good day, i'm chris jansing live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. we begin with the breaking news. the district attorney in donald

trump's hush money conviction alvin bragg has recommended the judge hold off on sentencing donald trump. he is not recommending the case be dismissed. in fact, he is signaling he would fight any attempt by trump's team to have the case thrown out. but, we will now have to wait to see if judge juan merchan agrees with bragg. i want to bring in vaughn hillyard. peter baker, and msnbc political analyst from new york times. kristi greenburg with the sdny criminal division. a former criminal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst. with me in studio. a retired judge diane keisel and lisa reuben. you are the one with me here in studio. we just got the paperwork. you are getting the first look

at the people versus trump. what's going on? >> so today the district attorney owed judge merchan and explanation of what they thought the next steps should be. let me remind you where things stood. judge merchan was supposed to make a decision about whether the verdict could stand. trump's lawyers had argued. >> given the fact that donald trump is now president-elect of the united states. >> no. it was on a different basis. they had asked him previously to decide. could the verdict stand on the presidential immunity decision. given that some of the evidence that was admitted at the trial came from conversations he had as president of the united states. like conversations with hope hicks. they argue certain of his tweets issued about michael cohen while he was president couldn't have been considered by the jury.

merchan owed everybody an answer on that motion. if he decided the verdict could stick, he was going to move to a november 26th sentencing. what the da's office is saying is they are prepared to agree to a stay of all proceedings so that trump's folks can put in a wholly new motion. a motion to dismiss the indictment because he is about to be president again and it is based on the titutional concerns that animate the department of justice's policies that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted. by prosecuted they also believe the world prosecution doesn't just encompass a new case or investigation but even the act of sentencing someone for a concluded trial. the da's office said they are going to oppose that motion to dismiss by donald trump's team. and in particular, on page two of their letter, they are saying that while they respect the office of the presidency

and they are mindful of the fact the presidency is unique and has certain demands and obligations, they also deeply respect the fundamental role of the jury on our constitutional system. and remind judge merchan there is no current law or case that says that a president's immunity from prosecution while they are in office requires dismissing a case that was based on unofficial conduct and where the trial was concluded when he was not president. and for which there was ample support in the evidence that has nothing to do with his being president. so they are signaling pretty loudly we are not prepared to walk away from this verdict. we will agree to stay any sentencing and any decision on that verdict. but we are going to oppose any mission to dismiss the

indictment. >> we are getting first reaction from trump world. where are they saying? >> i want to cut straight to the statement from steven chung. >> the manhattan da has conceded that this witch hunt cannot continue. the lawless case is now stayed and president trump's legal team is moving to get it dismissed once and for all. as lisa just outlined the defense ready to make that motion to dismiss the case. this is a remarkable turn of events. it was just a few months ago that the jury said he sent money to stormy daniels to ensure it would not cost him at the ballot box. he narrowly won the 2016

election. especially in three key battleground states. fast forward to eight years later and he has won election again. he ultimately is potentially unlikely ahead of his january 20th inauguration to face any consequences for any of those four criminal indictments that were brought against him. this is really for donald trump not only a political resurrection, but one in which he was able to effectively not only run out the clock which his attorneys openly sought to do, but was able to win his election and all but ensure that any punishment if there is for these 34 felony counts would not take place until he is out of the white house which is not here in the immediate years that await us. >> so there is no doubt kristi this has been a political resurrection for donald trump. the american people know he was convicted.

the american people, people paying attention in any case knew there were other outstanding cases against him. and yet voted. a majority of them to return him to the white house. but is this as steven says a total and definitive victory for team trump and donald trump in particular? >> absolutely not. he remained a convicted felon. nothing about this letter changes that. all the da's office is saying is we will defend the jury's verdict finding him guilty of 34 felonies and not backing away from that. we standby this case and by the jury's verdict. and there is nothing in the law that says there is no immunity for unofficial acts. that is what we what sat through weeks of this trial learned. the idea that there would somehow be a basis to throw out this entire case that was based

on unofficial conduct for which he is not immune simply because he has not been sentenced yet and he will be president again, there is no legal authority to support that. i expect that this verdict will continue to be upheld. this will not be dismissed. but, there is not going to be a sentence before he takes office. and there is not going to be a sentence handed down while he is in office. the da is agreeing we are putting this case on hold until after he leaves the presidency if and when he does. >> lisa, it is one thing to put out a political argument which is part of steven's job. the other part is what will be the legal argument to the judge. are we getting an indication of what exactly that might be? >> we are getting a sketch of what the arguments might be. we knew that the da's office had been in touch with trump's

lawyers. that trump's lawyers had asked them to consider whether or not they would stay all proceedings as they considered whether or not they would agree to a dismissal of everything. that letter is exhibit one. to what we see from the das today and what they are saying is first of all, dismissal is required now because a sitting president may not be prosecuted and he is about to be a sitting president. and prosecution includes sentencing but the other thing that they say is that it would disrupt the presidential transition process. i will read from the letter that todd blanche sent to da bragg. to require president trump to address further criminal proceedings at this point would not only violate the federal constitution, but also disrupt the presidential transition process. they are essentially migrating into the transition, some of the constitutional concerns

that animate the policy that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted. the reason the department of justice says a sitting president cannot be prosecuted is it is too much of a distraction from the office. it prevents them from carrying out their constitutional duties that the law be executed. >> this gets interesting. they further argue about the transition. there exists the greatest public interest in providing the president with the maximum ability to deal fearlessly and impartially with the duties of his office. this interest attaches to the ongoing transition activities which is an integral part of the presidential administration. >> what is particularly interesting about this argument that they are making about the presidential transition is they reference the presidential transition act. we know from public reporting at least to date, former president and future president trump has not agreed to participate in the transition, at least through the process authorized by the general

services administration. he has not agreed to background checks by the fbi. he has not yet receiving funding from the gsa. he is not participating in the presidential transition as authorized by and as created legally by the presidential transition act and yet, his lawyers are citing it as one more reason he should not be prosecuted during this transition period because the same heavyweight of the duties that bear on the transition is identical to what the president would go through. given that it is unlawful to prosecute a sitting president, it should be unlawful to prosecute a president-elect as well. >> so lisa brings up an interesting point. where are we in terms of donald trump formally finding a letter, formally participating in what is the transition that is outlined? >> i'm not up to date on the latest on that. he has made clear he does not plan to follow the rules as

other presidents have in so many ways in this transition. he did it before and i think he regretted what happened in 2016 and 2017. so he is in so many different ways saying this time will be different. that includes following the rules of the transition. things like vetting candidates for high office. it includes the types of people that you are appointing in this case. so he will not suddenly become a typical presidential incoming president just because of this. but he will of course not surprisingly, opportunistically cite laws like the transition law if he can to benefit him. the whole campaign was about this moment. about getting out from under the legal shadow he was in, in new york, in florida, in georgia and washington dc. now this is part of that victory for him. >> going back to that peter, this idea of a total and

definitive victory. it may not be in the legal sense but in the political sense, it is worth rehinding people when donald trump decided to run again for the white house two years ago, there were a lot of people who thought this is just a hail mary to try to get himself out of a lot of legal trouble right? >> right. and he achieved that basically, at least for four years. if his goal was to stay out of prison and disrupt the prosecutions against him, he has accomplished that through january 20, 2029. we'll see what happens at that point. he'll be an 82-year-old man and a former president at that point. we'll see what is permissible and what prosecutors may decide to pursue. but he has accomplished what he wanted to do with these legal challenges. one point about the statement, it shouldn't be allow to stand uncorrected. it said he won a large landslide in the election.

and that justifies throwing out these legal cases. it is not true. he won a definitive victory, yes, but not a landslide. just to be clear, the latest vote count shows him at 50.0% of the popular vote with a margin of 1.8 percentage points. i know they are trying to repeat this that they won a large landslide. they denied and we should stick to the facts. >> facts are very good things. diane, that brings me to you. a huge decision that juan merchan has to make. talk about the things he will be considering. the work done by the jury might have and these arguments we are getting a preview of on donald trump's side. >> well, in reading a letter and listening to all of this, i really think judge merchan has

one real decision to make right now. that is as pointed out by lisa rubin, whether the 330 motion that has already been filed based on the supreme court's decision, presidential immunity. and should result in this case being dismissed. that is a sound legal motion. the judge has what he needs to make that decision. frankly, once he makes that decision, i don't know if any legal president or argument that says because someone who is now going to be president was convicted of a crime prior to being president for a crime that occurred before he became president should somehow not have to face the consequences. if donald trump were anybody else. judge merchan, just because the

people and the defense have asked him to adjourn this to consider it, he doesn't have to do it. he can do whatever he thinks is right. he could sentence mr. trump to a nonincarceration sentence. go lead a law-abiding life. a $325 mandatory court surcharge and mr. trump could make all the same arguments he is making now in an appellate court. the judge has that option. whether he will do that in light of the fact both sides now want an adjournment to talk about this unique position that because he is going to be president in two months, he isn't going to be held accountable like any other citizen. he may choose to do that. those are his options. >> so understanding that's an option. what would be the compelling reason for him to take what

seems to be given what both sides are talking about that option? >> how about the fact that a jury found this man guilty of 24 felony counts and the judge very strongly during the entire trial said that we are not going to consider the political ramifications of this. that we will treat him like any other person presumed innocent, but charged with a crime. now that cloak of innocence has faded. can you put mr. trump in jail at this point in time when he is going to be president? i think the answer to that is clearly no. you cannot do that. that would interfere with his ability to run this country. will a conditional discharge have anything to do with that? no. >> so let me ask you again, part of the conversation we

have been having right? and bill barr talked about this. so let me read you his quote. what he said right after trump was elected. the american people have rendered their verdict on president trump and decisively have chosen him to lead the country the next four years. they did that with full knowledge of the claims against him by prosecutors around the country and i think attorney general garland and state prosecutors should respect the people's decision and dismiss the cases against president trump now. we have no precedent for this. we have never had a president- elect going into office with criminal sentencing and a sentencing hanging over him. does the judge weigh the verdict essentially of american voters against the verdict by the people who sat there and listened to that case for week after week after week? >> i will take the position as

the former judge that the verdict of american voters has absolutely nothing to do with this. what otherwise, what is our justice system? are we going to make decisions in the future based on what voters think? again, i agree with former attorney general barr, you can't put the man in jail now. i agree with that. in that sense, what the voters have said does play into this. obviously. but, i don't know that the vote has anything to do with the idea of conviction. having said all this, there is a perfectly reasonable view in which judge merchan would say okay, let's this play out. let everybody file their motions and we will decide this in the due course. that is a reasonable position too. but i don't think the sense of we should automatically dismiss

this because the voters voted for this man by a 50.0% margin. yeah. i find that to be a very disturbing precedent. >> so lisa, i have almost perfected the art of reading your notes upside down as you continue. we have print outs of this as we were coming on the air. so you have been going through it. and there are options for 2029. >> and part of the da ease thinking is trump is going to move to dismiss this indictment whether we support it or not. and they may go to a court outside judge merchan's jurisdiction either a new york appeals court or a federal court and seek a stay of everything that is going on. in light of that, what should we do? i think they spell that out in the let tore judge merchan saying consideration must be given to various nondismissal options that may address any concerns raised by the post

trial criminal proceeding. such as and here's the key phrase, deferral of all remaining criminal proceedings until after the end of the defendant's upcoming presidential term. that is as stark a language as you can find. they are saying to judge merchan, one of our options is just wait him out. we don't have to dismiss this case. we recognize that sentencing him might be inappropriate now. the one thing donald trump wants to do least of all is have to return to 100 center street and sit through a sentencing hearing even if the end result is time served or conditional discharge so recognizing he wants to move to dismiss, he doesn't want a sentencing. it says go be president and we will still be here. >> what would again, using the

words in this letter various non-dismissal options look like? >> so, i think that very little shot that donald trump is sentenced before he takes office because look. if we have learned nothing else from watching trump and his team, the one thing they are good at is delay. delay is the name of the game. and they have two months until he takes office. so even if judge merchan were to say let's go forward with the sentencing gate which is not what either party wants, even if he were to say let's go do that, they will appeal. and try to run out the clock the next two months. we are looking at any sentencing happening after his term is over. and that may be the best approach as well. because who knows what the world looks like at that point.

and how much can you accomplish with him sentenced now other than getting a slap on the wrist? before the election would have been the time to sentence him. unfortunately, it's a decision i disagreed with. the da's office did not oppose trump's request to delay the sentencing until after the election. we could have had the sentencing and we wouldn't be talking about this right now. but they didn't do that and we are where we are. i do think that this case be not be dismissed. there is every valid reason for it. for the jury's verdict to stand and we will be on hold. none of the arguments so far say to any authority saying that this case needs to be dismissed because he was elected to be president again. there is no law to support that. so unless a new law is created to justify that, i think we

will be on hold until he is no longer president. >> so we talked about potential motivation when he said he would run again for office. but a year ago, donald trump was facing four criminal cases. the possibility of years behind bars. and now, he may and that's a big may given the conversation we just had and the possibility of a postponement. he may walk away and avoid prison time. i wonder without benefit of history, is that luck? is it skill? is it the value of stalling something that donald trump has done very successfully in business as well as politics? is there any clear thing we can attribute that to? >> he has been very good at delay. very good historically before the particular cases. i think it says something. and i'm not a lawyer, so forgive me for offering this but it says something about our justice system, four years have passed and we have not fully

resolved any of these four cases. we did not get from beginning to middle to conclusion in four years. in three we didn't even get to a trial. in providing voters with a full accounting, that says something about where our system is right now. now, you can make the argument, vaughn mentioned this, that voters did in fact know basically what the former president was accused of. at least 50% decided it wasn't enough to vote against him even with 34 felony convictions but the fact we didn't manage to resolve these to say this is the definitive conclusion of our justice system says something about our ability to exercise accountability in the modern age. >> let me ask you a big picture

question about that. justice delayed is justice denied. we are talking about the defendant. but in this case, the american people had only a partial view into donald trump's cases. and so, the other cases were left on hold. can the american people, can american voters say justice delayed was justice denied. could it reasonably have been avoided? >> hard to say whether it could reasonably have been avoided. unfortunately, peter is correct. there is a lot of ability within the justice system to slow things down. to seek adjournments and courts wanting to be fair. and let all sides be heard.

often grant them. we have certain parameters in place. all judges are supposed to decide pending motions within 60 days of all of the final submissions. that means final decisions. if someone asks for a delay, the 60 days expands. we would be much better served if our justice system moved more quickly. how does that happen? it happens with more judges. with perhaps less indulgence about allowing for extensions of time to be heard. there are ways to do it but it is not easy and it is sort of like turning the titanic around. >> vaughn hillyard, peter baker, kristi greenburg, lisa reuben. thank you all. coming up, as new details

emerge about accusations against matt gaetz, how donald trump is working to get his choice for attorney general over the finish line. we'll have that next. . we'll have that next. here to help you understand how to get the most from medicare. if you're eligible for medicare, it's a good idea to have original medicare. it gives you coverage for doctor office visits and hospital stays. but if you want even more benefits, you can choose a medicare advantage plan like the ones offered at humana. our plans combine original medicare with extra benefits in a single, convenient plan with $0, or low monthly plan premiums. these plans could even include prescription drug coverage with $0 copays on hundreds of prescriptions. plus, there's a cap on your out-of-pocket costs. most plans include dental, vision, even hearing coverage. there are $0 copays for in-network preventive services, and much more. get the most from medicare with a humana medicare advantage plan. call today to learn more. remember, annual

enrollment for medicare advantage plans ends december 7th. humana. a more human way to health care. customize and save with liberty mutual. customize and sa— (balloon doug pops & deflates) and then i wake up. is limu with you in all your dreams? oh, yeah. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty. ♪

it's time to grow your business. create a website. how? godaddy. coding... nah. but all that writing... nope. ai, done, built. let's get to work. create a beautiful website in minutes with godaddy.

let's go boys. create a beautiful website in minutes the way that i approach work, post fatherhood, has really been trying to understand the generation that we're building devices for. here in the comcast family, we're building an integrated in-home wifi solution for millions of families, like my own. connectivity is a big part of my boys' lives. it brings people together in meaningful ways.

♪ ♪ donald trump is personally working the phones trying to save his embattled pick for attorney general matt gaetz. kevin cramer confirmed he got one of those calls saying trump is always persuasive. republican senators have new allegations to consider. a lawyer told nbc that gaetz repeatedly paid two of his clients for sex and drugs and that those allegations were shared with the house ethics committee. allegations that gaetz denies. >> did your clients make any assessments in their testimony about mr. gaetz's fitness or judgment to serve in office? >> they are very careful about

what they might express publicly. but one of them said i do not think a man like him should have that much power. >> dasha burns has been covering the trump transition and is here with me in studio. a allie, beyond the ethics report on gaetz and we are waiting to see what happens with that, senators are now hearing directly from a lawyer on the record representing clients who say gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old and paid women for sex and drugs and they are also expecting a visit by the way from jd vance tomorrow. to lobby for trump's cabinet picks on the hill. what does this mean? >> all of this happening at once. right, chris? in regard of to matt gaetz's early nomination to be attorney general of the united states. here on capitol hill, we are watching all of these different threads but also waiting for the speaker of the house to

potentially walk by around the area where i am. so if you see me make any sudden movements, that's where i'm jetting off to, just to the camera right next to us. but look when it comes to gaetz, we are hearing from the ethics committee as they are set to meet in bipartisan fashion. they are a bipartisan committee tomorrow afternoon to consider what they are going to do about this investigation and about the report that they have written regarding gaetz. and then separately, you have the trump transition team kind of going on offense and trying to make it what kevin cramer was talking about. that at least there could be an openness to gaetz as a nominee as opposed to the initial knee jerk reaction we heard from our sources and from senators on the record who said they did not think gaetz was qualified and that they had concerns about the allegations that you were just talking about. whether or not trump is making phone calls or jd vance sort of sherpaing around gaetz and pete hegseth, the defense department nominee, whether that makes a difference in the mind of senators at this early point in

the confirmation process, we will see. we know the transition team is going one on one meetings. senator john kennedy of louisiana said he would be meeting with gaetz tomorrow. all of this again, part and parcel of trying to at least open up this nominating process. as the ethics committee referral is considered and senators said they would like to see it. >> if the speaker comes and you get any news, good luck to that. let's go back to the allegations tonight. i think it is important that this isn't just some report we are hearing about. we are hearing from a lawyer whose clients are a part of this hearing, tell us more about what we know. >> he described what his clients told the house ethics

committee about witnessing this alleged act. listen. >> one of the first things that happened that the party should testify to the house within minutes of arriving. she was introduced to him and went upstairs and had sexual intercourse on the bed. then went downstairs, she was walking outside to go to the pool area and to the right, she witnessed representative gaetz having sex with her friend who was 17 at the time. >> did your client believe that gaetz at the time knew that her friend was underage? >> yeah, so the house was curious about that. she testified that her belief was that representative gaetz had no knowledge she was under 18. that she was 17 years old at the time he was having sex with her. >> and the attorney also said that his client testified that when gaetz learned that the young woman was underaged, he stopped the relationship and resumed it after she turned 18. and chris, we are also learning from court documents that a

fourth witness also said that she went to another party where gaetz was allegedly engaged in sexual activity. three additional witnesses said they went to that same party where the 17-year-old and gaetz allegedly had their sexual encounters. one said she saw the 17-year- old girl naked and the attendees were there to engage in sexual activities. gaetz denies all of this. but as we are waiting to see whether or not this ethics report is released to the public, this continues. okay governor, you and i have been around a little while. and we certainly have witnessed any number of sex scandals that have derailed political careers, congressional careers, people running for president of the united states. i wonder big picture as you look at this, are we just in a

very different point than we have ever been before? do things like i don't know morality, ethics play into these kinds of decisions anymore? >> chris, i think in the senate, they will play into their decisions. let me just point out that john thune who is really a traditionalist. he was not really the person that the trump people wanted. they were really for rick scott. they did it kind of low key. but thune was really not their guy. and my understanding is and i have been told what the vote count was, that scott got about 13 votes. so thune was overwhelmingly elected and john is a traditionalist. he is from south dakota. i have known him for, i served in the house with him. and look, i think you will find

the senate will do their advise and consent. they will look at all of them. go to hearings for a number of them and they will let the nominees speak and let those who have concerns be able to speak as well. and i think it will be a pretty normal process. i don't anticipate you will have the recess appointments. i don't believe the senate is going to give up that prerogative. and so that has been the tradition. >> can i interrupt you governor? we just got breaking news. >> yeah, of course. >> we just got breaking news from our hill team. they have spoken with a transition official and given a more fulsome report than we have had in the past. they say not only has donald trump been making calls to republican senators, he has been heavily working the phones on behalf of matt gaetz. that they knew that getting gaetz approved would be an uphill battle but that a full throttled effort would be engaged to continue to try to

get him confirmed. now to your point, you know john thune. i will read directly from this, the transition team believes the worst case scenario is that senator thune, recently elected senate majority leader efforts a letter cosigned by other gop senators disapproving of gaetz's appointment. vice president-elect jd vance's visit to the hill tomorrow is centers around lobbying support for gaetz. does that sound to you like something that john thune might consider? >> if i understand it correctly, chris. >> they think he might effort a letter to be cosigned by other republican senators disapproving of the appointment. >> that wouldn't surprise me. and the other thing is i think the senators will look for a way to create some independence from trump. just listening to all that is

going on. this will make it in some respects easier for senators to say this is not the right person, this is not the right time. and i think it will go beyond gaetz. i think there will be a lot of questions about the secretary of defense, there will be some questions about kennedy. it will be a process that will take place. so i would not be surprised if john thune was saying withdraw this and appoint somebody else so that the president would have an opportunity to do it. but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case. i do not believe at the end of the day gaetz will be confirmed. i don't see that happening. >> it is really interesting also in this note. i'm just finishing reading it now. gaetz reportedly told trump when donald trump called him to say i want you to be my attorney general, here is what gaetz said. this whole thing will be an uphill battle. trump told gaetz it was one he

wanted to fight. why do you think? there are of course folks who have suggested this is a president who feels he has been unfairly persecuted, prosecuted, both in civil and criminal court involving sexual misconduct and payoffs. that he believes perhaps matt gaetz is being unfairly accused. but why would you going into this presidency with so much possibility, right? so many opportunities as every new president has, but in this case, a particularly one because his party controls the house and the senate, choose to fight a battle that he and the nominee knew was going to be extraordinarily difficult and involved some pretty uncomfortable conversations? >> you know. i think, there is a possibility that some people speculate that put him up and that makes the

other ones look a little easier to get through. but it may be part of the fact that donald trump feels aggrieved by the system. and you know, he'll push somebody he does not think has been treated fairly. i don't know. but i think what people need to be sure of is that you are not going to have a rollover in the united states senate for any of these people. senators are people with high regard for themselves. they have high regard for the institution. we have seen some melting away of the kind of things we used to see in n that institution. but i have to tell you, senators are just not people that are going to roll over and do whatever anybody else wants including donald trump. because he won the election, because he won the popular vote, because he did as well as he did, i mean, people are going to give him extra consideration. but at the end of the day,

remember, senators have to go home and they have to stand on their votes and stand on what they have done. and i will tell you in the next election cycle, 2026, isn't going to be like it was in 2024 for the republican senate. it will be tougher. so i think all these senators are going to be considering things, they will belooking out for themselves and there will be a respect for senate traditions includeing the idea of recess appointments. >> former ohio governor john kasich and former member of congress? 18 years in congress? >> i was 18 years there and i used to go over to the senate and you know, look, i had good relationships. i had to as i was negotiating the budget or being on defense. but they always thought of themselves as a little higher and once in a while they would admit it but that is not bad. the advice and consent of the senate, the senate is the place. it's the saucer of the hot cup

of coffee. it is designed to show things down. thank god we are keeping the filibuster and that was a big issue. kamala harris talked about getting rid of the filibuster. no. you don't want to get rid of the filibuster because you don't want things to run rampant and things quickly to happen. we covered a lot here. >> we did. thank you governor kasich. and coming up. >> thank you. >> a republican lawmaker pushes a new trans bathroom ban. we'll head to capitol hill. and, putin's fury. his new warning to the west after ukraine was granted permission to strike deep inside russia with u.s. made weapons.

♪

(animatronic santa) ho, ho, ho! (vo) time to move? make it easy with opendoor. sell your home in any season, for any reason. (animatronic santa) look at me! i am festive!

on capitol hill, a fight over transgender rights only days after sarah mcbride made history as the first out trans woman elected to congress. republican congresswoman nancy mace is seeking to ban trans women from using women's bathrooms at the capitol. >> is this effort in response to congresswoman mcbride coming to congress? >> yes. absolutely, and then some. i know how vulnerable women and girls are in private spaces so i'm absolutely 100% going to stand in the way and to see the way that i have been attacked today and last night for fighting to protect women and girls is ridiculous.

if being a feminist makes me an extremist, i'm here for it. >> by the way, it would cover any trans lawmaker as well as staff member. let me go to the expert. ryan noble is on capitol hill. in addition to that, speaker mike johnson has weighed in on this. bring us up to speed. >> yeah. so we have to keep in mind chris, this is just a proposal. nothing has been voted on yet. this would be a resolution that the house would vote on after congress is sworn in, in the new year. and the new congresswoman sarah mcbride would be seated during that period of time. it would address this issue that has bubbled up here in the house republican conference. and we are getting mixed messages from the speaker of the house mike johnson who was initially asked about this earlier in the day. and seemed to strike a more balanced tone saying he wasn't going to engage in debates

that sully new members. but just a few minutes ago, johnson called all of the reporters together to make a statement in front of the camera. he did not take any questions but i believe we have that sound for you. this is what johnson had to say here a few minutes ago. >> i was asked a question this morning at the leadership gaggle and i rejected the premise because the answer is so obvious. for anybody who doesn't know my well established record on this issue, let me be unequivocally clear. a man is a man and a woman is a woman. and a man cannot become a woman. that said, i also believe that's what scripture teaches but i also believe that we treat everybody with dignity. and so, we can do and believe all those things at the same time. and i wanted to make that clear for everybody because there's a lot of question. that's where i stand. i have been there my whole life. >> so what he didn't do is

clarify whether he supported congresswoman mace's efforts to try and prevent a transgender individual from using the bathroom of their choosing. and it is not going to necessarily put this controversy to bed at all. and i wanted to show you what the congress-woman elect is saying about this. this is what sarah mcbride said. every day, americans go to work with people who have life journeys different from their own and engage with them respectfully. i hope member of congress can muster that same kindness. this is a blatant attempt from far right wing extremists to distract from the fact they have no real solutions from what americans are facing. i think we should point out that this comes after the very difficult campaign that was waged by both sides in which the issue of transgender rights was front and center throughout much of the campaign and it was something that republicans in particular campaigned upon in a

pretty vigorous way. they ended up being pretty successful in this last election cycle so it is not a surprise that you now see them leaning into this, in this current stage. as they return to congress in january. it is not necessarily going to solve any of the problems here. this is obviously an issue that many americans are grappling with. and the tone and the rhetoric doesn't appear to be something people are playing out in a kind way. >> to your point, republicans spent more than $200 million on national television ads, network ads targeting trans people this year. so this conversation far from over. ryan nobles, thank you. for the first time ever, ukraine has fired american made long range missiles into russia. according to two u.s. officials. today, at the g20 summit in brazil, russia's foreign minister said it was a clear

sign that the west wants escalation. in response, president putin formally revised russia's nuclear doctrine lowering the threshold for his country's use of nuclear weapons. that's the most significant act of saber rattling toward the west since his invasion of ukraine. keir simmons joins us, putin has said these long range strikes would involve the direct involvement of nato, the u.s., europe. so where does this go from here? >> reporter: well, these are anxious hours honestly. but don't know whether they are as anxious as we now know real concern back in october of 2022 when western leaders who have given their accounts thought that russia might fire a tactical nuclear weapon. we have seen russia, president putin shift russia's nuclear stance. so it formally is allowed to fire a nuclear weapon against a

non-nuclear state that is supported by a nuclear state. it is a message to ukraine and the u.s. it comes days after the biden administration has agreed to have these long range missiles used by the ukrainians and they have been used five fired and intercepted. one hitting an armaments depot and setting fire. what happens now? the kremlin spokesman says the use of nuclear weapons is still a last resort. so trying to clearly kind of show a little measured response. but, the issue is that we don't know how many long range weapons will be fired in the days ahead. and we don't know what president putin's reaction will be. i think what we do know is that a lot of this is about both sides preparing for president-

elect trump. the new trump administration. and can they try to win ground. there are the tens of thousands of north korean troops thought to be ready to launch an offensive to push the ukrainians out of a part of the region. that is about trying to prepare for potential negotiations. it does underscore all of this, if nothing else, just how fraught and difficult the negotiations are likely to be. >> keir simmons, thank you. and still ahead, new reporting on criminal investigations into israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu's aides. a live report from tel aviv is coming up in our next hour. stay close, nor chris jansing reports right after this. after (intercom) t minus 10... (janet) so much space! that open kitchen!

(tanya) ...definitely the one! (ethan) but how can you sell your house when we're stuck on a space station for months???!!! (brian) opendoor gives you the flexibility to sell and buy on your timeline. (janet) nice! (intercom) flightdeck, see you at the house warming.

♪ ♪ ♪ something has changed within me ♪ ♪ it's time to try defying gravity ♪ ♪ ♪ it is good to be back with you on this second hour