the way i approach work post fatherhood, has really 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. in the average household, there are dozens of connected devices. connectivity is a big part of my boys' lives. it brings people together in meaningful ways. my hand, darling. >> good day. i'm chris. >> jansing. >> live at. msnbc headquarters in new york city. >> british persuasion. >> with the. fate of ukraine and. >> the future of europe on the line. >> the uk's keir starmer.

>> takes his shot at convincing. >> president trump. >> to keep a centuries. >> old friendship intact. will it. >> be enough? plus, twice. >> a judge. >> told the trump white house to restore. >> frozen federal funding and twice. >> the. >> judge was ignored. so why is the chief. justice of the supreme court. >> still. >> saying they don't have to pay? and more measles. the resurgence of the deadly disease declared eliminated 25 years ago, now. >> spreading to. nine states and. claiming the. >> life of a little boy in texas. >> can officials get a. >> handle on it before it gets worse? so much to get to on this thursday. but we start at the white. >> house. >> where british prime minister keir starmer is. trying to succeed, where essentially everyone else has failed. >> keeping president. >> trump from. turning his back on europe and abandoning support for ukraine's fight against russia. starmer, who arrived at the white house less than an hour ago, is one of the uk's most liberal leaders in years. and may seem an unlikely candidate to. change the

president's mind. but he's been working hard to get into trump's good graces, going so far as to cut foreign aid and add billions to britain's defense budget, as the president has demanded. the idea to convince trump that the u.k. and the rest of europe is willing to do its part to help defend ukraine against russian aggression and deserves help from the u.s. but this is what he's up against. >> well, i'm not going to make security guarantees beyond very much. we're going to have. you do that because it's in you know, we're talking about europe is the next door neighbor. i know that u.k. has said and france has said that they want to put they volunteered to put so-called peacekeepers on the site. and i think that's a good thing. >> i want to bring in nbc's. >> aaron gilchrist, who's covering the white house. megan fitzgerald is in london for us. and ned price is a former senior official with the state department and the cia. welcome to all. aaron, we saw the president greet the prime minister a short time ago, kind

of setting the stage for their meetings. what we'll see over the rest of the day, let us know. what are we expecting to see? >> well, chris, reporters were let into the oval office just about ten minutes ago or so and saw the president and the prime minister already seated there, beginning this bilateral meeting that they had scheduled for today. we know when the when the prime minister arrived at the white house again, you see the video here, the pool was the press was able to shout to the president, can you get a peace deal done on ukraine? and the president said, yes, we can. he said, we can, we will. before he and the prime minister walked into the oval office. and that really is, as you noted, the primary reason for this meeting. we were told by a senior administration official today, earlier today, that you should expect to hear the president talking with the prime minister about this, this deal that he's trying to broker between the u.s. and ukraine and the u.s. and russia, and then eventually the deal between russia and ukraine to bring an end to the war there. and this meeting, as you noted, does follow a similar

meeting with the french president last week where the same issues were on the table. the idea of europeans stepping up to have a bigger seat at the table, as some administration officials have put it in this effort to make sure that this war between russia and ukraine can be brought to an end. we do expect to see this video playback from that meeting, that bilateral meeting happening in the oval office in just a few minutes here, chris. we also expect that there's going to be a news conference with these two men later on this evening, and we might get an opportunity, one, to hear what agreements they've made, and two, to see the two men answer questions from their respective press cause. >> so look, ned, you know this. starmer and trump are pretty different politically and personality wise. that said, starmer has been successful. he has win last summer, i think the biggest landslide in almost 30 years in the u.k. is there a reason, though, to think that he can kind of get to trump? he can convince trump in a way that, say, french president emmanuel

macron could not. >> well, it's certainly true, chris. >> that prime. >> minister starmer has put on a. charm offensive. >> he's been in regular contact with president trump even starting during the campaign, has seen him in person. and now this early visit to the white house, as. >> you know. >> chris visits by the british prime minister to the white house across democratic and republican administrations are commonplace. but this is. >> no ordinary visit. >> by the british prime minister. i think it is probably an understatement to some extent to call it an extraordinary visit. i think the best term is to call this an emergency visit, and i say that because. >> it comes in the aftermath. of secretary of defense. >> going to. >> our nato allies and essentially giving away the store. >> in terms of our leverage with russians for any future negotiations. vice president j.d. vance going to munich and berating our. >> european allies. >> strangely, meeting with the german, essentially neo-nazi party in the aftermath of that. >> and then president trump. >> himself calling zelenskyy a

dictator and turning president putin a potential partner in peace, a conclusion that i think is at least reportedly belied by. the u.s. intelligence community. and perhaps most shockingly of all, it comes on the. >> same. >> week that the united states. sided with russia, sided with belarus, sided with. north korea. against europe and the u.k. and ukraine on a resolution at the united nations. >> so prime minister. starmer is. >> coming with gifts. he is going to pledge to increase british. defense spending. he is going to say some things president trump will surely like about trade and investment. >> the question. >> i think we all. >> should. >> have, however. >> is whether president trump will just. >> have nice words during the press. conference or will whether he will actually offer something substantive, something that matters to the u.k. and certainly matters to ukraine in terms of security guarantees or actual real work to help ukraine achieve what we know has to be the case. ukraine that is prosperous, ukraine that is secure, a ukraine that has the

ability to defend itself and deter against future aggression going forward. >> and of. >> course. >> megan, the timing is critical because it is tomorrow when the president zelenskyy will be coming to the white house. so presumably mr. starmer is the last one to have the ear of the president, at least from europe. and you know, when they're hoping to sign this rare earth minerals. >> deal. >> what is starmer. >> hoping to get out of this. >> well you know chris look you know he's got this uphill battle of trying to get some sort of security guarantees for ukraine. but to take a step back for a second, you know, prime minister starmer, as we've mentioned already, he's heading into this meeting with trump after announcing the uk's biggest defense spending increase since the cold war. so you can bet that starmer is hoping his actions will help to try and move the needle a little here. starmer has made very clear of his intentions, saying that he'll reiterate the uk's commitment to securing long lasting peace in ukraine. he's expected to recognize and discuss the actions that both

the uk have taken, and that europe stepping up to try and play a bigger part on global defense. but then, of course, as we've been talking about, you've got the sticking point here where the rubber meets the road, trying to get trump to commit to a us military backstop for ukraine. so in other words, what we're talking about here is that europe would like to see, you know, them taking the lead on securing a peace deal with the troops on the ground to defend ukraine, to deter russia. but then they would want the us to have air and logistical backup. so president trump said that, you know, the presence of american workers on ukrainian soil would provide automatic security if that mineral deal is signed. but of course, remember, president zelenskyy said there's no deal without security guarantees. so look, you know, we are seeing some movement, some progress, but there's certainly a lot of work that needs to be done, a lot more that needs to be discussed before we're looking at an end to the war in ukraine, chris. >> so now let's be a little more

specific about the stakes that we're looking at here, because let's say that it's nice words at the press conference today, but there are no security guarantees. we don't see any movement from donald trump. what does that mean for the future of ukraine? what does it mean for the future of europe? >> well, chris. >> there is a consensus. >> across the atlantic about. >> what a victorious ukraine will look like. it is again, a ukraine that is secure as ukraine that is independent, that is prosperous and has the. means and ability to defend itself going forward and to deter any future aggression. >> that last part. >> is key. >> president trump and president. >> zelensky are going to discuss a mineral deal tomorrow. i think the key question is whether that mineral deal will be purely extractive. that is to say, whether president trump will put a an ultimatum on the table that says you can cede your economic sovereignty to the united states, or you can see your political sovereignty. to

president putin, that is not a choice that ukraine should have to make. i think the big question is whether there will be ultimately any security guarantees that go along with that. and ultimately, chris, that's not just a nice to have. >> there is a. >> history when it comes to russia and frozen conflicts. whether you look at georgia, which russia invaded in 2008, whether you look at moldova, where russian proxy forces are in transnistria, moldova from russia, or whether you look at ukraine itself, which. >> for a while was. >> essentially a frozen conflict until russia broke. what are known as the minsk agreements and ultimately went in full scale in 2022. so the presence of u.s. security guarantees is supposed to break that pattern. without those security guarantees, prime minister starmer, president macron, other european leaders and president zelenskyy himself are right to worry that history will repeat itself, that russia will not hew to its word and that russia will just rearm, refit and ultimately

refight another day. >> yeah, there is this. >> big. >> picture, right, of. >> what the relationship of the us and the eu will be going forward. so i want to play a little bit, ned, of what president trump had to say yesterday. >> i love the countries of europe. i love all countries, frankly all different. but european union has been it was formed in order to screw the united states. i mean, look, let's be honest, the european union was formed in order to screw the united states. that's the purpose of it. and they've done a good job of it. >> now. >> of course, the uk starmer not a part of the of the eu but but the new york times raises an interesting point whether the president is simply indifferent to europe and the eu generally, or if he is actually trying to undermine it. what indicates to you one way or another? >> look. >> this is this is ultimately a president. >> who is purely transactional. i wouldn't think for a moment that he believes in the idea of

a united europe. you have to remember, europe became united in the aftermath and the ashes of world war two, and an effort that was instilled in large part by the united states to unite these countries that had just fought a devastating world war, first with economic ties and later with political ties. in a. system that really has guaranteed unprecedented levels of peace, security and stability across europe for 80 years. only vladimir putin has gone to such extraordinary lengths to really disrupt that. president trump doesn't know the history. he doesn't know the context. what he does know, what he is focused on is what he can get. and i say he personally, because. >> i'm not. >> even certain that he looks out for the collective interests of the united states. what's good for him is best in terms of his policies. so he will look for something that. >> he can tout. >> he will look for something that demonstrates that he's all about america first. and if he

can conclude the day to day with the british prime minister and tomorrow with the ukrainian president touting both those things. leaving aside what it means for the security of europe, for the security of ukraine, that ultimately will be what he is after. >> aaron gilchrist, meagan fitzgerald and ned price, thank you. in 90s, the supreme court steps in. the nation's top justice, handing the trump administration a win on foreign funding. next, his reason for intervening and what would have intervening and what would have happened if he hadn't? with fatigue and light-headedness, i knew something was wrong. then i saw my doctor and found out i have afib, and that means there's about a 5 times greater risk of stroke. symptoms like irregular heartbeat, heart racing, chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, or light-headedness, can come and go. but if you have afib, the risk of stroke is always there. if you have one or more symptoms, get checked out. making that appointment can help you get ahead of stroke risk. this is no time to wait.

(vo) what happens when one of the most famous dunkers of all time goes to the greatest lobsterfest of all time? ahead of stroke risk. (blake griffin) i make red lobster famous. (vo) no blake, dunking happens. (blake griffin) yeah, you're right. (vo) create your own lobster lover's dream with 2 or 3 choices on one plate. at red lobster. redness. >> in one minute. >> and look at the difference. my eyes look brighter and whiter. >> for up to. (auctioneer) let's start the bidding at 5 million dollars. (man) robinhood gold members get a 3% ira match. while the wealthy hoard their perks, our retirement contributions are boosted by 3%. now with robinhood gold. swiffer duster traps 4x more dust, for a clean even mom approves of. that reach! making hard to reach... so easy. swiffer. wow. the mother of all cleans. love it or your money back! allowing

the trump administration to keep billions of dollars in foreign aid frozen for now. in a late night order, chief justice john roberts temporarily blocked a lower court order that would have required them to unfreeze those funds by midnight. but even before he stepped in, lawyers for the d.o.j. said the trump administration couldn't comply with that deadline. they said they'd need, quote, weeks to release those funds. begging the question, what happens if the trump administration just says no to a judge? i want to bring in former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst christie greenberg. also with us, msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin. so this order, lisa, came just hours before the deadline. walk us through that order and what it means for this critical funding. >> so all. >> justice john roberts, chief justice john roberts is saying in this order is that the order from the district court

yesterday is frozen. and that essentially allows, chris usaid to freeze funding that's already been contracted out or awarded to individual grantees. they've been sending dozens of letters to their grantees and partners, essentially saying, we've reviewed the terms of our contract with you. and according to the terms of that contract, we have a right to terminate them because it's not in accordance with our policy priorities. so long as they are doing that on what seems to be some sort of individual basis, as opposed to a blanket pause on funding, that seems to be okay with respect to the supreme court's allowing it to go forward. >> but if they had not stepped in, and as the administration says, we could not do this, then what. >> i think the. >> district court could have a bunch of tools at its disposal. it could have held individual people in contempt. it could individual people. correct. it could have asked, for example, secretary of state marco rubio

or pete morocco, who is the acting administrator of usaid, to come into court and explain what are the bases for your cancellation of these contracts? why aren't you letting the funds go? pursuant to what authority are you doing this? and if they didn't show up, he could have held them in contempt. >> so, christie, the federal judge, set this deadline because there were indications that the trump administration was failing to comply with that previous court order to keep this money flowing. are the orders not clear, or is there some misunderstanding of how much power they have versus the courts? what's happening here? >> i don't. >> think this is an. >> issue where the order. >> was unclear, and i don't think. >> that there's. >> really confusion. >> among the. >> government lawyers. >> about what. >> the order requires. >> it seems like. >> the. >> confusion is. was apparent. >> in a. tuesday hearing where the judge. asked a justice department lawyer, what steps. >> has the. >> government taken to comply with my order that i issued two

weeks ago? and the attorney. >> incredibly. >> said he was not. >> in a. >> position to. >> answer that question. >> that is. >> a very straightforward question. >> the fact that. >> he couldn't. >> answer it. >> suggested to. >> the judge that they. actually had not taken the steps to comply with the court's order. and that is really troubling. this whole. idea that the government is. >> now telling the. >> supreme court in appeal. >> for the first time, hey, it would take us weeks. >> to be able to comply with this order and free up the money owed. well, as the district court, the lower court judge says, you never raised those. concerns to me. we could you could have suggested a schedule. we could have talked about what that would look like, but you. never even. raised it before the lower court. typically, the any. arguments are raised at the lower court first so. that they can go through the. proper appellate process. that didn't happen here, which again. >> really. >> suggests that this department of justice is taking. >> a really. >> you know, strongly defiant position towards district court judges. and that's something that should trouble everyone.

>> you, lisa, were in the courtroom for trump's trials. we all know what the strategy was. delay, delay, delay. do you see some sort of synergy here? some kind of similar strategy here. >> from a courtroom perspective? yes, certainly, in that they are trying to delay compliance with court orders by rushing to different appellate courts. on the other hand, what they're doing is anything but delay, right? they are trying to expedite the action that they want to take through dodge and through other agencies to slash funding that's already been appropriated. that's hardly a delay. that's like taking as much action as you can as quickly as you can. chris. >> so. >> chris, the attorneys for the aid group, said their clients are at a crisis point. they've even been facing physical threats because of there's been nonpayment to vendors, other creditors and some of the countries where they operate. so are there other legal avenues they have as the government fails to comply and has now been granted this pause? >> well. >> right now, the supreme court.

>> has said that there is a. >> pause on this. >> order. but that. they the supreme. >> court wants. >> more information in. >> briefs on friday. >> i expect these aid groups to lay out the case that they. >> have already made. >> to. >> the district court that there is really irreparable harm that is being caused by pausing this aid. they laid that out. >> pretty convincingly. >> to the lower court standard, that this is really arbitrary and capricious. actions by the by the defendants here, the us state department. and i think they'll make those same arguments to the supreme court. >> they're going. >> to follow. >> the process. >> that's that's. >> what they should do. >> i think they'll. >> make those arguments strongly. and hopefully the supreme court. >> finds them as persuasive. >> as not only the lower court, but the appellate. >> court did. >> as well. >> i want to bring in new york times reporter and msnbc contributor, jeremy. peter. so, jeremy, jeremy, that's kind of the big picture, right? the legal part of this. there's the macro. and i think we i mean, the, the micro, which is we

touched on, which is the individual kinds of funding that are being affected. and i want to play what elon musk had to say about cutting money for ebola prevention. this was at yesterday's cabinet meeting. >> we will make mistakes. >> we won't be perfect. but when we make mistakes, we'll fix it very quickly. so, for example, with usaid, one of the things we accidentally canceled very briefly was ebola. ebola prevention. i think we all want ebola prevention. so we restored the role of prevention immediately. and there was no interruption. >> so we restored it. then the washington post spoke to current and former usaid officials who said musk was wrong. the funding has still largely been halted. does musk not know what's going on? is this i mean, it's another situation where, you know, lawyers are going in and they say, we don't know what's going on. musk is making statements that, at least according to reporting, good reporting, turn out not to be true. what's going on? >> well. >> and according. >> to musk himself. >> will turn out.

>> not to be true. i mean. >> he has said. >> basically don't. >> several different times. >> several different times. yeah. >> don't take us at our word. >> we may screw. >> things up here and there. i mean, this is really. >> reminiscent of. >> but then. >> he also said, but we'll fix it. and at least in this instance, there's. >> nothing that, you know. >> it. may not be. >> and i you know, i don't think this funding is something you can. >> turn. >> on and off with a switch. >> the way that musk seems. >> to think and would. >> have us believe. >> i mean, you're talking about an incredibly complicated. >> bureaucracy. >> and it's not. >> just as. >> easily just. >> as. >> it's not. >> as easily. >> slimmed down. >> and. made more efficient. >> in the. >> way that musk seems to think it is. >> it's also. mistakes aren't easy to necessarily correct. i mean, what. >> you. >> have here really reminds me a lot. >> of what. >> we saw. >> during the first. >> trump administration. >> when they. >> were making. >> mistakes all over the place. >> because they were rookies. >> they were, you know, the barbarians at. >> the gate. >> who had finally crashed. >> into the palace.

>> and this isn't what. >> they promised. >> voters, you know, this was. >> they were supposed to. have worked. >> out the. >> bugs by now. >> you know. >> supposedly the administration that is in place, the advisers around the president are more seasoned and know what they're doing to a much greater degree than they did in 2017. >> so then. >> why all the mistakes. >> and the backtracking? >> you know, you have elon musk posting all over x that the judges who defy the administration should be impeached. and he even posted this. i'm going to quote him. the only way to restore rule of the people in america is to impeach judges. no one is above the law, including judges. i mean, i guess you have to ask what law they broke, but how concerning would it be to remove these checks on power? >> right. >> i don't. >> i. >> mean. >> it's. >> so hard. >> to impeach a. >> judge, and. >> it's. >> so rarely. happened in our nation's. history that i think this is a pretty empty threat. i mean. >> it. sounds like. >> the threat of somebody who. is like musk, kind. >> of naive to how the.

>> political process works. >> the other part of it thought like that, that we've heard from folks who find themselves in the middle of it, maybe it's not successful. maybe you can't impeach him, but then their name is out there, and then the possibility exists. and we have seen this in the past. they start to get threats. they can't go. >> they've even been. >> shot. >> and killed. >> i mean. >> this has. >> happened with. >> with federal judges. >> in the past. >> certainly that. >> is not hypothetical. >> and i do think that, you know. if you see that. >> it's just another continuation. >> of the. >> way that president. >> trump and. >> many of his. >> supporters like. >> to bully and intimidate. >> the people. >> they believe. >> are standing in the way of their agenda. >> jeremy peters, lisa rubin, christie greenberg, thank you all very much. and coming up, growing concerns as the texas measles outbreak crosses state lines. the new cases we're now seeing pop up in new mexico and kentucky. and what can be done to stop the spread? a medical expert will join me. and an

investigation now underway in santa fe after actor gene hackman and his wife were found dead inside their home. we've got the details live from the scene in our next hour. you're watching chris jansing report only on msnbc. >> we will give you. >> and, doug. >> you'll be back. >> emus can help people customize and save. >> hundreds on car insurance with liberty mutual. >> you're just. >> a flightless bird. no. >> he's a dreamer. frank. >> fema game on. >> doug. >> well. i'll be. that bird really did it. >> only pay for. >> what. >> you need. liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty. >> everyone needs a vacation. eventually. and when i need a hotel. >> trivago compares. >> hotel prices from hundreds of sites so you can. >> save up to 40%. >> smart. >> simple. two of my favorite

things. >> hotel. >> trivago. >> kids, i'm. >> sure you're wondering why your mother and i asked you here tonight. it's because it's a buffet. of all you can eat. >> butterfly shrimp and sirloin steak. >> yeah. >> that is the reason. >> i thought it's because i made >> i thought it's because i made varsity. still have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis... ...or crohn's disease symptoms after taking... ...a medication like humira or remicade? put them in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when symptoms tried to take control, i got rapid relief with rinvoq. check. when flares tried to slow me down,... ...i got lasting remission with rinvoq. check. and many were in remission... ...even at nearly 2 years. and rinvoq... ...helped visibly reduce damage of the intestinal lining. check. rapid symptom relief. lasting remission. and visibly reduced damage. check. rinvoq can lower ability to fight infections. before treatment, test for tb and do bloodwork. serious infections, blood clots, some fatal;... ...cancers, including lymphoma and skin;... ...serious allergic reactions; gi tears; death;... ...heart attack; and stroke occurred. cv event risk increases in age 50 plus... ...with a heart disease risk factor.

tell your doctor if you've had these events, infection,... ...hep b or c, smoked,... ...are pregnant or planning. don't take if allergic or have an infection. put uc and crohn's in check... ...and keep them there. with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist... ...about rinvoq. do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. call coventry direct to learn more. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. our friend sold their policy to help pay their medical bills, and that got me thinking. maybe selling our policy could help with our retirement. i'm skeptical, so i did some research and called coventry direct. they explained life insurance is a valuable asset that can be sold. we learned we could sell all of our policy, or keep part of it with no future payments. who knew? we sold our policy. now we can relax and enjoy our retirement as we hadr more of life insurance, you may qualify to sell your policy.

don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit coventrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance. our xfinity network is built for streaming

all the stuff people love. how can it get any better? -i'm just spitballin' here, but, what if we offer people apple tv+, netflix and peacock? for one low monthly price. -yes. so, people could stream the shows they love. and we could call it... xfinity streamsaver! mmmmm. what about something like: streamsaver? ooooooo. -i love that. add streamsaver with apple tv+, netflix and peacock included for only $15 a month... and stream all your favorite entertainment, all in one place. you. explore your treatment options and connect with the provider at. >> today, there is urgent concern over a growing measles outbreak across the country. cases have now been identified in nine states, including kentucky, which reported its

first case overnight in an adult who recently traveled internationally. and new mexico has now identified nine cases in lea county, right along the texas border, near where an outbreak has surged to 124 cases, and where there has been the nation's first reported measles death since 2015. joining me now infectious diseases physician and director of boston university's center on emerging infectious diseases, doctor nahid bhadelia. it's always good to see you, doctor. the hhs secretary, robert f kennedy jr, kind of downplayed the outbreak yesterday. he called it not unusual. but how concerned should we be about this outbreak, and particularly the fact that a young person has died? and what's your advice to folks? >> yeah. >> chris, i. this is a human tragedy, partly because. >> it is preventable. the mmr vaccine is 97%. effective in reducing. >> this. >> disease, which can. cause 1. >> in 4 people. >> to be. hospitalized and can cause.

>> 1 in 1000. >> people to. >> die. >> which is exactly what. >> is happening. >> here in the united states. and what's. >> ironic about this. >> is that in 2000, we eliminated measles. >> that means there. >> were no cases. >> of. >> measles here. >> in the united states. >> and the reason it's made a roaring comeback is because of the kind of anti-vax. sentiment that secretary kennedy. >> organization. >> children's defense fund and. >> others have spread. >> which is reduced. >> parental confidence. >> in a safe vaccine that's being. >> used the. >> world over. >> what can people do now to protect themselves? one of the things i was surprised, for example, to see is that people i think it was who were born around 1957 or before 1957, they should think about getting a booster. i mean, obviously, number one, vaccines are safe. kids should get a measles vaccine. that would be your advice, right? what about for everybody else? >> yeah. >> i again. >> very good point. >> if you or your child. >> is not vaccinated you need. >> to get vaccinated. this is a.

>> safe vaccine. it's hundreds and. hundreds of papers. >> and tons. >> and dozens of vaccine safety studies have been done. and now millions of people have. received this vaccine. the other thing to know. >> is that this is. >> a. >> virus that. >> after you exposed to it, it can take a while. >> to. >> manifest the symptoms. >> so if you think you've been exposed to it, you should. >> find care so that you could get vaccinated in the interim. and also because that way. the public. >> health, you know, officials. >> can work with. >> you to reduce. >> transmission further. if someone is sick within your family, it's going to be important. >> to ensure that. >> they're isolated, particularly if you. >> have. >> others around them. they may not be vaccinated or may be immunocompromised. >> kennedy made a number of false statements yesterday. for example, he said two people had died. it was one. and that people were hospitalized. quote, mainly for quarantine. i want to play what the chief medical officer at covenant health responded to that. >> so we don't hospitalized

patients for quarantine purposes. so quarantine certainly if you've had an exposure there, there are indications to quarantine in the context of measles, but that. >> quarantine is. >> not something that would happen in a healthcare facility. we admit patients who need acute supportive treatment in our hospital. >> so they were not there to keep them away from other people. but in the big picture. and we learned a lot about this during a lot about this during covid, i think. how important is it for people to be able to trust what the leaders who are involved in health care for the u.s. government say? >> it's important? you know, we're. >> saying that experts. >> are and officials. >> are who. >> we need to listen to. if one of those officials. >> is basically saying what goes against just decades. >> of. >> scientific data and public. >> health practice and what is. >> medically sound, then that creates. >> a. >> crisis for families, right, who want to. listen to. >> to. >> the authorities. >> in this case, i just want to stress what the. >> what. >> the official.

>> in texas. >> said, people. >> don't get hospitalized because they're. >> getting quarantined. 1 in. >> 4. >> people who. get measles. >> have to be hospitalized because they can get severe pneumonia. they can get shock, and they need to be admitted for. >> icu care. >> in some. >> cases, it is. it is a serious disease. >> wait a minute. >> no matter what you hear from any doctor. >> i hadn't heard that before. one out of four. >> one out of four. >> people in the. >> united states who get measles will get hospitalized. it is a severe disease. it's a preventable disease. 97% effective vaccine. >> why wouldn't. >> you want that. >> for your. >> family and for. >> your children? >> doctor nahid bhadelia, always so good to have you on the program. thank you. important information coming up. budget battle showdown. what is the path forward for trump's economic agenda? if the house and the senate can't get on the same page? you're watching chris same page? you're watching chris jansing reports only on msnbc when migraine strikes, do you question the trade-offs of treating? ubrelvy is another option.

it works fast, and most have migraine pain relief within two hours. you can treat it anytime, anywhere. tell your doctor all medicines you take. don't take if allergic or with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. get help right away for allergic reactions like trouble breathing; face, mouth, tongue, or throat swelling; which may occur hours to days after. side effects include nausea and sleepiness. migraine pain relief starts with you. learn how abbvie could help you save on ubrelvy. always dry scoop before you run. listen to me, the hot dog diet got me shredded. it's time we listen to science. one a day is formulated with key nutrients to support whole body health. one a day. science that matters. chips. >> can turn into windshield cracks. >> but at least you can go to. >> safe flight.com. >> and schedule a fix in minutes. sweet safe flight can

come to you for free. and our highly trained techs can replace your windshield right at your home. >> they flight safe. flight. >> don't wait. go to safe flight.com and schedule now. >> safe flight. >> repair safelite replace the time saver. 90s. and you're done. stole shaver. a time saver. shop now. it's no shame to come back. >> no matter why. >> you started your business, your goal is to keep on growing. and with the help of financing from. >> capitas. >> you can meet all of your business goals. >> because at capitas. >> we finance the legacy builders, the creators, the freedom chasers, the opportunity seekers. at capitas, we finance seekers. at capitas, we finance small (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. beneficiary planner. that's one 800 650 6900. there's no obligation. that number again is

>> than job postings. get your own paychex recruiting copilot now at. >> so president trump in the oval office with prime minister starmer of the uk. it has been wide ranging, as it often is with this president. among the things that he has talked about is he said he will be going to the uk soon. he was given a letter from prince king charles inviting him for an official state visit. he said the answer is yes. he talked domestically about va layoffs, saying he was following the number of veterans that have been let go, but

overall was satisfied with the cuts. and i think critically, ahead of his meeting tomorrow with president zelensky of ukraine, he was asked to repeat his statement that zelensky was a dictator. and donald trump said, did i say that? i can't believe i said that. next question. we continue to listen in to this. we're particularly interested in any comments he will have about the meeting that's coming up with president zelensky and his relationship with vladimir putin of russia. so we'll bring that to you if news is made here. in the meantime, republicans appear to be heading toward a showdown. the house and senate are at odds about how to move forward after approving competing budget frameworks, and there's little evidence so far that they have found a middle ground. >> how many. >> changes will you. >> be. >> able to stomach? as little as possible, and i've articulated that over and over because, as demonstrated last night, we have a very small needle to thread here, and we have sort of an equilibrium equilibrium point amongst people with competing priorities. and we deviate from

that too much. we have a problem. so the senate understands that. and i think we'll have a product that both chambers can agree to. >> joining us now, nbc's julie sirkin on capitol hill, brendan buck is former aide to house speaker paul ryan and john boehner and an msnbc political analyst. so, julie, the house has little appetite for change. but our senators on board. >> well, chris, they really. >> have no choice because the guy at. >> the other side of pennsylvania avenue, of. >> course, donald trump. >> who's. >> in the white house. is going to put pressure on them to do whatever he wants them to do. and this. >> week, we've learned that. >> he wants to make those 2017. tax cuts not just. >> extend them, but make them permanent. there are real questions, both in terms of policy, what they can get through the senate parliamentarian who basically looks over the contours of any reconciliation process. again, it's a process that republicans are going through right now. the democrats have gone through under president biden that will enable them to pass funding for president trump's agenda without relying on democratic votes. so an open question there. the house bill doesn't make those tax cuts permanent. the senate

wants them to be permanent. the other piece of this is that the senate wanted to unlock funding for trump's priorities at the border, especially his mass deportations, asap. this was a request made by the trump administration themselves. if they go with the house route, this one big, beautiful bill, it's going to take months for them to be able to get that over the finish line. that being said, though, when we talk to speaker johnson and leader thune when they got back from the white house yesterday, johnson was markedly upbeat. thune not so much. and so it was clear to us that the that trump made his preferences known behind closed doors. you'll see that in this mass of sound you're about to hear from senators we spoke to yesterday and today. watch this. >> well. >> it's just. >> a framework. >> but. >> you know, it'll it'll need to. >> be changed. >> short answer. >> is likely. >> no. >> long answer is no. >> i think. >> we'll work through it. >> those conversations. >> are ongoing. i mean, i think the idea of reconciling. >> the two. >> resolutions is part of. >> the process. >> the house. >> product is.

>> comprehensive. >> and i. >> think it comes. >> closest to achieving president. >> trump's america. >> first agenda. >> there you go from a hell no yesterday to saying that the house version, not lindsey graham's senate budget resolution that they voted on a couple of weeks ago, comes anywhere close. i'll tell you that corn has been pretty consistent in his position here. he did tell us on the eve of the house vote earlier this week, that he doubted they could even get that across the finish line. now that they had it was messy and it was narrow. johnson proved that he could do it. can he do it if they break this up into multiple packages? probably not, because you have members of his conference, conservatives on the right who want more cuts. they don't even want to extend those tax cuts separately. that's why they're being rolled into this package. and then you have moderates who don't want cuts to entitlements and benefits. so far, johnson said he's not going to do that. but we still don't have an answer to the question of how are they going to get to $2 trillion in cuts without going into those necessary benefits that so many americans rely on? chris. >> yeah, that really is the big picture question, brendan. so take us inside these negotiations and how you see

this going. >> yeah. >> julie just laid. >> out. >> there are a lot. >> of moving parts. >> on this, but i'll. simplify it with one medicaid. >> the house. >> resolution calls for. >> $880 billion. >> in savings. >> from medicare. >> now they'll point out. >> it. >> doesn't actually say. >> medicare, but it is the. >> committee of. >> jurisdiction that oversees medicare. and you're not really going. >> to get anywhere. >> close to. >> $880 billion. unless you're going. >> really. >> hard at medicare. that's just simply. >> never going to fly. >> in the senate. >> you have. senators who. >> of course, are. >> responsible for overseeing. >> entire states. >> not just districts. >> and the medicaid. >> cuts would disproportionately hurt. >> a lot of republican. >> red states. >> so the senate. >> is just simply not. >> going to. >> swallow that level of cuts to. >> medicaid, and that's. >> going to have to be changed before they move back. once you do that. >> you're going to have a really. >> hard time passing. >> that in the house. as we saw this. >> week. >> conservatives were. >> unhappy that there weren't more. >> cuts in this bill. >> you take. >> out that $880. >> billion in savings from

medicaid. you are far short way. >> way short of the $2 trillion they're. >> looking for. >> and you don't have a lot of easy ways to go back at it when you're also rolling out medicare. >> and social. >> security and you're adding. >> funding to defense. >> so they made an important procedural step this week. >> but i don't know. >> that they've actually solved the whole lot of the substantive puzzle that's still. >> lays in front. >> of them. >> and what's bigger than the 2 trillion number? well, another difficulty for republicans in this budget resolution is how to make the tax cuts that they enacted in 2017 permanent before they expire at the end of this year. it would cost brendan an estimated $4.7 trillion over a decade. that traditionally requires actually paying for them, which the gop realistically has no hope of doing. so what do they do about that? >> so this gets into. >> complicated baseline. >> issues. >> and i hate to even use that. >> word. >> but the reality is. >> the process they. >> are going through. >> you are not allowed to add to the deficit.

>> after ten years. >> you can add. >> to. >> the deficit all you want. >> in the first ten years, but you can't. >> add to it in. >> the. last ten years. so what the. >> senate has conceived is changing the way that these policies are scored, so that they are. based on. >> what. >> the current. >> law is right now, not with the. >> current law is. >> going to be, or what the law is. >> going. >> to be. in five. >> years when those tax. >> cuts are meant. >> to go away. >> but they're telling. the scorekeepers to say. >> just count it. >> as though the tax rates as they. >> are today are going to continue on in perpetuity. that means there's no cost to keeping. >> them going. >> on in perpetuity. that change. >> is necessary. >> to. make this law permanent. >> so that ten. >> 11. >> 12 years. >> from now, you're. >> not adding to the deficit. >> does it actually. >> change how much we're spending. >> or taking in? >> absolutely not. the deficit number in. reality is. is what it is. but they're. >> going to change the scorekeeping, or at. >> least they're talking about changing the scorekeeping so that it does not look like it cost anything. >> and that's. >> the way. >> they're able to get it through this process. >> they're using. >> that again. >> doesn't allow you to add anything to the deficit. >> in the out years. >> and that's the kind of thing, don't you think, brendan, that

drives people crazy. and i mean that. and by the way, this is also when lawmakers need to figure out how to avoid a government shutdown and what, two weeks? speaker johnson says he knows they're going to have to probably pass a stopgap. everybody knows it as a cr, a continuing resolution. this has become a repeated crutch time after time after time after time. i think that that's their job. why can't they figure out how to avoid this and do their job? >> well? >> that would require. >> making a lot of hard choices. >> and it's. >> funny because. >> as you see. >> elon musk. >> running around. >> making all kinds of changes to government spending. >> you would think that. >> they would want. >> to get in on it. but the problem. >> is you. >> need democrats at this point to pass anything that. >> that that would fund the government. >> and they're just simply. >> not willing to make any trade. >> offs or compromises. >> with democrats. >> and so it feels like there's been a lot of just running. >> out the clock. >> because they don't want to actually reach. >> any. >> kind of bipartisan agreement.

>> and we'll. >> get up to the deadline. >> and they'll just say, i guess we're. >> just going to have to do another stopgap because we don't actually. >> have a bill to do at some point. that's not going to work. you can't just keep auto piloting the government forever, but it seems like they may actually want to try to do that for the rest of this year, simply to avoid again ever having to make a compromise with democrats. >> but i'm trying to figure out how that helps them as we look toward people will already, by the end of this year, be running to keep their jobs. >> there's not a lot. >> of political benefit to passing a spending bill anymore. >> i mean, they would. >> rather not have to make any difficult. decisions on on government. >> funding and just look the other way. >> look, if they had it all up to them and they could write a, a spending bill just with republicans, they would do it. they just can't because this is something that you can't put through that reconciliation process that julie was talking about. >> you need. >> 60 votes in the senate, which requires democrats to vote for this. and they just can't do that. they can't pass this on their own is the bottom line. they're going to need democrats,

and they just don't want to do that. and again, a funding bill is not anything anybody is going to be excited to talk about back home. what they would love to be able. >> to. >> do, i'm sure, is, is try to put in law some of these cuts. >> they just. >> can't find a way to actually do that. >> yeah. brendan buck, julie sirkin. thank you. we're going to take folks inside the white house where the president is with prime minister starmer, and president trump is talking about his unconventional relationship for a us leader with vladimir putin. let's listen. >> i don't think of if i didn't win the election, i don't think we'd be even talking to putin right now or anybody else. i think it would just, you know, i don't know if you're looking at the stats, but thousands of people are being killed a week. soldiers, mostly because the towns have been destroyed, but thousands of soldiers. this was a very bad week, by the way. i get i get the stats and you're talking about human life, number one. i want to see that. and it

doesn't involve american soldiers, but it's russian and ukrainian soldiers. and i can think i think i'm speaking for both. yeah, yeah. number one we want to see that stop. and number two, i want to stop paying the kind of money that we're talking about. you know, we're helping and we're helping nato, but we're helping a lot more than anybody else by far. and i want that to stop also. >> mr. president, the europeans. >> thank you sir. you talked. about trade tariffs. >> this morning. on your social media site. >> just a question about china. >> 10% tariffs has. already been implemented. >> on china. >> are you planning to do. >> additional ten above. >> this would be an additional. >> ten above. >> and is. >> there from the talks with. canada and mexico so far. >> are you not seeing the. >> progress that you wanted. >> in order to? >> i don't see it at all. no, not on drugs. we've done a great job. if you look at tom homan, he's been incredible. and christie, they've done a great job in terms of the border. but the drugs continue to pour into our country, killing hundreds of

thousands of people. we're losing substantially more than 100,000 people, i mean, dead, they're dead. the families are destroyed after that happened. so it's you know, it's not just that that's the ultimate, but the families are absolutely destroyed. the drugs come in through mexico. they come a lot of them, not all of them, but a lot of them come from china. and that's why we did that. it's ten. it's ten plus ten. was there confusion on that? >> there was sir. yes. >> okay. ten plus ten. it's a second ten. and i think you'll i think you're going to see eventually you're going to see drugs stopping because the country should not be allowing those drugs to come into the united states of america. and we're not going to allow it to happen. so that goes on on the 4th of march. and then on the 2nd of april, we have reciprocal tariffs. that's reciprocal where we charge countries what they're charging us. and nobody should have a problem with that. we have a reciprocity. it's

something that i think everybody i've spoken to said that's fair. and it is. if somebody charges us 25%, we charge them 25. if somebody charges us 10 or 15 or 30 or 70, we charge them an exact like amount. and it's pretty simple, but it's reciprocal tariffs because the united states has been taken advantage of by many, many different countries, including our friends, friend and foe, and in many cases, our friends took bigger advantage of. and when you talk about the eu, we're talking about the eu. the eu has been really a very bad to us in terms of trade, and i'm a different kind of a president. i can't let that happen. >> thank you president. >> you said just. >> now. >> please ma'am. >> go ahead. >> what would you be willing to do if vladimir putin. >> did not stick. >> to. >> the terms. >> of any deal on ukraine? >> if you know. >> what, it did. >> not stick to the. >> terms of any deal. >> on ukraine because he has a. >> history of not sticking to his word when it comes international agreements.

>> i think he'll keep his word. i think i think he's i've spoken to him. i've known him for a long time now. you know, we had we had to go through the russian hoax together. that was not a good thing. it's not fair. that was a rigged deal and had nothing to do with russia. it was a rigged deal with inside the country. and they had to put up with that, too. they put up with a lot. it wasn't just us. they had to put up with it with a phony story that was made up. i've known him for a long time now, and i think he will. i don't believe he's going to violate his word. i don't think he'll be back when we make a deal. i think the deal is going to hold now. they're going to have security. you're going to have security. you're going to have soldiers. i know france wants to be there. he's the president has has said he wants to have soldiers there. i don't think we're going to even be necessary, but i don't think there'll be any problem with keeping the deal with the security. we're going. >> to discuss that. >> you want to say something? no, i was just going to say. i mean, the deal if we get it is going to be hugely important. i don't think it would have happened if the space hadn't been created for it by yourself.

but if there's a deal in, we got to make sure it's a deal that lasts. that is not temporary, that lasts. and that's why we need to make. >> sure that. >> it's secure. and we've went in and said, we'll play. >> our part. >> and we've talked and we will talk about how we work with yourself, mr. >> president. >> to. >> ensure that this deal. >> is something which is not violated, because it's very important. >> that if there is a deal. >> we. >> keep it. >> and i think i can say that will be the easy part. that's the part we look forward to because putting security there, that's the part we all look forward to. that's easy. the difficult part is getting the deal made. so but i think we've come a long way. did you have. >> something? >> yes. he's got such a nice face. he's you know, he's smiling. but watch he'll ask a total killer question. those are the. >> him a long time. >> yeah. the ones that get, you know, he. >> looks like a nice guy. >> mr. president, what do you get on most? what's your common ground. >> with sir. >> keir starmer? because you're. >> both from different political backgrounds. >> sure. i think i can say this

because we've known each other now really for a little while. this is not our first meeting. as you know, he loves his country and so do i. that's our common, our common theme. he loves his country and i love our country. and we also have two countries that have gotten along for the longest period of time. no number one ally on each side. and we have good france and australia. we have a lot of good ones, but we've had a long time relationship, a long time, hundreds of years, and we like each other, frankly, and we like each other's country and we love our country. and i think that's our common thread. >> mr. president. >> mr. president the europeans. >> yeah. please. on tariffs. you just said with. >> china who are you with. >> i'm with the independent. >> oh that's good. >> it's ontario. >> you just said. yeah. thank you. we charge them. we charge them as we charge china. but the tariffs are paid eventually by.

american importers and consumers. >> no, no, i think they're paid for by the country. but you know look we can get into that. i had i put a lot of tariffs on in my first term, and we made tremendous amounts of progress because of those tariffs. china paid us hundreds of billions of dollars, billions we never had because they took advantage. and president xi is a friend of mine, but he knows he knows better than anybody. he took advantage of our country. he took advantage of presidents who didn't know what they were doing, and they expect them. they actually expect them. the smart countries expect them from me because they know me and they know our country. but they got away with they got away with murder for, for decades. and we just can't let that happen anymore. behind you. please. >> it sounds as though one of you completely trusts president putin, and one of you doesn't trust him an inch. have i got that right? and why do you. >> trust him? >> look, you know, it's trust and verify, let's call it that. and i think we both can be that way. you have to verify because

you never know what's going to happen. i know i know a lot of people that you would say no chance that they would ever deceive you. and they're the worst people in the world. i know others that you would guarantee they would deceive you. and you know what? they are 100% honorable, so you never know what you're getting. no, i have confidence that if we make a deal, it's going to hold. >> mr. president. >> benjamin. >> mr. president, less than 1%. of all. >> fentanyl that comes into the. >> us is apprehended. >> at the canadian border. so why use fentanyl as a reason? >> we apprehending much more. they're only apprehending 1%. you're right about that. it's a little more than that. but they should be apprehending much more because a lot comes through canada. and as mexico gets stronger in terms of the border, it goes up to canada and a lot of drugs are coming in through canada. we can't have that. >> mr. president. mr. president yeah. >> go ahead please. in the back. >> is there. >> anything you can say tomorrow to president zelensky to. >> reassure him. >> that his.

>> country's war hasn't been in vain and its sovereignty. >> is not going to. >> be. >> threatened by any deal? >> well, you know, he's coming. perhaps he's already on his way, and we're going to be signing the deal together, probably in front of the media, and we're going to be having a good conversation. no, we want to work with him. president zelensky, zelensky, she said before, we want to work with him and we will work with him. i think the president and i actually have had a very good relationship. it maybe got a little bit testy because we wanted to have a little bit of what the european nations said, you know, they they get their money back by giving money. we don't get the money back. biden made a deal. he put in $350 billion. and i thought it was a very unfair situation. >> we're not getting all of ours. >> i mean, quite a bit of ours was, was was gifted. it was given there were some loans, but mainly it was gifted, actually. >> is the president, the president? the europeans.

>> want a ukraine to be part of nato as part of. >> this deal. >> are you willing to budge on that at all or is. >> it a firm? >> well, i could be very nice and say, oh, well, we'll work to it. look, it's not going to happen. this is not going to happen. that's what started this whole thing. biden. biden said that. and all of a sudden the gun started. that was one of the primary reasons this started. and this was long before president putin. they never said it was an impossibility. so we can say, oh, gee, well, we'll try, but that's something that's just not going to happen. and then the other question you ask is about the land. will you get your land back? well, they fought long and hard on the land. and you and i will be discussing that. and we're going to certainly try and get as much as we can back. but on the nato, it's just not that's not going to happen. yeah. >> please. >> mr. president. >> you talked about having common ground. >> with keir. >> starmer, but there. >> are things you disagree on as well. >> you described. >> zelenskyy as a dictator. he describes president putin as a dictator. do you see that as a

problem? >> the relationship between president zelensky and president putin is not a good one. you've noticed, right? it's not a good one. it's not a good relationship. and we'll have to try and work something out. sometimes that happens. i get along with both. i have a very good relationship with president putin. i think i have a very good relationship with president zelensky. and now we're, you know, we're doing the deal and we're going to be in there. we're going to be actually in there digging, digging our hearts out. and hopefully, you know, we need the rare earth and we have some here, but we don't have enough. we're our our economy is very strong. and we need a lot of things that in some cases we don't have here. so i think we're going to have a very good relationship. but the relationship between them is not the best. >> i think that. >> mr. zelenskyy is a dictator. >> did i say that? i can't

ev