtapose their position against those narratives. and that's what the country needs to see and then decide for themselves who has the greater interest here, the victim in front of us or the party that's aligned with the narrative that refuses to do anything about it. >> so one of the shields that republicans use is a supreme court case from 2008, heller versus the district of columbia where the ruling said an individual has a right to bear arms, even if a place where you're not allowed them, in the

district of columbia within their home. there is a "new york times" opinion piece today from two of the clerks on that decision, the majority scalia and the minority stevens, the dissenting opinion. they write that lawmakers are reading this case wrong, that scalia didn't say that you can't regulate firearms, that there wasn't a role for congress to play in this. will you explain this to us, adam. >> sure. the supreme court in the heller case did say there was an individual right to bare arms protected by the second amendment but many judges and advocates out there especially in the nra and gun lobby circles argue that heller really means that many forms of gun control or gun safety reform are unconstitutional. and so far to date, most forms of gun safety laws have actually been upheld by the courts despite heller and while they're

applying heller's reasoning and rationale that said, by the way, the second amendment is not an absolute right and can be regulated. but i do think that republican opposition is hitting upon something that's worth noting, which is that the supreme court is going to issue a decision any day now on a major gun case out of new york and is likely to greatly expand second amendment protections. when republicans say a ban on assault weapons or high capacity magazines is unconstitutional, that's not necessarily a bad prediction of what the supreme court will say should congress enact such a law. >> let me ask you about that decision that we are awaiting in new york. we haven't paid all that much attention to it but it is one that will be significant for the state of new york, and that's to allow people to carry concealed weapons anywhere in the state where you're not allowed to. >> that's right.

the reason is, look, we have three new justices appointed by donald trump, all of whom are very strongly pro gun. they are pushing the supreme court to really take second amendment -- take more second amendment cases and start to really put some teeth into the second amendment in the view of gun rights advocates. and the court really is likely in the coming years, i think, to call into question many of the top agenda items in the gun safety reform movement, such as bans on assault weapons and bans on high-capacity magazines. >> i don't understand, michael, why it is so controversial to put some limits on this. the majority of the public wants there to be background checks. the majority of the public wants there to be some regulation so psychopaths don't get a deadly weapon and go shoot up a bunch of elementary school kids. nobody wants that. the majority of the public says, please, no, let's find a way to stop it. so why is there just no movement at all within one side of the

country, within one side of congress, i should say? >> well, because they've largely been boxed into a sort of corner i guess you could call it by the nra, by hardened second amendment advocates who threaten both primaries and votes and money. and so, therefore, a skittish political leadership will buckle. and it has buckled. despite the fact that even a narrow reading of heller, you still get to the same place that's outlined in that the "new york times" opinion piece by the two clerks that says that there can be limitations in place, that the second amendment is not absolute. it doesn't mean that suddenly everyone's coming for your guns. it's just a recognition that there are no constitutional

principles that are so absolute that they override the interests of the broader public. and the interests here of the broader public is your point, katy, that there should be some measure of control here -- wrong word probably, but some level of fair play in terms of how the country and the citizens in it live in peace with those who are armed to the teeth. and i think that's going to be a big, important narrative politically going forward. the question becomes for voters after the supreme court decision is how much more of this are we going to stand? and if we don't want to stand anymore, that means you're going to have to decide who is going to represent you in the state legislatures that draw the lines for these congressional districts and the men and women who then go to congress. >> there's a lot of single-issue voters on the republican side and the democrats need a lot of voters who don't show up to vote

a lot of times for these mid terms or even the presidential election. the voter turnout in this country is very, very low. i want to emphasize again the majority opinion by scalia says a few things. "the problem of hand gun violence in this country is serious, that the constitution leaves the government with a variety of tools for combatting that problem including some measures regulating handguns." it also says it recognized "presumptively lawful regulations regulations such as laws imposing conditions on qualifications carrying arms and noted the tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons." so there are limits that can be made according to supreme court justice -- former justice scalia. gentlemen, thank you very much

for having this conversation with us. coming up, how desperate is the white house to end high gas prices. what the president may be considering in the face of damaging inflation. and russia's assault on ukraine enters its 100th day. what the president might have suggested is going to need to happen to end the war. check out this backpack i made for marco. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ you're pretty particular about keeping a healthy body. what goes on it. usually. and in it. mostly. here to meet those high standards is the walgreens health and wellness brand. over 2000 high quality products. rigorously tested by us. real world tested by you. and delivered to your door in as little as one hour.

for state controller, only yiu will save and d taxpayers money.door wait, who, me? me? no, not you. yvonne yiu. yvonne yiu. not me. good choice. for 25 years, yiu worked as an executive at top financial firms. managed hundreds of audits. as mayor, she saved taxpayers over $55 million. finding waste. saving money. because... yiu is for you. yiu is for you. exactly.

yvonne yiu. democrat for controller. our students, they're our top priority. and students are job one for our superintendent of public instruction, tony thurmond. recruiting 15,000 new teachers, helping ensure all students can read by third grade. the same tony thurmond committed to hiring 10,000 new mental health counselors. as a respected former social worker, thurmond knows how important those mental health counselors are for our students today. vote for democrat tony thurmond. he's making our public schools work for all of us. this summer, dinosaurs are in our world. he's making our public schools pet dinosaur? i'll take care of you. nice and quiet. hey, look! it's your mom! hot dog?

. it is day 100 of russia's war on ukraine. that has changed ukraine and the security in europe. ukrainian troops are fighting to hold their ground and then retake every lost inch of land. joining me now from poland is the former adviser to ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy. we're on day 100. everybody would like this war to end. president biden was asked about what it would take and i want to play what he said. >> from the beginning i've said, and not everyone's agreed with me, nothing about ukraine without ukraine. it's their territory. i'm not going to tell them what they should and shouldn't do. but it appears to me at some

point along the line a settlement here. what that entails i don't know. i don't think anybody knows. >> what do you think he's talking about there? there have been conversations or there has been talk out there that at some point ukraine might need to cede some of its territory in the east. do you agree with that? >> i would say it's impossible. i don't think ukrainian people are going to take it. at the moment as things stand on the battlefields, i don't see any room for diplomacy whatsoever because at the moment there's too much insurgency in the east. plus on top of that, if history teaches us anything, it's that concessions to russia never end well. so i hope for that possibility of diplomacy here but without any lost territory, that's the only precondition. >> are you worried, there's been so much attention and so much

aid that has flown in from western countries, but it does feel like the attention on the conflict in ukraine is starting to waver just among media consumers. axios reported a 22 fold decrease on social media interaction on news articles published about ukraine. are you worried if this is not the lead story of every newscast that people won't care as much and you won't get the aid that you need any longer? >> exactly. that's the main problem. i mean, the real tragedy today is the fact that we're focusing on this number 100. day one was horrible and day number 99 will be just as horrible. there's nothing major newsworthy happening. people are still dying. it's not a exciting as it use

to be. it's a boring war and it's a slow war and it's losing out. that's the tragedy and we have to do something about it. >> it is interesting. we're looking at pictures of kyiv right now and you do still see monuments surrounded by sandbags. they're trying to protect things knowing the shelling can still come in kyiv. there's some army equipment there that people are taking a look at but life is getting back to whatever the new normal is there while the war is still raging in the east. just the dichotomy in the country, can you help me understand that? >> well, it's been like that from day three of the war actually. i mean, it's definitely easier now. if we take kyiv at an example, there are less missiles flying at kyiv. there was an interception yesterday or the day before that. people are going about their

daily lives. this war has been going on for eight years. there are plenty of people dying a few hundred kilometers to the east of kyiv. and also economically this is a war of attrition against ukraine and not only ukraine. russia is black mailing would world with grain exports and making the inflation global. and that new normal is very uncertainty and uncertainty is the determining factor. >> uncertainty makes it hard for anything to really take root. i want on another happy note, i want to congratulate you on you ukraine win over scotland and the preliminaries for world cup. i know they play wales this weekend so good luck with that as well. >> and we might be playing the u.s. after that in the world cup if we go through. >> we will see.

>> igor, thank you very much. >> and pomp and pageantry without the queen. you see harry right there. >> companies are still hiring so why does elon musk say he has a super bad feeling about the economy? lways been into health, and wellness, and fitness... i tried everything with diet and exercise, and nothing worked. there was just kinda this stubborn area on my stomach. but coolsculpting worked for me! coolsculpting targets, freezes and eliminates treated fat for good. no needles, no incisions. discuss coolsculpting with your provider. some common side effects include temporary numbness, discomfort and swelling. you've come this far... coolsculpting takes you further. visit coolsculpting.com trelegy for copd. ♪ birds flyin' high ♪ ♪ you know how i feel ♪ (coughing) ♪ breeze driftin' on by ♪ ♪ you know how i feel ♪

copd may have gotten you here, but you decide what's next. start a new day with trelegy. ♪ ...feelin' good ♪ no once-daily copd medicine has the power to treat copd in as many ways as trelegy. with three medicines in one inhaler, trelegy helps people breathe easier and improves lung function. it also helps prevent future flare-ups. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. take a stand and start a new day with trelegy. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy. and save at trelegy.com.

welcome to your world. your why. what drives you? what do you want to leave behind? what do you want to give back?

what do you want to be remembered for? that's your why. it's your purpose, and we will work with you every step of the way to achieve it. at pnc private bank, we'll help you take care of the how. so tell us - what's your why? ♪♪ even amid soaring inflation, the u.s. exceeded expectations by adding 390,000 jobs last month. the unemployment rate remained steady at 3.6% for the third month in a row. still not everyone is feeling as confident. here is president biden acknowledging a low-level dread a lot of folks can't seem to shake. >> i know that even with today's good news a lot of americans remain anxious. i understand the feeling, but there's every reason for the

american people to feel confident we'll meet these challenges because of the enormous progress we made on the chi, the americans can tackle inflation from a position of strength. >> joining me is the host of public radio's "full disclosure" podcast. a lot of conflicting statements going on out here. mark zandi of moody's analytics says the may jobs report holds a lot of good news, employment gangs are strong, employment is increasing by about 400 per month, down from 550,000 in the previous year and the labor force continues to notch higher as the academic fallout fades and despite the job growth, unemployment which is low and consistent with full employment is stable. nonetheless, job growth needs to soar more this summer, get closer down to 150k, this will

ensure the economy doesn't blow path growth and today's report that is precisely where the economy is headed. take all of that and put it into words that i can understand. >> i think you and i talk about this on many fridays. it's so much wash, rinse, repeat, analyze it all over again. there are so many forces at work in this economy where well over two years into this pandemic and you see gasoline where it is, supply chain hassles, people are waiting for car parts or sheet rock for their homes. you would think on the margin, you're standing on the sidelines, 3.6% unemployment, wage growth, that's all excellent. it depends on the eye of the beholder. if that gives fodder to the federal reserve to push through several more half-point rate cuts that could send the economy into recession, good news is bad

news. you see that in late cycles. >> is that why we're seeing jamie dimon warn of an economic hurricane? and it seems like elon musk tagging along saying he's super scared or has a super weird feeling about the economy. >> elon musk loves the mic. he's trying to buy twitter. he'll chime this unsolicited and tell you whatever he thinks about work from home, inflation, the economy. jamie dimon i would be a little more worried about. he has a window. he gets daily reports into deposits and people taking money out of the bank and credit card delinquency rates, leading indicators that are more important than the jobs report. does he know something he's not letting on? we are dealing with inflationary pressures that we haven't felt in our adult lifetimes. >> if you are watching this from

your homes, what should you be doing with your money, sitting on it and saving it instead of spending it? >> you look at venezuela, turkey, to spend money while it still has value. i saw a report today that car insurance premiums are going up at a chunky clip. you're seeing food prices go up, restaurant prices, leisure prices, if you can even get a plane ticket. plane ticket, you want to rush and book it right now, a hotel thing. in realtime we're seeing chunky inflation approaching double digits. but then again you also want to husband and save money for a rainy day. i think you have to always be able to do a little bit of everything, save, invest, consume. it's never perfect to time the market whether you're talking about inflation or a recession. >> thanks for being with us. >> and coming up, we go live to

london for day two of the queen's platinum jubilee and all of those funny hats.

this... is the planning effect. this is how it feels to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. this is what it's like to have a comprehensive wealth plan with tax-smart investing strategies designed to help you keep more of what you earn. and set aside more for things like healthcare, or whatever comes down the road. this is "the planning effect" from fidelity.

choosing t-mobile is like paying for this... but getting that! and with our new price lock guarantee, you won't need to worry about price hikes. because unlike at&t, we won't raise the price of your rate plan. another way customers get more at t-mobile. the platinum jubilee is

shining across london, even without its star. day two kicked off with a thanksgiving service at st. paul's cathedral. the queen was supposed to be there but we learned on air yesterday she pulled out last minute after experiencing some discomfort during the trooping the colour parade. also absent the archbishop of canterbury who was replaced by the archbishop of york to deliver the sermon following a positive covid test. compared to the scaled back balcony appearances yesterday almost all royal family members were seen today including prince harry and meghan, the duke and duchess of sussex. this is the first time the couple has appeared publicly with the royal family in two years after stepping down from their roles as senior working members in 2020. joining me now from london is nbc news correspondent former foreign correspondent stephanie gosk. stephanie, i know there's a lot of people rolling their eyes at this whole thing because it's so

bonkers and weird and unfamiliar to all of us in the states but i love it. i do. it puts a smile on my face and frankly i love watching all the silly hats. >> reporter: me too. you know, i had an array of silly hats out on pie bed before the trip and i panicked. i didn't know which to take and ended up not taking any of them. you know, it is an incredible event to see regardless of what you think about the monarchy and feelings are mixed in this country, this is a moment in history and this is a woman, keep this in mind, 70 years on the throne. she has met 14 u.s. presidents and while this is a little bit of speculation, katy, i would bet there is no other human being on the planet who has met 14 u.s. presidents and that really speaks to the role that she has had, which she took on at a young age at age 26. now, certainly there's some disappointment in not seeing her at some of these events. the reality is there wasn't much of an expectation she would make much of them. you think about the event today

at st. paul's cathedral. it's in and out of cars, it's a lot of stairs up into that cathedral. a lot of walking. that's difficult. if you watched her last night she's very -- walks very gingerly and obviously taking care and the palace is protecting her. tomorrow there is what they call the derby. if you read it, you would say derby, a horse race and difficult for a 96-year-old woman so i think people in this country are disappointed that they can't see her but still happy to come out and celebrate her 70 years. >> i see you're enjoying the beautiful spring weather in london with that scarf, stephanie gosk. >> reporter: yeah, right. >> always good to see you. i see rain in the forecast at any moment and for tomorrow as well. good to see you, steph. stay dry. that's going to do it for me. >> reporter: in london you have to pack for three seasons. >> you really do, all in one week. steph, thanks so much. i am jealous. i wish i was there. that is going to do it for me

today. from los angeles, not a bad place to be. hallie jackson picks up our coverage next. and in it. mostly. here to meet those high standards is the walgreens health and wellness brand. over 2000 high quality products. rigorously tested by us. real world tested by you. and delivered to your door in as little as one hour.

ever wonder what everyone's doing on their phones? they're banking, with bank of america. and delivered to your door the groom's parents? they just found out they can redeem rewards for a second honeymoon. romance is in the air. like these two. he's realizing he's in love. and that his dating app just went up. must be fate. and phil. he forgot a gift, so he's sending the happy couple some money. digital tools so impressive, you just can't stop banking.

what would you like the power to do? this is xfinity rewards. our way of saying thanks, with rewards for the whole family! from epic trips... to jurassic-themed at-home activities. join over 3 million members and start enjoying rewards like these, and so much more in the xfinity app! and don't miss jurassic world:dominion in theaters june 10th. another crazy day? of course—you're a cio in 2022. but you're ready. because you've got the next generation in global secure networking from comcast business. with fully integrated security solutions all in one place. so you're covered. on-premise and in the cloud. you can run things the way you want —your team, ours or a mix of both. with the nation's largest ip network. from the most innovative company. bring on today with comcast business. powering possibilities.™

♪ ♪ bonnie boon i'm calling you out. everybody be cool, alright? we've got bonnie right here on a video call. we don't take kindly to video calls. oh, in that case just tap to send a message. we don't take kindly to messages neither. in that case how 'bout a ringcentral phone call. we don't take kindly to no... would you can it eugene! let's just hear her out. ha ha ha, i've been needing a new horse. we've got ourselves a deal. ♪ ♪ ♪ ringcentral ♪ this is not the stallion i was imagining. as we are coming on the air a former top aide to former president trump as we speak is in a federal courtroom facing new and serious charges. a live look on the one side of your screenout side the courthouse where peter navarro is in his first