developed nearly 20 years ago was radically different and met at first with great skepticism. >> they really didn't care about it. it wasn't until around 2008, 2009 when people started to see the potential. >> from 1998 to 2008, 2009, all those years, you were in the wilderness. >> took another ten years. >> mrna and other covid-19 vaccines have been administered more than 13 billion times now proving they're both safe and effective. that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." thanks for being with us. you can follow us at mitchell reports on social media. "katy tur reports" starts right now. clear cleesh. good day. i'm chris jansing live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. donald trump's reputation,

brand, wealth, everything he's worked to build is under threat right now. the former president just left a new york courtroom for a lunch break after facing off with the attorney general. just moments from now we'll lay out the significant stakes that trump faces. plus kevin mccarthy's speaker ship is in danger. his last-minute deal to avoid a government shutdown could come at the cost of his gavel. the new and growing threat from inside the republican house caucus. the pointed warning that this is the new normal, flooded streets, floating cars, water pouring in from the walls. as challenges grow and infrastructure increasingly buckles across the country, what can be done to combat climate change? i'll speak with two leading experts. we begin with the empire that made donald trump into a mogul and a president, on trial right now in new york city. trump decided to be in court and

face the judge that has already ruled he consistently committed fraud. before arriving he acknowledged on social media he's fighting for his name and reputation and once there echoed familiar complaints that he is the victim of a rogue prosecutor and judge. >> this is a continuation of the single greatest witch hunt of all time. it was never a default. it was never a problem. everything was perfect. there was no crime. the crime is against me because we have a corrupt district attorney. we have a corrupt attorney general. >> attorney general letitia james sitting in the direct line of sight to trump today put out her own statement, quote, no matter how rich or powerful you are, there are not two sets of laws for people in this country. i want to bring in nbc's vaughn hillyard outside the courthouse, former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst paul butler,

also writer at large for the bulwark and msnbc political annual nift tim miller and "new york times" investigative reporter suzanne craig who has been listening inside the courtroom. suzanne, i think you were in the overflow room. what's going on today? >> reporter: i actually had a pretty good view because we had a view of the whole court including the former president. we started with opening arguments like a lot of trials do. the new york attorney general, they made her case today saying, and what they have to prove, because remember, we've already had a finding and summary judgment that the fraud -- the main allegation has been proven, and now what the attorney general has got to do is naive got to show their evidence and they've got to show -- it was a conspiracy. they've got to convince the judge how big it was because they're looking at damages. they've asked for $250 million

in damages. it could go above that. it might come in below that. they've got to make their case. on the other side which was just fascinating to see, we saw as mr. trump looked on, one of his lawyers got up and made a very audible and angry speech to the judge saying this was a witch hunt, donald trump was a victim here. i was surprised, she just continued -- i wouldn't say i was surprised. it was probably not surprising, but kind of shocking to hear, they immediately started doubling down on some of the things they said that are false, things like mar-a-lago is worth a billion, more than a billion dollars, things that he's said in these financial statements that are in question. doral is worth more than a billion dollars. even at one point she said to the judge, you said it was just worth 18. this is not a jury trial. it's from the bench. the judge actually stopped her and said, i have never said that. donald trump repeats a lie and

peemd think it's true. he's doing that even here today, now accusing a judge of saying something that the judge hasn't said. >> this is so different, paul butler. it's one thing to play to a jury. it's one thing to be emotional, to make that kind of vociferous appeal to 12 men and women, a jury of your peers. very different from a judge. tell us about the dynamics that play out that's very different from what most of us are used to saying on "law and order." >> trump actually had the option of a jury trial, but he preferred a judge decide his case. he didn't get to choose the actual judge, and he probably wasn't counting on judge eng engoron. last week when trump's team asked for a delay of the trial, the judge had a two-sentence response, decline to sign. defendant's arguments are

completely put out there. the judge is going to decide this case on the law, not on whether he likes donald trump. the judge has sworn an oath to be impartial. the judge also knows that however this trial is resolved, there is certainly going to be an appeal. >> vaughn, what's behind trump's decision to voluntarily be inside the courtroom today? he got to choose a judge. he didn't have to be there today. he made that choice. why go face-to-face with a judge you've called deranged? >> reporter: i think it's important to note that what donald trump, by being inside of that courtroom today, sure, yes, the political angle of this. this is him telling his supporters he's defiant. he's going to stare down the judge, stare down new york attorney general letitia james. as he was leaving for the lunch break, he looked directly at the new york attorney general and glared at her. also part of this is he's able

to listen directly to his own attorneys attempt to defend him in front of the judge. not only alina habba who is the spokesperson for his legal team, she went before the judge and said she hadn't intended on speaking today until new york attorney general letitia james went and smoke from the steps and she went on a monologue making the case this is a politically motivated case, the likes that michael cohen shouldn't be believed. also, this is donald trump's opportunity for him to hear from chris kise, his lead attorney, go and present the defense on his behalf. this could have very broad implications for donald trump, not only politically but financially in the future of the trump organization. chris kise, his lead attorney, that future in so many ways is now in his hands. so for donald trump outside of being able to come and sit here in trial and hear from his

attorney specifically defending him, there are no cameras that are streaming this line or recording this in realtime. for him, donald trump has gone through attorneys quite frequently in the past. he has led some to exit on their own accords and has fired other attorneys. notably in just the last year, except for chris kise, this is an important opportunity for him to watch his attorney go and present the case and see whether he's happy with the work of his own defense attorney. >> i want to bring in msnbc legal analyst lisa rubin who has joined susanne. give us your impressions of what you saw today. what is legally significant and what is the mood inside that courthouse? >> -- notably after his florida

indictment and at his arraignment. there is a lot of excitement in the courtroom and a lot of folks in that courtroom including tons of court security officers and secret service. then, of course, you have the defendant himself, donald trump who, although accompanied by his adult son eric, who is also a defendant, sat at the counsel table. eric did not. he sat in the gallery. donald trump, you could told how he felt the arguments were going by his body language all throughout. in particular as judge engoron was going back and forth you saw a lot of arm crossing, head shaking, even pushing from donald trump, almost as trying to push chris kise to say certain things, doing the same thing with alina habba. i think the demonstrated performance by alina habba, in marked contrast to chris kise, was not as intellectual or methodical, just all passion was because donald trump prodded her to that, because he was

dissatisfied with the performance of chris kise who is talking about very, very specific and pond rouse accounting principles in his opening statements. >> let me follow up on that. we talk about how extraordinary everything is from donald trump. to have him in the courtroom, very nearby is the attorney general who decided to pursue this case, in addition to the judge whom he has tried to rip apart. what was that like? give us your impressions of just that dynamic. >> tish james came into the courtroom much earlier than donald trump did. she sat there with the press for almost an hour as we awaited the former president's arrival. she sat in the gallery, not wither lawyers. at one point trump seemed like trying to get her attention,

almost to dare her to make eye contact with him. she didn't want to. then when he left the courtroom at this last break, he walked very slowly. as he passed her in her front row seat, he looked down and gave her a defiant glare. tish james looked directly ahead. there could not have been a more dramatic staredown than what we just witnessed. >> i was reading everything from your piece, sue, that donald trump believes just by being there he can influence the outcome of this trial and he took advantage of it. when he went in, he spoke. at the lunch break, he spoke. i want to play what we just heard from him. >> we're going to be here for months with a judge that already made up his mind. it's ridiculous. he's a democrat judge. he's an operative and it's

ridiculous. other than that, things went very well. >> sue, he doesn't often let sort of a temper show. he has these lines he uses all the time, but you can feel and see and hear the frustration in his voice with that. >> you really could. you could also see it in court today. he was angry. he walked in angry, and at times he looked a bit bored during some of it. boy did he perk up when his second lawyer got on. she was audible, almost yelling at times at the judge. i have to say the idea this may help him being here, i'm not sure about that. this is the judge that just last week found him liable on the fraud charges, on the main charge. today in court the lawyer -- one of the lawyers was sparring with the judge and was saying things that the judge has never said. i can just imagine this is not sitting well with the judge.

this judge is the one that's ultimately going to decide when we go into the penalty phase what is it going to be? so i found that was just interesting, his decision to show up today and just the temperature in the room was very high. he was very angry. >> well, that leads me back to the judge, paul, if i can. if i can call them antics. i don't know. you can forcefully defend your client, sfliet again, how is that likely to play? is he going to be immune from the fact that donald trump goes out in the lunch break and rips the whole process to shreds? >> i think the judge will be immune from trump's antics. but lisa used just the right word to describe what the lawyers are doing in court. it's a performance. it's a performance for donald trump, their client. it has nothing to do with the

rule of law. trump out of court called the judge a deranged democrat who is trying to take away his property. that's playing more to his political base than a court of law. if the lawyers do that in court, they'll get in even more trouble. i say even more trouble because last week the judge fined five of trump's lawyers $7500 each because he thought they were acting inappropriately in court. that's more money, a bigger sanction than tish james asked the judge for. it's the lawyers on the line here in terms of how the judge responds to this case, much more than the defendant donald trump. >> tim, it may not help him legally. apparently isn't helping the pocketbook of his lawyers. having said that, trump truly believes, right, that this is going to help him politically. we know from michael cohen, at least what cohen says is trump did all this because he wanted to be higher on the forbes list,

inflate the numbers, increase the value of his assets. he wanted to be higher in ranking. for him, his reputation, his standing, people's belief that he is this great businessman is so important to him, i don't know if this will change the opinion of a single supporter of donald trump. is there any way in which you see it helps him, it advances him politically? >> i don't think that this case is the particular threat to him politically. i guess if you were going to look at how this could conceivably help him, he is running as an anti-establishment candidate. i think there's a theory among some of the establishment republican times that all of these court cases will add up and people will get sick of him. i think the opposite has happened. despite the fact he's a former president, it's ridiculous from an objective standpoint.

but it plays into the narrative that he's anti-elite, that people are out to get him. that helps him with the maga base. i don't know how much that will help in the general election with general election voters. there's another case about the trump organization that's coming up which is this fraud case where he was involved in a multi-level marketing scheme, acn, and he screwed over for people that signed up, thinking they were going to get rich like donald trump and they lost their savings. i think that type of case is much more vulnerable than his lying to deutsche bank. i think it depends on who his victims are, on which ones are more vulnerable for him politically than others. >> let me take you back into the courtroom, sue and lisa. first of all, what comes up next after the lunch break? sue, i'm curious, what are you

looking for going forward? who are the key witnesses in a legal sense. people want to see what some of the people closest to him have to say but who the other folks are. lisa, let me start with you and what you're looking for later today. >> after the lunch break, chris, the first thing i think that's going to happen is we're going to see the prosecution call their first witness. we understand that witness is likely to be donald bender. he was donald trump's lead accountant. one thing interesting about alina habba's presentation, in addition to her tone being so different than chris kise and cliff robert who represents donald trump jr. and eric trump, she put the blame on ms. czar. essentially they had disclaimers saying these were performed by accountants, why is nobody investigating the czars. i think we can look to that

cross-examination to be a much more strenuous and heated one than we might have expected than someone who served as donald trump's lead accountant for a period of many, many years. accountants are traditionally mild mannered people. i don't think this examination will be mild mannered. >> after that, sue, who else? who will you be looking at? >> one other point this afternoon is alina habba, trump's lawyer saying not only diz ms. czars prepare the statement, that's not what my reading says. there's disclaimers on them. there's a big defense for trump, there are these disclaimer. they say we were provided information and this is all on donald trump. so i think how that exchange goes this afternoon is going to be really important. going forward, we're going to see a number of trumps testify. whether or not they take the fifth i think will be really interesting. at the end we'll have someone

come in who is a discouragement expert. that's going to be crucial because it will determine ultimately the penalty that will be paid. i think part of what we saw today, and i really want to make this point because i think it's important. today the other audience for what was going on, donald trump was clearly the most important audience for his lawyers, but the appellate court is very, very important in this. this is going to go on appeal. trump's team is very angry at a number of the rulings that have happened and they are playing to the appellate court as well as their client. >> would you expect, paul, a difference in tone between -- cross-examination, again, always an interesting thing to watch, but in terms of the prosecution and defense, what would you look for? >> the prosecution is basically already proved its case. the main issue that's going to take three months to resolve is

just how much money in damages trump has to pay. i'm not sure what the defense is. again, they're going to say that -- how much real estate is worth is subjective and they're going to also make that point about they have all these disclaimers that said we're not saying these financial reports are exactly right. the problem, chris, for that defense is that the judge already resolved many of those issues when he ruled in favor of tish james, that motion for summary judgment last week where the judge said basically the receipts of this case, the evidence including that submitted by donald trump makes it clear that there was fraud. again, the main issue is just damages. >> of course, donald trump who spoke, as i said, going in, coming out for the lunch break isn't the only one who had something to say. here is attorney general tish james. >> donald trump and the other defendants have committed

persistent and repeated fraud. my message is simple, no matter how powerful you are. no matter how much money you think you may have, no one is above the law. >> so, tim, this isn't a trial that could send trump to prison. and as you rightfully point out, it isn't one where you can look at a lot of victims that people might relate to. deutsche bank is probably not going to gender a lot of sympathy for what happened there. what do you think is at stake beyond trump's personal wealth, obviously? is james right about the message that needs to be sent? >> i don't think we can understate how important this is for him. i think others that were there testified to just how personal he seems to be taking this. this is how he sees his legacy. it's his baby, his business. that's tied to his ego. that's where this moves from the legal into the political. his whole aura, his whole ego,

this invincibility about him, somebody who became rich and put his name on top of all these famous buildings and became president, if that is undermined to such a degree that it was all a house of cards, that it was all a fraud, obviously i think that's going to impact how he responds personally which will have a political impact. i think it has an impact on his broader brand, maybe not for his core base, but for particularly low information voters who are trying to determine what -- yet still whether they would get on board with him another time. >> it looks like lunch break is ending. donald trump once again speaking to the cameras. we have our cameras there, obviously our reporters there. we'll keep an ear to it. we'll keep you posted. in the meantime thank you all. appreciate you very much. up next, the government shutdown averted for now.

can speaker mccarthy keep his job? we've got that in 60 seconds. 60s

at this hour we're learning more about congressman matt gaetz's plan to challenge kevin mccarthy's leadership. moments ago the florida congressman hinting on the house floor that a motion to vacate, in other words, essentially fire the speaker, could come later this week. the chaos of a possibility shutdown averted over the weekend with the help of democrats has been replaced by new fights. what will the speaker's battle look like? joining us is nbc's ali vitali on capitol hill and jake sherman, co-founder of punchbowl news and an msnbc contributor. ali, what did matt gaetz have to say? >> a lot of words, but not specifics. we asked how this might work. gaetz telling reporters on the

front steps including myself he would introduce a motion to vacate some time this week, he didn't specify. he said he didn't think he'd have the votes to oust the speaker but said he would do this as many times as he saw fit. i asked him the critical question who, if not mccarthy? he couldn't provide an answer. instead choosing to filibuster. i'll show you more of that conversation on the steps after he left the floor. >> who would you want to see as speaker? >> we have a lot of talented people. there are probably hundreds of republicans i would vote for as speaker. we need to rebuild trust. we need someone who can connect the most conservative features of our conference to the most moderate features of our conference. i understand that. i'm not running for speaker. i understand it might not be someone who agrees with me on every position. >> reporter: again, it's the age-old question of you can't replace mccarthy with nobody.

right now gaetz is not proffering a name. one he did throw into the mix casually is steve scalise, the number two house republican here. his health has been something that might make him double-think a run for leadership. again, no one is outright talking about challenging mccarthy. for gaetz, he's throwing this motion to vacate at the wall, hoping for the chaos of it. not something we pressed him on. the idea that, if he kuntz putting up motion to vacate votes, this would effectively paralyze an institution that his party is the majority and holds the power to, he seemed unfased by that, instead listing things that he thinks mccar they didn't abide by, from the concessions he made to hardliners in january, things like a supposed side deal with president biden on ukraine funding. that, of course, is something that gaetz has challenged mccarthy to speak to. he also mentioned the idea that in the speaker ship rule making

process, mccarthy agreed that members should have 72 hours to read legislation, that he wouldn't do things by suspension. both of those things happened on saturday to avert a government shutdown. so while mccarthy says this is all personal, gaetz is saying it's all about policy. i think it's probably more a mix of the both. >> jake, i want to play a little bit of what republican jason smith said about a possible effort to oust mccarthy. >> the only way a motion to vacate could be successful is if matt gaetz did exactly what he yells at speaker mccarthy doing and that's working with the democrats. in fact, he'd have to get more than 200-plus democrats to join him to remove kevin mccarthy because more than 200 republicans are 100% behind speaker mccarthy. >> jake, pick up where ali left off. where does this go from here? apparently there are a hundred

republicans out there who could be speaker. >> with all due respect to mr. smith, that's not exactly the case. these are typically in typical times votes for leadership, especially on the floor, although we have had a motion to vae kate, are party line votes. whether democrats vote with mccarthy or against mccarthy is not gaetz pairing with them exactly. that's an important distinction. listen, i don't know if kevin mccarthy is going to be speaker by the end of this week. i don't know the answer to that i'm not saying he will or he won't. it's really, really difficult. to be clear, if mccarthy stays speaker, it will rely on democrats. i don't know at this point if he can get 218 republicans to be with him, and neither do his aides, leadership aides as well. they think if mccarthy can become speaker, it's either because democrats sit the vote out or vote present or somehow dispose with this motion otherwise. mccarthy has vowed, his aides

have said, leadership aides have said they will not negotiate with democrats. democrats should do the right thing and not line up with gaetz. democrats don't see it that way. there has to be some sort of conversation between mccarthy and house democratic leader hakeem jeffries today or tomorrow morning to figure out what democrats are going to do. if they don't figure it out, it could be quite messy for mccarthy. >> what's the likelihood that happens and what's the likelihood that hakeem jeffries is include to help any republican out. >> it won't be cheap, let's put it that way. if you're asking the minority to save the majority speaker, that's a very big askment i cannot imagine that democrats are going to do that for free. i just don't think that's going to happen. but all of that said, the calculus for democrats to make is a few things. number one, can they extract some sort of rules concession out of him?

i think mccarthy's aides say the answer is no. and what stands on the other side of mccarthy. by the way, we haven't heard from the administration on this yet in a substantive way. does the administration want more ukraine aid? i think it's very unlikely as it is. it becomes less likely if kevin mccarthy is not speaker and it's someone more conservative than kevin mccarthy. so democrats -- listen, this is a republican problem that mccarthy is going to need to ask democrats to solve for him. democrats have a big choice to make here. i think we'll see more and more of that in the next 12-24 hours. democratic leadership meets tonight, the steering committee, a caucus meeting tomorrow morning. i think the shape of this will become more clear in the next 24 hours. >> ali, for anybody who doesn't follow this closely, why would he go to the democrat? why not go to the republican who is making trouble, right? is there anything kevin mccarthy could offer to matt gaetz to go away? even if there was, is he

inclined to give gaetz anything? >> i don't think so on either of those scenarios, chris. it goes back to what we were talking about and what i was talking about with congressman gaetz. mccarthy on the weekend chose, and he says this to as many people as will listen, that he thinks this is all personal for gaetz. there might be a sled of that, that the personal is swirling in the pot. certainly personal relationships are the currency on capitol hill. it's how deals get done. it's probably why it's a non-starter between these two men at this point. for gaetz, he was very clear to outline to me and other reporters just now, that for him, this is about mccarthy violating some of the rules he created while doing negotiations with his hard rank flank back in january to get this job in the first place. you have to think about all that in tow at that time. it's not one singular thing. it's not just personal, it's not just politics. it's always a mix of all of those things. that's why mccarthy might have

no choice just as he did on saturday, but to look left, having exhausted all the options within his own conference, having looked at the numbers, looked at the realities of what's movable, what's not. it may be concessions to democrats could get him where he needs to go if he's running up against brick walls from his own conference. he'd certainly take fire from that from some of the right. now now, what's the alternative? >> ali vitali, jake sherman, thank you. former president trump just spoke in his defense during the lunch break. you're watching "chris jansing reports" only on msnbc. you're wg reports" only on msnbc you comi? because the only thing dripping should be your style. plop plop fizz fizz with alka-seltzer plus cold & flu relief. also try for fizzy fast cough relief. (all) ♪ toooo youuuuu! ♪ (sean) i wish for the amazing pnew iphone 15 pro!ief.

(jason) sean! do you mean this one - the one with titanium? (sean) no way i can trade this busted up thing for one. (jason) maybe stealing wishes from the birthday boy is not your best plan -- switch to verizon and trade in any iphone and get the new iphone 15 pro on them. (sean) what!? (jason) yup, and on an amazing network (sean) and i don't have to ruin anymore birthday parties! (jason) yeah, that ship has sailed... let's go get you the iphone. here we go, come on hon. (vo) trade in any iphone in any condition for a new iphone 15 pro on us. only on verizon. since my citi custom cash® card automatically adjusts to earn me more cash back in my top eligible category... suddenly life's feeling a little more automatic. like doors opening wherever i go... [sound of airplane overhead] even the ground is moving for me! y'all seeing this? wild! and i don't even have to activate anything. oooooohhh... automatic sashimi! earn cash back that automatically adjusts to how you spend with the citi custom cash® card. [mind blown explosion noise] (man) mm, hey, honey.

looks like my to-do list grew. "paint the bathroom, give baxter a bath, get life insurance," hm. i have a few minutes. i can do that now. oh, that fast? remember that colonial penn ad? i called and i got information. they sent the simple form i need to apply. all i do is fill it out and send it back. well, that sounds too easy! (man) give a little information, check a few boxes, sign my name, done. they don't ask about your health? (man) no health questions. -physical exam? -don't need one. it's colonial penn guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance. if you're between the ages of 50 and 85, your acceptance is guaranteed in most states, even if you're not in the best health. options start at $9.95 a month, 35 cents a day. once insured, your rate will never increase. a lifetime rate lock guarantees it. keep in mind, this is lifetime protection. as long as you pay your premiums, it's yours to keep. call for more information

and the simple form you need to apply today. there's no obligation, and you'll receive a free beneficiary planner just for calling.

-- trump decided to be inside that courthouse today and face the judge who ruled he committed fraud. in just the last five minutes he was speaking to reporters, defending himself again to cameras outside that courtroom. nbc's vaughn hillyard is there for us. i think that's time number three going in, leaving for lunch. he's seen a bank of cameras again and stopped. what did he have to say this time? >> reporter: every time donald trump has had the opportunity to take the microphone, he's taken the microphone. donald trump could very well decide to testify himself and go

before the judge and actually answer questions of the prosecutors. there's been no indication that he intends to do that. instead he's going to use the microphones that are available to him and he will continue to talk. take a listen to part of what he just said just moments ago. >> this rogue judge, a trump hater. the only one that hates trump more is his associate up there, the person that works with him, and she's screaming into his ear almost every time we ask a question, a disgrace. >> reporter: chris, he spoke for several minutes. as you can hear the sirens, several of the streets around the courthouse are shut down. his motorcade awaits him. the only way for donald trump to hear the pending trial go forward is by being in the courtroom himself and hearing his own attorneys come to his defense. as for the other remarks that donald trump said, we're listening to several minutes of

remarks. of course there are personal attacks against attorney general letitia james, suggesting this is nothing short of a witch hunt and since she ran for attorney general has been, in his own words, out to get him and that's exactly what this lawsuit is. he's also made direct attacks on the judge overseeing this case suggesting he should even be disbarred. he also made very specific remarks that nobody was defrauded for this, the banks didn't lose money, the lenders didn't lose money. this will ultimately play out over the next two to three months and will be the determination of the judge, to extend to which he's liable for these financial fraud claims. he also made reference of an appellate court ruling over the summer in which ivanka trump was taken out as a defendant. she is no longer going to be taking the stand -- she, i should say, is no longer a defendant along with her brothers and her father and the

trump organization. last week the appellate court threw the ball back into this judge's determinations to analyze the extent to which the statute of limitations may clear donald trump from facing the civil suit brought by the new york attorney general suggesting numerous claims made by the prosecutors happened at a time previous to which he can be liable for. ultimately the appellate court, much to the chagrin of donald trump did not expressly rule in his favor and not throw this suit out. he was hoping that at least the court proceeding would be delayed. instead the appellate court said today would be the first day of the proceedings. the question is whether the appellate court could still jump back into this case which donald trump in his remarks is clearly hoping for, suggesting he is believing this judge would be a

biased one. as the judge laid out in his ruling last week, as somebody unlikely to rule in his favor in these months ahead. >> that's been his consistent defense. still months to go in this trial. vaughn hillyard, thank you. supreme court justices are back on the bench today with a number of political lightning rods on the document. among those issues, should guns be banned for anyone who is the subject of a domestic violence restraining order? should states prevent social media companies from censuring their users? how much power should the federal government have over things like financial institutions and environmental protection? in addition the justices could hear arguments in a case to limit the availability of mifepristone. scorching heat waves and flooding destroying aging infrastructure across the country. up next, what's happening to our globe with climate change's firm grip and how can we fight back? you're watching "chris jansing

reports" only on msnbc. ching "cg reports" only on msnbc in the subway app today. now that's a deal worth celebrating. man, what are you doing?! get it before it's gone on the subway app. ♪♪ ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪♪ ) woah. ( ♪♪ ) ( ♪♪ ) ( ♪♪ ) ( ♪♪ ) constant contact delivers the marketing tools your small business needs to keep up, excel, and grow. constant contact. helping the small stand tall.

unprecedented heat in the middle of fall forced the cancellation of the annual twin cities marathon, and the runners didn't find out until less than two hours before the race was set to start. meteorologists expected a high of 89 degrees, but it got even hotter, actually hitting 92, and that shattered a record dating back more than 20 years.

now new york's governor is calling these apocalyptic images the new normal. streets turned to rivers. all 7,400 miles of new york city's pipes inundated by torrential rain. cars and buses ground to a halt. water pours through the roofs of underground stops. air travel stopped as passengers waded through flooded terminals. thousands of basements and ground level apartments, entire livelihoods destroyed in near minutes by rising waters. while the east coast is having its rainiest fall season in 140 years, another alarming sign from above courtesy of nasa's satellite. the color of the ocean is shifting from blue to green, signaling an abrupt change to the water's ecosystem. dr. michael mann, aptal distinguished professor of earth and environmental science at the university of pennsylvania and author of the new book "our

fragile moment, how lessons from earth's past can help us survive the climate crisis." david lip see, the author of "the parrot and the ig gloo." david, you live in new york. it was a deluge. the government declared a state of emergency. parents got frantic calls to come and get your kids from school. we can't have them here. whether it's here or texas or the plains or hawaii that we were warned about decades ago. >> we were warned in 1979 by the national academy of sciences, if this continues, there's no reason to doubt that climate change will occur and no reason to believe that those changes will be negligible. here we are. roger ravel, first generation to the great professor that dr. mann belongs, he warned that

within 50 years carbon dioxide could have an effect on the climate. how fragile are we especially when it comes to aging infrastructure and overall, infrastructure not built to sustain the rain, the winds, the snow, the heat that we're now experiencing? >> we built this massive global infrastructure over thousands of years during a relatively stable climate, there are 8 billion-plus people who depend on that infrastructure and it's threatened by the fact that we're now changing the climate. that's what makes this moment so fragile. we're warming the planet at rates that have no precedent as far back as we look. what that means is that we are losing the reliability of the infrastructure that helps sustain this very large population, helps provide

resilience in the face of extreme weather events. those events are getting more extreme and they're starting to pass thresholdtion as we see with new york city where they're no longer just a nuisance, they become catastrophic in their consequences. if we continue to burn fossil fuels and go down this road, it's worse than the new normal. it was mentioned a new normal earlier in the segment. it's an ever-moving baseline of greater warmth and other extreme weather events. the good news here, the science tells us, if we stop burning fossil fuels and stop putting carbon pollution into the atmosphere, the surface of the planet stops warming up almost immediately. so there's a direct and immediate consequence of our efforts to act. >> i want to ask you who to lead the charge. you're both professors. michael, i'll start with you about young people. they are turning high anxiety over climate change and we know they have it, into action. first a successful lawsuit in

montana that argued the state's failure to combat climate change wasn't constitutional. in portugal, six young actiists are fighting 32 countries, offering that climate change is threatening their basic human rights. what are they fighting for, michael? what might the world look like when they're our age if they're not successful? >> yeah. so, and it comes back to the theme here of the book, urgency versus agency. we see the urgency, but urgency without agency, without anyway of changing things can be debilita debilitating. the fortunate thing here is we see with these young folks that we do have the ability to change things. the youth climate movement has had a massive impact. it has changed the entire conversation. we see these court cases that are going to now require that governments take climate change more seriously when they make decisions, for example, about granting new fossil fuel

infrastructure. we're making some progress. we've seen global carbon emotions stabilize. they're no longer rising. we're making progress, but we're not yet making enough progress. that's why we have to take advantage of this moment, this fragile moment where there's still time to act, take advantage of the door that these young people have opened for us but now we have to collectively walk through that door. we have to make the decisions, we have to vote, we have to do all the things these young folks can't yet do so we don't leave a degraded planet behind for them and their children and grandchildren. >> professor lipsky, there are young people organizing who are not buying into the denialism that you spent five years researching and writing about. what is it that changes people from maybe a household where there's denialism or a culture where they operate that's in

denial? what does history tell us about it? is it public pressure? is it political pressure? is it courts? how do you see change coming and what role young people are playing in it? >> it's putting your hand on the stove and drawing it back. before, i think, the few people that did this study in june, only 54% of the country believed that climate change was a major threat. ap did a study last week and 87% of americans believe they have been touched by an extreme weather event. that's a huge jump. that was up by 10% since july. that's the change. that's what climate scientists said would be the change, we're going to see this happening. i was watching the footage on the monitor, and that was like a thought balloon over climate scientists' heads since the late 1980s, which is this is going to

happen. let's try to avoid it. >> the deniers knew that kind of like in the science of smoking, which you write about in your book, it would start to shift because you put your hand on the stove? >> exactly. the scientists believed that. along the same lines, what actually stopped people using tobacco were the courts. it wasn't actually politics. the master settlement agreement was all of these states settling with phillip morris at all in knorr of 1998. and so this movement is something that climate scientists like jim hanson has seen coming too. politics may get bottlenecked, people like matt gaetz get in the way. the courts come through. it taps on us on the shoulder. this is happening. i found out that my water proof boots weren't water proof at all. it took ten years to learn that. >> there are two books, i've

read them both. terrific. michael man, david lipsy. some of europe's top diplomats in kyiv today. a show solidarity for ukraine. the u.s. stopgap funding bill includes nothing for kyiv. in europe, similar signs of political strain are emerging 19 months into this war. eu official says this unannounced informal meeting, the first ever held outside eu borders was intended to signal the bloc's unwavering support and to discuss the peace plan. while that meeting in kyiv may be symbolic, the conversations taking place on capitol hill could really be a matter of life and death for ukraine. in just the past two hours, nbc news reported there's roughly $5.4 billion left in funding for ukraine, according to a u.s. official. broad bipartisan majorities in both chambers support sending more aid to help. but a faction of those hard-line

house republicans were able to shut off that lifeline in this latest spending bill. and in the process, raised doubts over whether it will ever open again. nbc news chief foreign correspondent richard engel is covering the response to the u.s. funding deal. always good to see you, richard. what are we hearing from kyiv and the kremlin about the government funding deal without aid for ukraine, and the impact it might have on the war? >> well, you know, people are very frightened when they don't say anything at all. that's the situation we have in kyiv right now. i have had many conversations with ukrainian officials and in private, they will tell you they are very nervous. they are worried that the united states is giving up on them. they're angry and frustrated because they feel they are risking their lives, in many cases giving their lives to not just defend their country but the cause of freedom. they say that if you stop

supporting ukraine in its efforts to defend itself that you go back to appeasement. they believe this is another 1939 moment, and that the world saw what happened when dictators and fascists were appeased at the dawn of the second world war. but they know they can't say that out loud. they don't want to antagonize their friends. they want the russians to remain their enemies. they don't want to pick fights within the coalition. they know that the polls are facing a very similar situation. the polish government, which has been immensely supportive of ukraine and supplying weapons and supplying funds to a degree, hosting many refugees, they are now facing pressure from the far right as well saying we've done enough, we have spent too much. this is an open-ended commitment. we need to spend more money at home for the polish people. very similar kind of rhetoric that we're hearing in the united states. and the ukrainians are saying

it's not just about ukraine. history has shown that if dictators are allowed to gobble up their neighbors, that they won't be appeased. they won't be satisfied. they will keep going. but so far that argument is not having the same sort of weight that it did six months ago, a year ago, when ukraine was making rapid advances on the battlefield. >> appreciate your updates. coming up, the latest on former president trump's trial, he's facing off with the new york attorney general who brought the fraud case against him and his company. a live report from a lawyer who has been inside the courtroom all morning long. you're watching "chris jansing reports" only on msnbc. ng reports" only on msnbc . [dog barks] no it's just a bunny! only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ i was stuck. unresolved depression symptoms were in my way. i needed more from my antidepressant.

vraylar helped give it a lift. adding vraylar to an antidepressant... is clinically proven to help relieve overall depression symptoms... ...better than an antidepressant alone. and in vraylar clinical studies, most saw no substantial impact on weight. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, as these may be life-threatening, or uncontrolled muscle movements, which may be permanent. high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death, weight gain, and high cholesterol may occur. movement dysfunction and restlessness are common side effects. stomach and sleep issues, dizziness, increased appetite, and fatigue are also common. side effects may not appear for several weeks. i didn't have to change my treatment. i just gave it a lift. ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie could help you save.

this is american infrastructure, a prime target for cyberattacks. but the same ai-powered security that protects all of google also defends these services for everyone who lives here. ♪

(aidyl) hi, i'm aidyl, and i lost 90 pounds on golo. for everyone who lives here. i struggled with weight loss and weight gain my entire life. with all the yo-yo dieting i did in the past, i would lose 20, 30, 50 pounds just to gain them over and over again. thanks to golo, i've been able to steadily go down the sizes in my closet and keep the weight off. for the first time in forever, i feel in control. (announcer) change your life at golo.com. that's golo.com. we've got a lot more to cover on this second hour of "chris jansing reports." ahead for us, was it an