in getting to the hospital unfortunately 30 died there. we are trying to make sure those who arrive at the hospital are cared for. the fighting was still happening today. it depends on the time of the day. sometimes we have access to the hospital, sometimes we're cut off. we're trying to scale up and we already moved some to a general hospital that cares for the needs. another challenge is all the hospitals are shut down, except the one where we're working. they're close to where the fighting was happening or because of some of them were subject to looting >> doctors without boarders an extraordinary, thank you for taking the time. our thoughts are with the folks who are there working. that's going to do it for us this hour. join us for "chris jansing reports" 1:00 to 3:00 p.m.

eastern time here on msnbc katy tur reports right now good to be with us i'm katy tur on monday, kevin mccarthy was in new york city trying to get wall street on his side as he plays a game of chicken with the white house on the debt limit. today it's president biden who is making his case this time he is speaking to union workers in maryland. the president is arguing a clean raise of the debt limit is the only good option at the same time he's pitching his own plans on the economy some that have already created jobs in the past few months we've seen the president or the vice president in places like upstate new york, dalton, georgia, durham, north carolina, minneapolis, minnesota and more touting green energy initiatives or the chips act the financial times says $209

billion have been pledged by the u.s. or foreign companies to create 280,000 new factory jobs and that amount is almost double the capital spending commitments made in the same sectors in 2021 and nearly 20 times the amount in 2019, but is the public absorbing it we'll go through some recent polling on what americans perceive but that perception will be used to help the gop argue that slashing the budget is the solution. on the house floor just a moment ago, speaker kevin mccarthy finally made an announcement on what the gop proposes, cutting trillions in spending, taking the budget back to 2022 levels, clawing back unspent pandemic funding and introducing work requirements for entitlements. >> these are the same levels we had just four months ago

i didn't hear a single democrat complain about that level of spending the spending limits are not draconian. they're responsible. federal spending exploded in the past two years when democrats controlled all, that doesn't include the trillions of covid-era spending >> joining me now is kayla tausche and msnbc political contributor jake sherman kayla, let's talk about the economic stakes here the president was out today saying if we don't raise the debt ceiling, a clean raise of it, it's going to be disaster. >> yeah. that's what he's been saying for the last two months. he and speaker mccarthy last met on february 1st. that was his position then that's his position now. the white house has not budged in the two plus months since then president biden today is arguing that the across the board 22% spending cuts that republicans

are proposing would hurt every-day americans and the white house is sharing polling with reporters that it beliefs supports that message. an ipsos poll that it sent around says that 69% of respondents believe that high earners and corporations should be taxed to essentially have the country be on a better fiscal path rather than just 19% that believe that cost cutting is the way to get there even so, it's unclear exactly how this compromise happens. even though president biden said this is his position, it's a nonstarter on capitol hill speaker mccarthy, where republicans have the majority in the house of representatives, he said they will not do a debt ceiling raise with no strings attached and he will not raise taxes as the president laid out in his budget. at some point there will need to be a meeting of the minds but

there's no sign that's happening just yet and it could be several weeks before it does >> part of the issue is when it comes to the economy -- we laid out those numbers, all those jobs that will be created. all that money poured into american factories by u.s. and foreign companies, that is out there, but the perception of it is also -- it's not aligning with it. we can show polling on how americans feel about the economy. does the president have the leverage he needs to push through what he wants to do? >> it's unclear what leverage he does have. the white house is hard at work implementing all of that legislation that it believes will continue to create jobs, continue to put shovels in the ground, create projects that are tangible and visible for every-day voters to see in their hometowns. of course, that process is still playing out. you know, as we get closer and closer to the debt limit, one side is going to have to blink it's not clear exactly who it's

going to be. each side has at this point dug in its heels and we have a few weeks before the treasury department is going to say exactly when the rubber will meet the road here, when that so-called x date is. when it's done with its creative accounting measures, when it's actually going to need to be dealing with this issue. at that point there will need to be a compromise. even a compromise that emerged behind the scenes that the problem solvers caucus put together as a last resort, the white house today when asked about it says it doesn't support that in this moment. >> i was writing this down the inflation reduction act. the chips act. all of those acts that will pour a lot of money into creating jobs, they take time to take effect you plant a seed, you have to let it grow. you have to give it time jake, we're talking about leverage what leverage does kevin mccarthy actually have when it comes to what he wants

>> the leverage he what is that he controls the house. i think you said it well, kayla said it well as well at some point there are two intractable positions. democrats say they won't negotiate, and mccarthy says he won't raise a clean debt ceiling. usually in those situations as we've seen this since 2011, the two sides meet and figure out what they can talk about biden and schumer are stick of that because they've been through it for a decade now. mccarthy both internally and idealogically to the extent that there is an ideological position here, which there is, he wants to cut spending, he cannot at this point show that he's going to raise a clean debt ceiling. to be quite honest with you, his speakership will be over that's a grim prediction i think he would not be able to survive after that this plan is going nowhere fast.

no one takes this seriously. his goal, though, is to show he can get something through the chamber, okay, senate democrats, you want to raise the debt ceiling? do it. i'm skeptical, at least at this moment standing here today on april 19th, that he'll be -- that the senate can raise a clean debt ceiling today june 1st would they raise a clean debt ceiling maybe. we'll see. we'll see how crazy the market will get i don't know how crazy the market gets. but at that point maybe they can raise a clean debt ceiling mccarthy is trying to shift the onus and get the white house to negotiate, which they say they won't do having covered a bunch of these things over the last 13 or so years, this is the worst like everyone should be clear about that this is the most intractable i've seen it in 12 years >> i want to ask kayla about the markets and wall street in a

moment i do first want to ask you about the optics you have the president talking to union workers in maryland you had kevin mccarthy talking to wall street on monday do the optics of this matter sure, i guess they matter a little bit politically mccarthy is trying to jolt the markets into understanding his position which he thinks -- i tend to agree with him on this -- they don't understand how intractable the situation is if they did, i would say we're heading closer to a default than we ever have before. i don't know that we will default. i can't predict the future he's trying to get people to understand that he is deadly serious that he's going to demand spending cuts not the spending cuts that he laid out that's an opening gambit but he is not, at this point, standing here today, i've spoken to him many times about this, he's not going to fold on a clean debt ceiling >> it sounds like we're heading into a world of pain in the coming months. >> yeah. >> how will that look on wall

street what was wall street's reaction to kevin mccarthy trying to argue his points to them on monday >> he was in front of a friendly audience, both with his interviewer and with the audience that he was speaking to at the new york stock exchange, very capitalistic, low tax, low regulatory type audience he did get some applause when he talked about the sensible joe biden of 2011 that negotiated a grand bargain that led to several years of spending cuts and ultimately led to a raising of the debt ceiling in august of 2011 the problem is that it took the markets to fall by thousands of points back then, which is would be a magnitude higher now, to actually light a fire under lawmakers to get a deal, to put the fear of god in them and sit down at the negotiating table and work something out i think jake is right. that might be what has to happen in order to get them to sit down

and reshuffle some of their priorities and we're just not there yet. as far as the market's reaction to kevin mccarthy on monday, it's flat. >> great just great thank you for bringing us such good news at the top of the show appreciate it. coming up next, shot for mistakes three stories in a week of young people getting shot for making mistakes a wrong doorbell, a wrong driveway and now opening the wrong car door the latest in kansas city, new york and now texas we also have news on the mass shooting at an alabama sweet 16 over the weekend two teens are now in custody then, $787 million apologies, but none on the air what incentives does fox news actually have now to stop lying? we're back in 60 seconds ♪♪

♪♪ cargurus. shop. buy. sell. online. i'm adding downy unstopables to my wash now. i'll be smelling fresh all day long. [sniffs] still fresh. still fresh! get 6 times longer-lasting freshness, plus odor protection with downy unstopables. heading on a family trip? nah, sorry son, prices are crazy, [son deflates] awh, use priceline. they have package deals no one else has. [son inflates] we can do it! ♪go to your happy price♪ ♪priceline♪ nicorette knows quitting smoking is freaking hard. you get advice like... just stop. go for a run. go for ten runs. run a marathon. instead, start small with nicorette, which will lead to something big.

it was about telling the truth and the media telling the truth and i think that what was important for us is for people to be held account for when they recklessly and knowingly tell lies that have such devastating consequences >> held financially accountable, but fox news doesn't have to say its sorry and none of the hosts who spread the lie will have to tell viewers that they lied to them instead the media company is paying $787.5 million as pennant. is it enough for fox to change its ways maybe not, but there's another lawsuit pending from another voting machine company smartmatic is suing fox for defamation and now they have a benchmark for how much fox is willing to pay joining me from wilmington delaware is stephanie gosk i saw a lot of interviews with the dominion lawyers today

they were asked multiple times why not demand an apology as well as part of this settlement. what happened to that? i thought that was a sticking point for a while. >> we don't know about that. it is a huge amount of money and there was a risk for dominion going into this trial that they weren't going to end up with a lot of money there could have well have been an appeal. we may never know the answers to those questions. as you mentioned, there's another legal challenge on the horizon for fox. this 2$2.7 billion defamation lawsuit brought by smartmatic. smartatic says dominion's litigation exposed some of the misconduct and damage, smartatic will expose the rest they said they will fight this lawsuit and specifically they're taking issue with the 2$2.7

billion. they said that will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and fox says that's what they were going to fight in this courthouse and they say they're planning to fight it down the road probably as late as 2025. >> stephanie gosk, thank you very much. joining me now is former u.s. attorney joyce vance. i know you were on the air when this settlement was announced. i announced it in the last few seconds of my show and you were on with nicole it's a lot of money, but again no apology from fox. if you can afford to tell your viewers lies, if you can afford $787 million, it appears fox can afford it, what sort of system do we have in place that that can enforce the truth? what is the punishment

>> i think you're identifying one of the central issues that we have in dealing with disinformation in our society. this was a defamation case this was a lawsuit by a business that was defamed by a news entity and they wanted to recover their losses i think in our minds, the media's minds, the public's minds this became a route to vindicating the spread of the big lie, something that a private lawsuit is not really well positioned to do. ultimately the lawyers did the right thing. they took a smart settlement for their client the question that leaves hanging is how do we deal with the spread of misinformation >> is there any legal recourse, i know it's a slippery slope when you talk about legal recourse with -- at least they call themselves a news company what they did is so far out of the norm journalists make mistakes all the time it happens there are consequences for those

mistakes that come from within a company or the public. what is the recourse for them poisoning the country with thi stuff? >> typically the resource of that would be involved in the licensed process if there weren't cable tv, there would be fcc recourse, but this is cable so that doesn't exist i feel it's unlikely that there's any appetite in congress to address the problem will a clever lawyer come up with a new lawsuit, i'm not sure >> let's talk about smartmatic, there's still that lawsuit pending. do they essentially have a road map here on how to pursue it is their case the same as dominion's was >> the statement you played from smartmatic, that was their opening bid and settlement negotiations now that it's been established that fox will pay, other businesses will try to extract more money from fox news that's where we are on that. we have breaking news, i'll get to that.

the supreme court is extending the temporary pause on the texas decision on the abortion pill. we are going to get to that news in just a couple seconds it will take us a few minutes to get laura miked up with the media matters president, angelo kerosone let's talk about fox was this settlement reported on their airwaves >> know, tno, they talked about fact they settled, but didn't give details they just said they settled, then they also said the rest of the news media will be disappointed about it. that's how they framed it for their audience they didn't even give the amount of the settlement, which i think is significant because if you're -- even a fox viewer, a number that big, it's not like you would wow the entire world view, wow, that's a pretty big

number i wonder what they did you might look for it. they didn't. they just said it was settled and moved on >> it's a lot of money do you believe or is there any indication that it will force fox to change its ways a little bit for the fear of not wanting to pay something like that again? >> no. actually i think my warning is that fox news is about to burn brighter and hotter. you alluded to this a bit, they need to make this money back the way they make this money back is not through advertising, they're going through a series of contract renewals with cable companies that are worth way more money than what they paid out for this, this litigation and future ones. the way they'll jack those rates up is whipping their audience into a frenzy. they need to resecure their political power and leverage that for these contract negotiations i think they're about to get worse. >> we'll see if that happens can you give me indication that that has already started to happen have you seen evidence of that

so far >> yeah. we tracked 50 conspiracy theories since january 6th alone where fox was attacking elections, institutions of government, repeating the same sort of scaffolding around the big lie, the thing is they didn't name characterers s this time during the interview with donald trump, there's very few questions that tucker carlson asked him but one was some say joe biden won the election that's a question born out of the idea that the 2020 election was stolen this is the narrative they're continuing to tell on fox. the only difference is they're changing the characters. >> angelo, thank you very much for coming on. i know you spent a lot of time analyzing what goes on on that network. appreciate you as i said, we have breaking

news out of the supreme court. we were expecting it any moment. the temporary pause on a lower court decision that would roll out access to mifepristone has been extended. joining me now is nbc news senior correspondent laura jarrett and joy vance is sticking around for us laura, explain what this means >> it means the justices are trying to buy themselves more time the question is why. are they doing it because this kate is enormously complicated, which it is. are they doing because one or more of the justices want to write a dissent? we don't know. originally this temporary pause was supposed to expire at 11:59 tonight. we got an order out saying they're extending it two days. so it will be friday at 11:59 when that temporary pause is set to expire. the question is again, what's going on behind the scenes we don't know. they could take any mub of different paths, as you and i

have discussed, they could grant the stay, deny the stay. the question all along is what happens to the pill during that period of time where it's going back and north and all this legal wrangling. right now we know the pill is status quo, it's on the market, nothing has changed. >> for at least two more days. maybe more >> when we consider the most likely option given the law out there and the rulings in the past, it seems like they're not going to want to weigh into the issue of forcing the fda to change all of its practices, right? then allow any person to bring a lawsuit without standing to say this lawsuit can hold, doesn't that open the door for a lot of -- potentially a lot of lawsuits from people that don't have a standing. >> that's the argument being

made by the justice department the pill manufacturer, fda is up in arms about this for that very reason they say this has ramifications for every single fda-approved drug on the market if one can be upended after 23 years of being in existence it doesn't mean the supreme court might not rule differently. this is the same supreme court that upended 50 years of precedent when it came to roe. this is a very different case. they may not treat it the same i don't want to preview what they might do with this. having said that, i think we should err on the side of caution. >> this is the same supreme court filled with a bunch of justices when interviewed by congress said they respected precedent, then with roe v. wade they did not joyce, what is your read of

this >> this is very predictable. this is not a decision on the merits of the case this is just early times this is an effort to decide what the world looks like while this litigation proceeds. that could take a year or more for now we have a stay in place which means mifepristone can stay on the market and is available to pregnant people on friday we'll find out -- laura is spot on it's tough to read this. did they want more time? is someone writing a powerful dissent? justin kagan that's possible. >> or maybe justice thomas what if it's all of them and one other justice has an outlier view on this >> that's what makes this so interesting. the supreme court, this court's jurisprudence on abortion has been different they've been willing to ignore precedent. it's been results-oriented in terms of undercutting abortion rights here they're knocking heads with important regulatory interests the potential here is to upend drug manufacturers reliance on a

regulatory process that's worked very well. maybe they won't go all the way here >> this pill has been on the market, it's important to remind everyone about this, this pill has been on the market for 23 years. when you talk about side effects or potential harm, all of that is now well documented it's not -- it's shown to be -- obviously there's certain cases, but not that big of a deal in the scheme of things when compared to other drugs that are on the market. >> 0.1% risk of complications. >> 0.1% risk of complications with this drug, especially when used in tandem with the other drug if you just use the other drug, the complications increase let me ask you about what the doj argued specifically when they sent another motion to the supreme court on how it should be decided what was that? >> they -- two bites at the apple. you get to put out your emergency motion and then you get to do a reply.

this is their reply to the plaintiff's legal arguments. one of the things they're hammering here, both the justice department and the pill manufacturer, they're trying to say to the court recognize that what you're doing here by tinkering with all of the different regulations at play, that it's super complex. when you do that, you could result in having to take off all the existing boxes of those pills we've seen, all of those could immediately come off the market if this decision is allowed to go through because they would be misbranded, that essentially means it's not just like stopping production for future doses it means taking the drugs currently on the market off the shelves immediately. they're trying to ring the alarm that the judges have gone very far here in this regulatory dance they've been doing >> there's talk about getting

this pill from overseas and it's being mailed in. would this affect that process is that not legal to begin with? >> there's a lot of questions that surround drug availability from foreign suppliers the question is who anyone intends to vigilantly enforce those laws sometimes that's done particularly with opioids that come from a foreign source here there's the prospect of enforcement that could be taken. let's bring in another voice to this conversation, irene carbone. you covered this a lot tell me how you read this today. >> it's interesting because this is a deadline that justice alito himself set. i question why they need more time it could be a dissent or maybe alito and thomas are dissenting. it should be a no-brainer. why do they need more time is my

question given that this case is from the beginning of its filing so outlandish and subsequent decisions at the district court level and at the 5th circuit have each completely flouted precedent when it comes to the very origin of this case, the threshold question of why they need to see this to keep the stay in place or say there is a stay and it needs to be litigated seems simple. if you read some of the briefs filed in the supreme court, they make the point that these anti-abortion claims are total fiction. they say that sometime in the future that they'll have to treat somebody for complications for mifepristone laura mentioned how vanishingly rare those complications are but there's also nothing that has changed in the last few years except that perhaps abortion has become even more unavailable. what is going to change in the future and what can the supreme court or any other court do to change that given that abortion

remains legal in half the country? this needs to be seen in the context of a novel, very outlandish legal theory. the supreme court is punting for now. we have no idea what will happen we know friday at midnight is not peak news time there's also a broader question here of the court -- there was friday night holiday weekend, two different decisions on this. the most incendiary one being from texas there's a question of important policy happening in the dark, late at night that could affect millions of people access to health care. >> the idea that the deadline forthis is friday night at midnight there was another deadline friday night at midnight, because you've been tied to this for a week now -- >> they might do it before that. they want to buy themselves enough time.

still, the point still holds >> i was going to say that i think we need to step back and think why it is they're going after this particular pill they missed their deadline to do so they waited until the supreme court overturned roe v. wade to restricting a pill that is frankly a savior, a lifeline for people seeking abortions who don't either -- either can't get to a clinic, don't want to walk into a clinic with protesters standing outside screaming in their face, you mentioned overseas pharmacies, there's also people who are sending abortion pills by mail from blue states to red states people driving into blue states to get them. anything they do to chip away access to take it off the shelves or restrict it heavily, the amount of time or who can give it, the way the 5th circuit did, is a way to plug the gaps in the tremendous curtailing of

access that the overturning of roe v. wade did. they're doing it because of a regulatory thing but they're trying to effectively make abortion even moreimpossible nationwide >> harder to access. you also covered the health angle of this. talk to me what it would mean for women's health if this drug was taken off the market >> the irony is that these doctors are saying that this is going to harm women's health to have continued access to this pill but since dobbs has been overturned, we have heard of people bleeding out, doctors waiting for them to get septic abortion can save a person's life it can also be the right decision for them whether they're about to die or not. i think the implications of -- i would also say studies show childbirth is 14 times more dangerous than an abortion

the implications to make abortions inaccessible are vast. >> i can tell you from experience that childbirth can get dangerous quickly. >> we should also make the point, it's not only just abortion this drug is used to manage and treat miscarriages the way that this order is written, it would be off the table for that as well so, women who are experiencing the symptoms of an early miscarriage take this drug so they don't have to go through what is already an incredibly painful process and this allows it to speed up a little bit. by taking this drug off the market, you remove that one -- one of those tools in a doctor's set of tools, right, when it comes to managing that type of process. it's worth sort of spelling that out. obviously the debate over abortion is so heated, the rhetoric is so strong across the board. but this drug is used by doctors for more than just abortions >> remind me -- it's not like

you're taking this pill when you're 30 weeks pregnant, are you? >> it depends on, again, where the supreme court steps in as of right now, you can use the drug through ten weeks of pregnancy. if the lower court rulings come back into play, we're now in the land of seven weeks of pregnancy. not only before some women know that they're pregnant, as you well know, you can't even go see some of your doctors before eight weeks of pregnancy lots of women have experienced this they say come back to me when you're eight weeks you would be too late under this lower court decision to take advantage of that. that's again one of the things that we'll see, these roll-backs that happen if the lower court's decision stands. >> just to tell people, in case you weren't aware. at eight weeks, ten weeks of pregnancy, it's -- it's undetectable element the baby -- baby in quotes -- it's so small. it's a clump of cells at that

point. when you're taking this drug, it's so, so, so early in the pregnancy. this is not -- this is not a fully grown baby that you're dealing with >> the rhetoric that surrounds abortion has always driven far too much of the debate, which should be about women's health and women's ability to make their own decisions. to laura's point, medical care is delivered in different ways in this country depending on where you live there's not only the miscarriage problem, there's the issue of women who live in counties or parts of states where in-patient care at a doctor's office is no longer accessible, unless you can travel you would have to spend three visits in a doctor's office to obtain treatment that's the bear minimum they're holding out. that makes abortion functionally inaccessible for women who need

it >> i was talking to nancy mace yesterday about the issue of abortion she says she's pro-life but she's pro-life with an understanding that there are cases where a woman will need an abortion she said the republican party is extreme on this, they need to moderate it. they're not in line with the rest of the american public. and she made a point that if you are going to outlaw abortion, if you're going to make it illegal, you have to start coming up with ways to help women get through that pregnancy -- she mentioned there were a number of ob-gyns in counties -- no obgyns in certain counties in south carolina, but then you have to manage the unwanted babies that get put up for adoption. you have to support families you are seeing any moves where the republican party is putting that stuff forward to account for this outlawing of abortion in so many states?

>> not so much you're seeing them talk about it a little bit more. there have always been pro-choice republicans they have not had a lot of influence. they have less influence than ever before in the coalition you are seeing some states that are not immediately throwing pregnant and postpartum women off medicaid i would count that as a small win. even though the majority of people who are seeking an abortion, they're disproportionately low-income, marginalized, just making childbirth free, which we should do any way, just having paid leave, which we should have any way, giving everybody the resources for their children to grow up safely wouldn't be enough in my personal view to make it okay to force somebody to be pregnant or have a baby. all of these things are very important. but the underlying question here is the question of dignity,

privacy, who makes the decision, women's equality yes, absolutely all of those things are important but i think that they are besides the point when it comes to this fundamental question of who gets to make that decision >> we have a lot of reporting around that. let's get the medical perspective, joining me on the phone is former obama white house policy director, dr. kavita patel what are the consequences of a ruling that takes this drug off the shelves? >> it's pretty broad even beyond what has been a very important conversation around access for abortions at different time periods, ie before ten weeks or before seven weeks think about everything that it affects including miscarriages, including just treatment -- this is a drug we've been using safely for over two decades. having this confusion itself is causing people to think, well, it's not available, even though

it technically -- it is technically available, as you just heard legally there are states imposing further restrictions tying the hands of doctors. i'm sitting in the clinic and we were just talking about this all of us who have gone through pregnancies understand, when we start putting such a black and white, seven weeks and the drug might be okay. six weeks, like in the state of florida and we have this harsh kind of limit, what we know medically is that sometimes it's six weeks and two days, but that doesn't change the woman's medical needs or the evidence behind why it's appropriate to use a drug like mifepristone in situations i think what we're seeing is the inability medically to make the decisions that are scientific and evidence-based because we're going through the legal matrix of what we can and can't do as

doctors. honestly, as a patient and their families, it is utterly confusing. can you imagine walking in the door and she says what if i'm ten weeks, what if i'm eight weeks? what if i'm four weeks that's should not be the question they're asking us the question is what is the best thing for me and my health and what are my options? now people are thinking about what does this mean for me if i'm two days too late or one week too early >> important to say, where you are in your pregnancy is a guesstimate. it's a guesstimate at how many weeks you're at. nobody knows you can't know the moment of conception maybe you might know yourself. in terms of the number of weeks of pregnancy, it's a guess that's why there's such fluctuation on when women give

birth. >> i'm on the phone with you because i'm looking at a timeline of pregnancy we've been using for years, and it is exactly what you said. i counsel patients and i say exactly what you said just now look, these are estimates. but what we will do is make sure that we are with you for this process and that we will give you the best medicine, treatment and advice and counseling. i can't understand how -- i'm hopeful this kind of extension that the supreme court is asking for is because they're trying to look at the evidence i'm trying to remain optimistic. you asked the most important question, what's happening medically? what is this translating to in conversations in states like mine in maryland where i'm practicing today right now and people are trying to understand what does this week mean what does it mean for me at this time period? i had to iterate, we're still in -- i'm lucky to be in a state where i can practice the medicine i need to, but we are all wondering and watching to

see what options might be available or not available if we end up not having a drug, again, approved and authorized for over two decades that i've safely used in women and now we might not have that option and we have to give them other options which will cause unnecessary doctor's visits and potentially cause more distress and harm to the woman. that's what we're discussing here >> let me ask you about those other options. if mifepristone is taken off the market even temporarily, it's used, correct me if i'm wrong, in tandem with another drug. what happens if that drug is the only drug used >> globally -- mifepristone is a drug we use as part of that two-drug regimen it's a drug that in many parts of the world is the only option. it's something we can use. however, the reason there are two drugs, mifepristone being the first one, is that they each

play a different role in helping just prepare the body in different stages to actually prevent implantation in the uterus, to prepare the uterus to make it more humane and to make it clinically safer for the woman to have any sort of -- whether it's a miscarriage or just anything that we need to do medically, the two drugs combined will actually be the best regimen if we only have the second drug, which is what we're all mentally -- i'm preparing that's the option we might need to resort to, what we tell women is that you might have more cramping or bleeding, and you will likely need to return so that we can make sure that the one drug did what it's supposed to do or what two drugs were supposed to do this will result in more follow-up that is otherwise not needed and more pain that is not needed >> dr. patel, can you explain -- a lot of the arguments around

this, it feels like what i'm hearing from people who are in support of banning boabortion i all cases is that women are abusing the process. they're getting abortions whenever they want abortions they have a reckless disregard for the life inside their body even up to 30, 40, 50 -- 40 weeks pregnant up until the moment of birth you can get an abortion if you want to get an abortion that's what these women are going out there and doing. tell me who gets an abortion at what point when you're talking about a late-stage abortion, who is generally getting a late-stage abortion >> yeah. thank you for asking that question first, i have to just say that when i hear people kind of talk about -- what you started with, there's all these women looking out -- in this country, it's hard to advocate for yourself to get health care of any kind. i don't care who you are, what kind of person you are, it's

difficult. then to have conversations at any stage of a woman's reproductive cycle about their options, it's not easy in the sense that we have barriers to access, all sorts of things, just to get in to see me could take weeks it's not easy to see providers and the health care they need. when we talk about reproductive access of any kind, the typical woman seeking a medication abortion, that's the majority -- over 50% of abortions are medication abortions, i'm thankful for that because these are women that are along a spectrum of having talked to doctors such as myself, they have had options in front of them most of them have other children, most of them are sole providers. they are also people -- people have this notion they're coming in frequently. that is not the case statistically. we know that for a fact. to your point about people at

later stages, it's, one, incredibly rare and most of the time it's because of medical circumstances. i've yet to work with a woman, a family, an ob-gyn, a women's health team where we had anyone in later stages that has had not had other circumstances either other medical problems, medical conditions, or something that is going on with the fetus. i have to stress that the majority of these medication abortions are done prior to 10, 12 weeks, and the majority of them are done in women who have other children, who again have had unintended pregnancies and i will just repeat this, because i think now we need to put stories and faces to it, it's a woman going through a miscarriage. it's a woman, as you mentioned, who didn't realized they missed their periods because they're working 80 hours a week to put food on the table for their family and they missed a period.

this is the kind of woman we're talking about. we need to put faces, names, stories to this. this is not -- by the way, i saw in the texas ruling that there were stories from the plaintiffs about all these er visits because of these medication abortions run amok that's the opposite of the truth. emergency room visits because of the two-drug protocol have decreased dramatically before we had these drugs available we had problems because of the options that were limited. this has given us options for health care. period >> i will also argue or add that, you know, in terms of where you are in your cycle, women have different lengths of cycles some cycles are longer than others sometimes your period comes more than three weeks or four weeks you never have af full idea of when you're pregnant unless you are carefully monitoring your own cycle.

what might come in the future for women have been harmed because of the lack of access to abortion or doctors are too afraid to do anything. any legal cases brought forward by those women, pushing back on the laws >> there haven't been. it's not clear what sorts of legal vehicles may be used there's some thoughts that there may be a religious vehicle there has not been sustained litigation on behalf of women. the problem is the trajectory here is to have more criminal litigation as a response to abortion the supreme court narrows the right, some states are gearing up to prosecute not only doctors but women. >> a lot of states have pushed back, laura, by voting in abortion to their constitution >> they have because they have that right the states can do whatever they want as it relates to abortion as we've seen.

some women have tried to file lawsuits, essentially taking a little bit of the route -- more of an interesting posture to say, look, i should have been able to claim one of those medical emergency exemptions and i wasn't able to we saw this -- i think just a couple months ago, a bunch of women in texas filing lawsuits saying i should have been able to -- under any reasonable circumstance, i faced a situation where i was having bleeding or miscarrying and i should have been able to get one of those exemptions. the doctors are too afraid to get sued or for whatever reason delayed care and, you know, sometimes people face sepsis or other terrible infections from delaying that care you have seen some women try to file lawsuits on that ground there has not been nearly the same amount of sustained sort of posture that you've seen on the other side, the anti-abortion groups they are much more mobilized in terms of an aggressive legal campaign on this issue

>> ladies, thank you very much for joining us today the headline news here is the supreme court has issued a stay, a two-day stay now this decision gets kicked down to friday at midnight coming up next, an update to a story we first brought you yesterday. oklahoma county officials caught on audio talking about lynchings and killing journalists. how one of them reacted to the calls for resignation. give your small business one tech solution that checks all the boxes. it's all here with the

comcast business complete connectivity solution. peace of mind with cyberthreat security. the power of the largest, fastest reliable network. plus, save up to 75% a year with comcast business mobile. the complete connectivity solution. from the company powered by the next generation 10g network. get started for just $49 a month. and ask about an $800 prepaid card. comcast business. powering possibilities™.

we have news out of oklahoma yesterday we played you audio of a local sheriff and county officials appearing to discuss murdering two journalists and lynching today one of those officials has resigned >> they're insignificant in my life. >> yes. >> they bring no - >> the old saying is what goes around goes around i told you it will. >> yeah. >> i know where two big deep holes are here if you ever need

them. >> i've got an excavator. >> some of the audio the third voice on the clip mccurtain commissioner mark jennings delivered a handwritten resignation letter to governor kevin stitt this morning jennings wrote he planned to release a formal statement in the near future regarding the recent events in our county. at the request of governor stitt the bureau of investigation confirms it is investigating the officials. nbc news has not independently verified those recordings. joining me again from tulsa, oklahoma, the anchor at our kjrh affiliate erin christy bring me up to speed on this resignation. >> well, the governor now has 30 days to call a special election to fill the commissioner's post, but i think the latest in this story is that we are waiting to see what reaction jennings might have since he said he was going to be releasing a statement from the happened written note he

gave the governor and we're waiting for tomorrow because the paper is not finished with their story. that was the first in a series, so they have another article that they're going to be publishing tomorrow as well as the entire three hours from that meeting they're going to be releasing the entire audio. >> there's still more and you have to buy that paper because they have no online presence we'll rely on someone down there sending us a screen shot, not a screen shot, a picture of the article. what about the others who were caught on that audio you have jennings and what about manning and what about the sheriff? any other word or larry hendrix, word from them or kevin clardy about what they might do >> other than sheriff colardy saying he plans to investigate the recordings we have not heard from them. we have reached out and they

have not spoken about possible resignations or making any statement of any kind. one of our state senators leased a statement after that resignation saying he's asked everyone involved to resign. there have been multiple people calling on their resignation and it's sort of a wait and see at this point. >> what's been the reaction from oklahoma >> there were protests on monday outside of the county commissioners meeting in idabel which is three and a half hours away from where our tulsa station is it's pretty far from where the metropolitan areas are there was a hospital in idabel, the county seat of mccurtain county on lockdown after a bomb threat that turned out to be a hoax they evacuated the entire hospital. >> that's interesting. these positions r they voted in to office or are they appointed?

>> they are voted in to office they're elected officials. >> elected officials thank you so much, erin christy. we'll have you back when we get more updates on this story. still ahead, the man charged with shooting a 16-year-old for ringing his doorbell was in court today. how long he could spenind prison if he is convicted. with the subway series. an all-star menu of delicious subs. there's the philly, the monster, the boss. if i hadn't seen it in person, i wouldn't have believed it. eating is believing steph. the subway series. try subway's tastiest menu upgrade yet. (vo) if you've had thyroid eye disease for years and you can't get any shuteye because you can't shut your eyes, or...if your itchy eyes have you itching for a fight, it's not too late for another treatment option for thyroid eye disease, also known as t-e-d.

to learn more, visit treatted.com that's treatt-e-d.com. ♪♪ the only thing i regret about my life is that i did what everyone else did at the time. i hired local talent. if i knew about upwork, i would have hired actually talented people from all over the world. instead of talentless people from all over my house. -grandpa... -shh.. shh.. shh.. -but... -shh.. shh... shh... -but... -oh... ♪ this is how we work now ♪

introducing astepro allergy. now available without a prescription. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid-free spray. while flonase takes hours, astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can [ spray, spray ] astepro and go. cheerleaders don't need to be shot when they walk into the wrong car. teenagers don't need to be murdered because their music is too loud kids shouldn't fear for their life when they go to school or pick up their their siblings from a house in the neighborhood we can do better we can adjust the dials in order to decide not to live in this

distope ya. >> we have the ability to change this culture, senator chris murphy said on the senate floor today. murphy is reacting to the news of three separate young people shot by three separate men in three separate states for three innocent mistakes. first there was andrew lester, the man accused of shooting 16-year-old ralph yarl for ringing the wrong doorbell he was in court today charged with two felonies and if convicted could spend the rest of his life in prison. he has so far pleaded not guilty the other two cases of young people shot for, again, making a mistake, in new york 65-year-old kevin monahan denied bail by a judge today. manahan accused of killing 20-year-old kaylin gillis after the car she was in pulled in his driveway by mistake. he's charged with second-degree murder texas a 25-year-old arrested and charged for shooting multiple teenaged cheerleaders for opening the door to a car they

thought was theirs one of the girls grazed treated and released, the other air lifted to a hospital in critical condition. here is nbc news correspondent morgan chesky. >> reporter: in elgin, texas, outpouring of support for a beloved cheerleader whose team says was injured monday night that may have been over a misunderstanding according to nbc's affiliate kprc the shooting happened when a group of cheerleaders stopped at a grocery store and one tried to get into the wrong car, stopping after seeing someone else in the car. after the girl tried to apologize, the man began firing. >> i just halfway my window was down, threw hands up and then he pulled out a gun and then he just started shooting at all of us. >> reporter: police arrested and charged pedro tello rodriguez jr. who they say fired into a vehicle after an altercation authorities say one victim had serious injuries and

helicoptered to a hospital a local gym owner says that was payton washington, a young cheerleader well known in the community. >> she's won every title in all-star cheer leading, a role model for kids throughout the country. >> reporter: friends posting on social media calling for support and prayers for the high schooler it's one of several shootings to gain national attention recently in rural upstate new york 20-year-old kaylin gillis shot and killed saturday when the suv she was in accidentally pulled in to the wrong driveway investigators say kevin monahan walked out of his home and fired two shots at the vehicle he has pleaded not guilty to secondeg-dree murder. >> that's going to do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts right now. if you want laundry to smell fresh for weeks, make sure you have downy unstopables in-wash scent boosters.