get over here kids. time for today's lesson. wow. -whoa. what are those? these are humans. they rely on something called the internet to survive. huh, powers out. [ gasp ] are they gonna to die? worse, they are gonna get bored. [ gasp ] wait look! they figured out a way to keep the internet on. yeah! -nature finds a way. [ grunt ] stay connected when the power goes out, with storm ready wifi from xfinity. and see migration in theaters now.

and i thank you. good to be back with you on this second hour of msnbc reports with jose diaz-balart. it is 1:00 eastern, 10:00 a.m. pacific. i'm in today for chris jansing. what happens today in a d.c. courthouse could be one of the most important days yet for the former president. donald trump's lawyer facing off against jack smith's special counsel team about the durability of trump's presidential immunity argument. it is now in the hands of three judges, but could this case as trump's lawyer put it open pandora's box? >> a president has to have immunity. and the other thing is i did nothing wrong. >> and the two top figures in this case, special counsel jack smith and judge tanya chutkan have now both been victims of swatting. what does that mean for the safety of public officials as we head into a busy 2024?

plus, the pentagon's investigation into secretary of to hide his hospitalization from even the white house as more lawmakers on capitol hill call for his resignation. i want to begin inside that d.c. courthouse where we heard a bit more than about an hour's worth of debate that could have massive implications for donald trump's future and that of the power of the presidency. at the heart of it, the former president's claim that he is immune from prosecution, tied to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. it is now in the hands of a three-judge panel. for the u.s. court of appeals who are up against the clock of an upcoming election and three other criminal court cases, the former president is facing. lawyers on both sides made it clear today that the stakes could not be higher. >> to authorize the prosecution of a president for his official acts would open a pandora's box from which this nation may never recover. >> never before has there been

allegations that a sitting president has with private individuals and using the levers of power sought to fundamentally subvert the democratic republic and the electoral system. and frankly if that kind of fact pattern arises again, i think it would be awfully scary if there weren't some sort of mechanism by which to reach that criminally. >> let's bring in nbc's yamiche alcindor and walk us through what happened in court today and what comes next there. >> reporter: well, another historic day here in washington, just behind me, former president trump and special counsel jack smith and lawyers both in court arguing before this three-judge panel. the central issue is former president trump, is he absolutely criminally immune from some sort of prosecution? his lawyers argue yes, he is.

the government argues no, he is not. interesting back and forth here. these were judges asking questions and pressing for answers here. judge pan who is a judge who was appointed by president biden, was pressing the lawyer to former president trump saying, what if president trump had killed a political rival, what if he had sold pardons, what if he sold military secrets, would he still be criminally immune? president trump's lawyer argued unless he was impeached and convicted by the senate, he would be criminally immune. also making the argument that if performer presidents were allowed to be criminally prosecuted, it would open up a slippery slope for other presidents to be criminally prosecuted because of political motives. take a listen to what president trump's lawyer had to say. >> the president has to look over his shoulder or her shoulder every time he or she has to make a controversial decision or after i leave office, am i going to jail about this, when my political opponents take power that dampens be the ability of the

president. >> reporter: now, a judge who is appointed by former president george h.w. bush, republican, also asking questions and that judge was asking, well, how do we avoid the slippery slope that president trump's lawyers were talking about? james pearce, a lawyer for special counsel jack smith, he pushed back on this theory of a pandora's box. he said that we need to live in a nation where presidents cannot do things by killing their political rivals or sell pardons or sell military excrete s or sell militaryecrets. he said it would be a frightening future if that was the kind of country we were living in. the arguments took a little bit more than an hour. now we're waiting for an answer. once we get an answer, it is sure to go to the supreme court where that -- where the justices there are going to then take their stances on what this means. overall, former president trump is saying this is all wrong, that he should not be in court, that this is really all a sort of witch-hunt, something he said over and over again. but jack smith, special counsel jack smith and the lawyers for the government are saying this is an unprecedented act that was

taken by president trump, trying to overturn the 2020 election, so we will, of course, continue to cover this and continue to watch this closely. another historic day here. jose? >> yamiche alcindor in washington, thank you. catherine, what do you make of what you heard in court today? >> well, it was shocking to have attorneys, you always want to represent your client and be vigorous about it, but when i believe it was judge pan, as you reporter said, ask, well, can the president sell pardons, can a president direct navy s.e.a.l. team six to assassinate a political rival, and basically donald trump's lawyers argument was unless he has been impeached and convicted by the senate, he can't be prosecuted. eventually there was a lot of torturous pulling of teeth, the trump lawyers conceded that there are some circumstances

where a president can be prosecuted. but it was actually surprising that, to me that was a no brainer, of course you say of course he can be prosecuted if he tries to assassinate a rival and those words did not come out of his lawyer's mouth. >> there was a discussion on what the scope of what is being asked of the judges to decide is and is not. i thought that was an interesting thing. the judges are saying, well, wait, if that's what you're alleging, that there can be absolutely no -- the full immunity for a president to do anything and everything and unless he's convicted by the senate, is immune from it, the judges then kind of said what is it then you're asking? it seems like they're focused the question much more. >> well, the -- the judges sort of narrowed the issue because quite frankly donald trump's lawyers sort of made them narrow it by taking this very, very hard line, he's absolutely

immune for acts he president, unless he was impeached and convicted by the senate. it was sort of they put the judges in a position where it is sort of, i believe, an easy decision for the court and it will be denied and will probably -- the judges will deny this appeal and we'll see it in the supreme court. the question is that march 4th trial date, will that happen? i don't think it will. but can it happen may 4th? maybe. >> and, carol, so the former president and we're looking at the artist renderings was there and right there in the front, in the courtroom. why would trump choose to be there today and not on the -- on the campaign trail in iowa, what benefit does it bring him to be there? >> jose, i'm glad you raised that point. because you may remember that donald trump has complained bitterly in various court filings in any of the four courthouses now where he faces

charges, and claims of fraud or crimes, he has made the complaint that this is really unfair to him to set all these trial dates because he's campaigning for office. the truth is in the pudding. wherever you're putting yourself physically and donald trump is putting himself physically in that courtroom, it is important to him and part of his campaign to say he is being persecuted. that something is different and wrong about the government charging him with crimes when he was in office. as james pearce for the special counsel's office argued, pretty well, there is a reason they're charging donald trump with crimes and the reason is the unprecedented acts he took from basically november 4th forward to try to block the peaceful transfer of power. as pearce said it, using the levers of power and deploying people outside of the white house to help him stop the

election from being ratified, certified, and essentially tried to strangle the victory of joe biden. >> and, carol, our team in court pointed to this specific moment when trump seemed to be reacting in court. here is what the special counsel's team was saying at that moment. >> the fact that this investigation did doesn't reflect that we are going to see a sea change of vindictive tit for tat prosecutions in the future. i think it reflects the fundamentally unprecedented nature of the criminal charges here. >> our team writing that he, quote, shook his head in disagreement. what do you make of that, carol? >> it is interesting, jose. former president trump has actually been the person giving voice to this pandora's box idea and has said over and over again, well, now he's opened the door, biden opened the door, i

could now charge any of my political enemies with a crime if and when i'm re-elected president. and he's referenced recently this idea that biden's alleged failure to deal with immigration policy and the crossings of the border could lead to a criminal prosecution. i'm kind of scratching my head because that isn't a crime. and indeed id can't see a way in which the department of justice would find any statute underwhich it is a crime. if a president seeks under a policy to do something, and does a lousy job of it, i'm not saying that's what happened here, or does a fantastic job of it, it is actually part of the job of serving as president. and what the special counsel is arguing here is that donald trump's acts have nothing to do with being president, safeguarding the country, being its steward. in fact, it had everything to do with clinging to power

illegally. and using every sort of lever at his disposal to do so. trump has shook his head many times at this idea that it wouldn't be a pandora's box, but he is the one who said he will open it. >> yeah, and carol, trump's lawyer brought up impeachment a number of times throughout the debate today. that if he was impeached, this conversation would be different. at the time of the impeachment, the argument by his people was this wasn't the venue to prosecute him. so, which is it? >> i have to say i'm with catherine on the ease with which this panel can make their decision on the law. i don't -- i'm not in the business of speculating, but i think they will come to the conclusion that it is sort of impossible for congress to either fully investigate a potential crime, as was clear with the january 6th committee, they did an amazing job of

uncovering a lot, but they don't have the powers of the department of justice. and then if we go back to impeachment, obviously senate leaders said this wasn't the place and the time to pursue and investigate donald trump. at the moment, he was a sitting president. he had not -- biden had not yet been inaugurated. it is a stretch to say congress' impeachment powers are the same as the department of justice's investigative and prosecution powers. >> and, catherine, you were talking about the dates, march 4th seemingly a difficult one. how do you see the process going forward because there is the three judges, and then going up the ladder. how do you see it going forward? >> i think the district -- the d.c. circuit court of appeals are going to expedite their decision. they know what the calendar looks like. if it is donald trump loses as

we expect, and the appeal goes to supreme court, they may or may not take it. but if they do take it, i think the supreme court will also expedite their decision. they want this done before november election and, in fact, before the primaries are over. so i foresee there will be a decision. i can't see the march 4th date happening, that's just too close. but i can see it happening before june. i'm talking about the federal election case. >> catherine christian and carol leonning, thank you so much. new swatting attempts on two of the top figures and one of former president trump's criminal trials. we'll dive into the fallout of the nbc news exclusive reporting. we're back in 60 seconds. news ee reporting. we're back in 60 seconds k time? -unnecessary! -go! -unnecessary! -go! -unnecessary! -when you can take this phone, you'll be ready.

-make the unnecessary, unnecessary. let your employees do their own payroll. jordan's sore nose let out a fiery sneeze, so dad grabbed puffs plus lotion to soothe her with ease. puffs plus lotion is gentle on sensitive skin and locks in moisture to provide soothing relief. a nose in need deserves puffs indeed. america's #1 lotion tissue. 14 past the hour. two key figures in the case that former president trump's team is arguing and immunity claim and today special counsel jack

smith, also judge tanya chutkan have now come under dangerous swatting attacks. in these latest attacks, raising new questions about the safety of public officials in the country right now. nbc's ryan reilly has the latest on these swatting attempts. also with us is former present congressman from florida and msnbc political analyst david jolly. ryan, swatting attacks have been a tactic we have seen often lately, unfortunately. walk us through the latest use against chutkan and smith. >> reporter: yeah, unfortunately and pretty predictable. we have two high profile individuals like this, they're going to be targets and we have seen rhetorical attacks from donald trump on the two individuals. in the case of jack smith, it happened on christmas day itself. in the case of judge chutkan, it happened on sunday night. and there was an np response to her home. from the police report, it indicates they spoke with someone, unnamed at the scene

who said there was no incident inside the home. obviously a very scary scenario when you have a police response come to your home like this. the purpose behind these sort of incidents is to trigger that police response and that very sort of frightening response where getting your heart rate up and not knowing what is going on at the door and potential for even a deadly scenario there if police have used weapons or there is some sort of unexpected circumstance. a really scary scenario and one that law enforcement has to be increasingly vigilant of and make sure they're coordinating between different agencies to prevent and head this off by making sure the addresses of individuals are known to law enforcement so this type of response doesn't happen, jose. >> and, so, ryan, explain again, i know we all heard about it, but what exactly is swatting? >> reporter: essentially what will happen is someone calls the police, calls 911, and say that there is an incident. in this case, someone said there

is a shooting, there is a mass shooting at judge chutkan's home. that was not true. they gave the address to judge chutkan's home. then the police would respond to that as if there was a shooting there, believing there to be a shooting there. they show up with this sort of police response and, you know, in some scenarios it can be very dangerous. because you have that police response and who knows what can happen when that police response shows up. if the police don't read the situation correctly, don't know what is happening, and believe they're going into a shooting, perhaps with weapons drawn as a potential scenario. it is a really scary scenario for individuals who are targeted in this way. >> yeah, david, what do you make of this? it is just this continuing intimidation, the threat of violence that we're seeing focusing on public officials. >> yeah, jose, can't be said enough how dangerous these incidents are as ryan said, they often are calls that involve a report of a risk of life. it can be a hostage situation, a

shooting situation, a self-harm situation, that requires law enforcement protocol to be dispensed and they are very intense situations that put both law enforcement at risk as well as the individual that is being targeted. and i think it is an acceleration, if you will, an escalation of political violence and we know that political violence has existed since politics has existed. donald trump did not introduce it to the political system. i would suggest that it is obvious that trump and others are not doing anything to de-escalate it. in fact, whether they are identifying individuals, like donald trump has, on his truth social platform, by name, it is a signal to his supporters much like the january 6th calling was, that this is my grievance and these are the people who are standing in my way, and therefore followers do what you want to do. and i think what we should at least expect from our leaders, trump, republicans, democrats, is to condemn this, quiet and

de-escalate it. we're not seeing that from our leadership right now. >> as a former member of the house, it seems as though threats to public officials, to elected officials are on the increase. how do you as a former congressman deal with something like that, but how do we as a society help deal with this? >> this is new territory, jose. the threat has always been there. it wasn't until i was a public official that you are the subject of some of these increased risks. this idea of swatting is new. in part because new technology allows the people who are doing it to remain anonymous. they're able to complicate the originating phone number, the voices, whatever it might be, so we haven't seen an accountability. you can argue on swatting, we need some arrests and accountability and we need to put a face to it, maybe that will reduce it. but we also need leadership to say, enough is enough. look, the vitriol and hatred

across the aisles is real. we know that. and between neighbor and neighbor. this is one of those moments, particularly going into november of next year. we need to call for calmer voices, we need to recognize the unity is more important than violent division. not sure we're there yet. maybe this is the opportunity. >> yeah, i want to ask you about january 6th participant ray epps. he changed his tune, now saying he thinks biden won fair and square. walk us through what is happening here with epps. >> reporter: yes, the ray epps case stands out a little bit. a lot of people were unlawfully on the grounds of the u.s. capitol like ray epps. but because he became the target of this conspiracy theory, spread by a former trump administration official, who is in the white house, a speechwriter, that suggested that ray epps was an undercover operative, he has been the target of a lot of vitriol and speaking about this, he had to

flee his home, he's living in an rv with his wife because he was targeted by a lot of conspiracy theorists who believe this bizarre conspiracy theory that he was some sort of federal operative and directing all of the actions that day. at the end of this, though, the justice department ended up charging him with a misdemeanor offense here, even though there are a lot of people who fit into the same category as him who are not charged and sought a six-month sentence in this case. today, a judge decided that was too much. sentenced him to probation, factoring in the idea that ray epps' live has forever been changed because of this. he's suing fox news and tucker carlson because of the false rhetoric that they spread suggesting that he was a federal agent and there are millions of people who will forever believe this, will die believing that ray epps was a federal agent when there is zero evidence of that whatsoever. it is a bizarre conspiracy theory, but millions of people will believe that because it was spread by so many people who should have known better. >> ryan reilly in washington, d.c. and david jolly, david, stick with us, we have more

conversations that carry on with you. a consequential question hanging over defense secretary lloyd austin. did his secret hospitalization break any laws? you're watching msnbc reports. ls you're watching msnbc reports. t. and something serious may be behind those itchy eyes. up to 50% of people with graves' could develop a different condition called thyroid eye disease, which should be treated by a different doctor. see an expert. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com [ tense music ] one aleve works all day so i can keep working my magic. just one aleve. 12 hours of uninterrupted pain relief.

aleve. who do you take it for? and for fast topical pain relief, try alevex. nice to meet ya. my name is david. i've been a pharmacist for 44 years mainly because i just love helping people. as i got older, it was just a natural part of aging, i felt that my memory was beginning to decline and that's when i started looking for something that would help. when i first started taking prevagen, i noticed my memory was so much better. just stuff seemed to come together and fit like a jigsaw puzzle in my mind. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. a force to be reckon with. no, not you saquon. hm? you! your business bank account with quickbooks money, now earns 5% apy. 5% apy? that's new! yup, that's how you business differently. emergen-c crystals pop and fizz when you throw them back. and who doesn't love a good throwback? ( ♪♪ )

( ♪♪ ) emergen-c crystals. ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪♪ ) with the push of a button, constant contact's ai tools help you know what to say, even when you don't. hi! constant contact. helping the small stand tall. i found a cheaper price on my meds with singlecare. did you say singlecare? i use singlecare. are we talking singlecare? i saved 40 bucks with singlecare. -that's cool. - yeah. i have all my customers check the singlecare price first. good job. whenever my customers ask me if there's a cheaper price on their meds. i always tell them about singlecare. you just search your prescription, find the best price and show your coupon, in the app, to the pharmacist. i found a cheaper price with singlecare!

i know. download the singlecare app free today. the power goes out and we still have wifi i know. to do our homework. and that's a good thing? great in my book! who are you? no power? no problem. introducing storm-ready wifi. now you can stay reliably connected through power outages with unlimited cellular data and up to 4 hours of battery back-up to keep you online. only from xfinity. home of the xfinity 10g network.

let's go to tel aviv. secretary of state antony blinken is speaking after his meeting with israeli officials. >> -- addressed the people of israel days after the october 7th attack. he made a very simple pledge. the united states has israel's back today, tomorrow, always. the friendship between our nations is truly exceptional. it is our unique bond and america's enduring commitment to the people of israel that allows indeed demands that we're as forth right as possible in the moments when the stakes are the highest, when the choices matter the most. this is one of those moments.

happy to take some questions. >> the first question goes to simon lewis with reuters. >> thank you. mr. secretary, the future of the gaza strip has been a theme of your trip while you've been visiting regional countries. i wonder today were you able to do any -- make any progress on closing the gap between arab leaders and israel on specific security reconstruction and governance arrangements for gaza. and, you talked before leaving saudi arabia yesterday about the need for a practical pathway to a palestinian state as part of any efforts toward regional integration. and obviously that's come up today in your meetings with the cabinet. has prime minister netanyahu changed his mind, is he still opposed to the creation of a

separate palestinian state or have you managed to convince him or get any guarantees that this is something that could happen? >> so, one of the things that i heard very clearly on this trip and these two questions are actually joined, is many countries in the region are really prepared to invest in a number of ways, to invest when the conflict in gaza is over in its reconstruction, in its security, supporting palestinians and their governance. but, it is essential to them that there also be a clear pathway to the realization of palestinian political rights and a palestinian state. and i think the view that they have expressed is that critical to ending once and for all the

cycle of violence that is only going to repeat itself at some point in the future is through the realization of palestinian political rights. that was very clear message that i heard everywhere i went, just as i heard again a commitment not only to be engaged in the future of gaza, but also to take the steps necessary, make the commitments necessary, provide the assurances necessary, to give israel confidence in its security. and that's something that is new in recent years and powerful, which is the willingness, the commitment of many neighboring countries, not only to live in -- with israel in peace, but also genuinely to have a region that is more integrated in which everyone can feel secure including israel. so, there is a -- i think a --

also here a potentially powerful opportunity for the future. and now very difficult to get there, hard to get there, hard decisions, hard choices need to be made in order to get there. you can see that that possibility. i'm not going to speak for the prime minister, anyone in the israeli government, about their views. i can just share our own and share a little bit of what i heard from countries in the region. >> for the next question, suleman asada with khan news. >> thank you for taking my questions. i'll do it real fast. the israeli government still refuing to transfer the money and said yesterday there are 2 million nazis in gaza and i won't give money to nazi, just like the u.s. won't give money to al qaeda. i would like your comment on that. the second question is the cabinet said -- the war cabinet said they're refusing to let

gazans go back to north gaza for now. is that something that you agreed on with your israeli counterparts? thank you very much. >> so, first, with regard to the palestinian -- these are their avenues. they should have them. they should have them to make sure they can pay their people and provide essential services, including doing essential work in the west bank, the palestinian authority security forces are playing a very important role in trying to keep peace, security, stability in the west bank, something that is profoundly in israel's interest. so, we believe that those revenues should be released to them. again, their revenues and being used to do something that is important to israel. and when it comes to the future governance of gaza, when the conflict is over, of course people need to be paid. they need to be able to do the

work necessary to administer gaza, to do the other things that will be critical once the conflict ends. in terms of palestinians and moving back north in gaza, as i spoke to earlier, we have an agreement that the u.n. will now conduct an assessment to determine the conditions necessary for people to be able to move back home. there are a lot of really challenging and important issues to deal with including things like unexploded ordinance, booby trap s and other explosives left by hamas, infrastructure questions, proper support, all of those things are going to be evaluated by the united nations, pursuant to this agreement. and then as soon as conditions allow we want to see people be able to move back to their homes and we have been very clear about the necessity of doing

that when conditions allow. and making sure that people want to go back, they can go back. >> will malden with "the wall street journal." >> thank you so much. i just wanted to ask about, we heard some voices among israeli political leaders talking about the threat of iran in the region and, of course, its proxies, hezbollah and houthis have been active in and around this conflict. and you're bringing a message to the region of de-escalation. was your message of de-escalation heard and agreed with when you spoke to your israeli counterparts? and political leaders today? or, you know, we certainly haven't seen that in the last few days there have been strikes on hezbollah that would appear to be an escalation. do you support that? and is the u.s. and its partners -- are they prepared to

take a strike against the houthis because of their continued action in and around the red sea? >> thanks, will. one thing that we heard clearly every place we have gone, including in israel, is that escalation is in no one's interest. no one is seeking it. no one wants to see other fronts opened in this conflict. and more than that, as i already shared, we have countries around the region that are using their relationships, using their influence, to try to make sure that that doesn't happen. we had discussions about that today as we had on other days of this trip, and here we focused particularly on the situation in northern israel. and it is very clear to me from these conversations a few things. first, we strongly support the proposition that israelis need

to know security so that they can return to their homes in northern israel. 80,000 or so israelis have been forced from their homes because of insecurity from coming from southern lebanon. the rocket attacks, other threats posed by hezbollah. equally we believe and the government of israel believes that a diplomatic path is the best way to achieve that security. and that's exactly what will continue to pursue. that's what the government said today. and that's what we're focused on. more broadly, we have, you're right, a number of actions being taken by houthis, by other iranian proxies, in iraq, in syria, that threaten stability and threaten the potential for conflict. and we're determined, again,

that we not see escalation, that we don't have the conflict spread, and we made that very clear. but, of course, if our personnel, if our forces are threatened or attacked, we'll take appropriate steps. we'll respond. we'll protect them. we demonstrated that in the recent past. and we will again if we have to. we talked already about the threat that the houthis are posing. that's a threat not to us, just to us, or to israel, it is a threat to the entire international community. they have been attacking shipping through the red sea that is vital to providing -- it provides 15% of global commerce every day. these attacks have had very, very negative effects for countries around the world in terms of forcing ships to route around the red sea, take longer routes, more expensive, more

time, prices for food, energy, whatever is being shipped, are going up. more than 40 countries joined us in condemning the houthi actions, that's why other countries joined us in making clear that if this continues, they're going to be consequences. no one is looking to create a conflict or to escalate a conflict. on the contrary. we're seeking to prevent that from happening. we also have to uphold basic principles of international law, including freedom of navigation, and we have to make sure our own personnel, when under threat are being protected. >> you said there are going to be consequences. does that mean there has been a position by the u.s. or partner ships to take action? >> i won't speculate on what will happen in the future. we want to make clear if the acts by the houthis continue, there will be consequences. i won't say anything beyond that. >> the final question, al amari

with al jazeera. >> thank you. first, let me thank you for expressing your deep sadness about the tragedy of our dear colleague. he lost his wife and three sons and grandchildren and israeli bombardment of the house where they were fled from the center of gaza city and displaced to the southern gaza strip on 25th october. two days ago or three days ago -- his oldest son hamza, a journalist and was killed in an israeli air strike that hit a civilian car in rafah. 110 palestinian journalists were killed so far by israeli army in gaza during the war. more than 20,000 civilians were killed and tens of thousands were injured and hundreds of thousands were displaced from

their homes that no longer exist. the situation of the israeli citizens is also difficult. tens of thousands were displaced from the gaza -- and the border line with lebanon. and hundreds of civilians were killed in the hamas attack on the 7th of october. and there are many stages from both sides as you know. my question, why do you as a superpower and as leading force in the international community not oblige the parties and the israeli government to cease-fire in gaza and to speak to united nations resolutions indicated the peaceful solution instead of both sides continuing war blood by more blood. my second question is related to the matter of normalization.

and busy with the matter and do you think, mr. blinken, that the option exist or is it just an attempt to escape from the solution of the palestinian question and attempting mr. netanyahu to agree with the american position in order to change his extreme government? and what about the rule of the four arab nations or countries as you mentioned before, in gaza. it is just to contribute for the reconstruction or they have political rule there. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> let me just say again, at the outset, the loss, losses that your colleague suffered are unimaginable. and i have deep condolences for

what he's suffered. again, i can't even begin to fully imagine what he's gone through. and as i said, again, the other day, to the journalists who lost their lives or have been injured in gaza, we feel very strongly for them as well. and the essential work that they do is more vital than ever. we want this war to end as soon as possible. there has been far too much loss of life, far too much suffering. but it is vital that israel achieve its very legitimate objectives of ensuring that october 7th can never happen again. and we believe there has been considerable progress toward that goal. at the same time, i think it is very important to remember that everyone has choices to make.

and that includes hamas. hamas could have ended this on october 8th by not hiding behind civilians, by putting down its weapons, by surrendering, by releasing the hostages. none of the suffering, none of the suffering would have happened if hamas hadn't did what it did on october 7th, and had it made different decisions thereafter. so, it is very important to keep that in perspective. and, again, this could end tomorrow. if hamas makes those decisions. we will continue as we have done to give the israelis our best advice about conducting this war in a manner that achieves the

objective of making sure that october 7th can't be repeated. does better by protecting civilians and making sure that people get the assistance that they need. with regard to normalization, there is, i think, a clear interest in pursuing that. integration of the region is something that virtually all the countries i visited on this trip want to advance, want to pursue. some of them have already taken vital steps to do that. others i think are interested in doing the same. but, it is equally clear that that's not a substitute for or at the expense of a political horizon for the palestinians and ultimately a palestinian state. on the contrary. that piece has to be a part of

any integration efforts. any normalization efforts. that was clear in my conversations during the course of my trip, including in saudi arabia. thank you. >> secretary of state blinken, just wrapping up his conversation. let's listen in very quick. >> most of the countries i visit ready very prepared to support gaza in the future, to support all the efforts that are necessary, and to support palestinian-led governance for gaza. but it is also vitally important to them that there be a pathway forward for the palestinians in terms of their overall political rights. and a very clear political horizon. we and they support palestinian governance that is joined of

gaza and the west bank, and the pathway to a state. that's, again, very clear from everyone i've talked to in the region. thank you. >> all right, and that does wrap up the secretary of state's remarks in israel. i want to bring in nbc's richard engel, he's in jerusalem today. richard, the secretary of state spoke over and over again about what happens to gaza after the war, and the right and the need for the people to be able to return home to the north of gaza, once this war is over. but it seems as though, richard, that war still has a lot way to go before we can see any of these positive, peaceful movements happening. >> reporter: so, they're discussing an endgame, but it is not clear that we are anywhere close to the middle of the game or the later game. also not discussed what homes

are they going to be going back to. i spoke to israeli commanders who have been operating in northern gaza, and they have openly acknowledged on camera to me and others that certain parts of the northern gaza strip are no longer inhabitable. there are no homes to go back to. so, this idea that the -- once the operations are done in the north, then the israelis are moving now to the central gaza and then potentially could move to the south, that the people who are crammed into southern gaza strip will be going back to their home villages. but if there are no services, no hospitals, no infrastructure of all the pipes are damaged, the electricity is out, what are they going to be going home to? and then the question of who is going to run the gaza strip. what is the day after even look like? and what we saw today, and what we just heard from secretary blinken was a bit of a dangle.

he's saying that the arab states are interested in normalization, they do want to get back to a path where israel is integrated into the wider social fabric of the middle east, including saudi arabia. but, on these conditions that there is a resumption of the peace process that leads to a palestinian state and there is a single government for the palestinian people in the west bank and gaza, that is palestinian-led. that means not a reoccupation of the gaza strip, which israel's defense minister recently floated in something of a trial balloon saying that the israelis would maintain security control and some undefined responsibilities would be left to the palestinians, but not controlling their ultimate destinies, not controlling their borders. that's not statehood. so it seems like the two sides are very far apart and if you heard the first question, that

he was asked, did he have any assurances today from prime minister netanyahu that prime minister netanyahu's government, which has rejected a two-state solution, rejected returning to the peace process based on achieving a two-state solution is any closer to agreeing to that, he moved on and didn't answer the question. so does not seem like so far we're getting any breakthrough, but he's conveying what the arab world expects in order to move forward with no normalization. >> richard engel in jerusalem, thank you very much. tomorrow, andrea mitchell sits down with secretary of state antony blinken for an exclusive interview in tel aviv. watch "andrea mitchell reports" tomorrow at 12:00 p.m. eastern here on msnbc. and we just heard from one cabinet secretary, and in the next hour, we're expecting a briefing from the pentagon, where a review is under way over whether secretary of defense lloyd austin broke any laws by waiting to notify the white house and the public that he had

been in the icu, unable to perform his duties. on capitol hill, the breakdown in the chain of command is stoking a bipartisan backlash with some lawmakers calling for his resignation. >> i think joe biden should be calling for his -- however they want to handle it, but this guy shouldn't be in charge of our military now. >> it appears lloyd austin is the person who needs to resign or his chief of staff or both of them. >> nbc's courtney kube covers the pentagon for us. great seeing you. there is so much we still don't know about austin's condition, what prompted his return to the hospital. where is the pentagon investigation as of right now on this? >> so, what they're doing is reviewing a senior staff here. civilian staff here, member here, is going to review what happened on january 1st. who was immediately notified that secretary austin has been taken to the hospital and then who exactly how that process unfolded.

then frankly, i think the more important part here is where the breakdown in communication was that the president, the senior level of the biden administration, that they were not informed. that secretary austin had been taken to the hospital in an ambulance in serious pain and had transferred authority to kathleen hicks. now, in addition to this review, austin's chief of staff has already ordered several changes and that includes a specific and broader list of individuals, leaders. service chief, service secretaries here in the pentagon then of course the situation room. notified any time that there is a transfer of authority from austin to hicks. i think a lot of our viewers would be surprised that process is not already in place. i know i was to read that memo last night. but they've already started several processes in place to try to fix this from happening

the next time. but the reality here, jose, we still have more questions than we do answers. we don't know what this medical procedure was. we don't know how serious his condition was while he was in the intensive care unit. we don't know if he's had follow on procedures. we still don't know his diagnosis beyond the fact a statement was released saying he's in good spirits and his condition is improving. >> thank you so very much. turning now to a story out of ecuador where a convicted leader of one of the most powerful drug gangs has vanished from prison. in response, their president announced a national state of emergency. authorities say sunday, the gang leader was missing from his cell and by monday, had not been found. ecuador's prosecutor's office said charges have been filed

against two prison guards they believe were involved. riots have broken out in several of the country's prisons. coming up on msnbc reports, millions are bracing for a powerful line of storms barrelling across the entire east coast. panama city, florida, already been hit and it's been hit pretty hard. a possible tornado tore through today ripping roofs from homes. we'll have more on what's to come from this storm system, next. e on what's to come from this storm system, next

want the power of 5 serum benefits in 1? olay super serum activates on skin to hydrate, smooth, visibly firm, brighten, and improve texture. it's my best skin yet. olay

57 past the hour. more than 40 states from washington and massachusetts and more than 100 million americans are being impacted by winter storms on the move today. take a look at this video out of panama city beach, florida. tornado destroyed homes and overturned cars. in south dakota, snow blowers and plowers are out as the midwest braces for another dumping of snow. bill, what's going on and where is this thing heading? >> jose, we have many life threatening conditions happening now in many different states. we'll start with the tornados. we can call this a tornado outbreak. we know of one fatality. an 80-year-old woman in a mobile home got hit this morning just outside of dothan, alabama. in panama city, the tornado came through before sunrise and did significant damage there. so the tornado threat continues. we have watches that extend from fort myers, tampa, jacksonville,

savannah, and a new tornado watch was issued from wilmington to raleigh so the chances will continue through the afternoon and today. we have a couple of active warnings. most located in southern georgia. these little red triangles in here. these will be making their way in between jacksonville and savannah in the next half hour. savannah to brunswick to jacksonville, a very dangerous line of storms will be sliding your way shortly. and the flooding, we've hat 4 to 6 inches of rain in the mountains of south carolina, western north carolina. asheville has had 4.5 inches of rain. 75 million people under flood watches. that's life threatening stuff happening now. water rescues have happened in upstate south carolina, pickens county. macon, you're under a flash flood warning. charlotte and roanoke.

this will translate north later on today. the dangerous conditions will arrive washington, d.c. and new york city by about 5:00 p.m. to midnight and with it will come intense winds. 162 million people under wind alerts and the wind predictions have been increasing. we're now thinking the jersey shore and long island could hit winds of up to 70 miles an hour. we will have probably millions without power come this time tomorrow. >> really dangerous. bill karins, thank you so very much. that does it for me and this edition of msnbc reports. thank you for the privilege of your time. katy tur picks up our coverage next here on msnbc. thanks and i'll see you. good to be with you. it has been an extraordinary day. in washington, appellate