he couldn't report to somebody like tulsi gabbard in good conscious. she is too risky. she has a history of cheering america's adversaries. if confirmed i'm worried she'll push false intelligence for political ends. those are precisely the moments mr. ratcliffe will have to hold firm, reject what she says and go to the president and speak truth to power. his answers to my questions about that were unsatisfying, so i'm voting no, because it's such an important position. now on the hegseth vote, today the senate will vote to advance one of the most unqualified, erratic nominees for a major position we have ever seen in america. no position in the cabinet carries the weight, the responsibility of secretary of defense. the secretary of defense is in charge of keeping us safe and keeping the men and women in our armed forces and the civilians safe. you need someone who has a steady hand. you need someone who has had experience in this kind of stuff. you need someone who when he shows up to a meeting, you're sure that he knows all the facts and is going to be able to conduct

caller: hegseth for one, and tulsi gabbard. i've called a couple times, i'm a john mccain republican converted to independent, but i'd like to remind congress and our representatives that when matt gaetz was still up for nomination, congress decided should be let all this news come out about him or not, i think we need to remind our representatives that it is not a big boys club that they've got going on up there. they are representatives of the united states and me and all the people that vote for whether it is trump or kamala harris, if there is stuff going around in the background of these people, they need to put that stuff out and not decide whether it should be put out or not because it may be detrimental. that's not a big boys club they've got going up there. it is not a private club. and trump doesn't read the daily briefings. he never did, so i think it's pretty important that the people in the cabinet are focused on just what is best for this country, because trump i don't think his priorities are what is going to hap

tulsi gabbard going to meet with mark warner today. what is your sense of the direction do you think of her nomination? i mean, as zach says, he basically needs republicans. but do you think mark warner's opinion coming out of this meeting could change things? >> well, i'd like to think it would. this is a nomination of great concern, widely inexperienced and a critical role. let's remember why we formed odni in the first place. >> it was post nine over 11. it was to coordinate the intelligence community, to force them to share information to avoid another 9/11. couple that with the fact that her meeting with assad isn't just an isolated incident. the fact that she came back from that secret meeting saying he's not an enemy of the united states, it concerns me that our allies wouldn't share critical information that keeps us safe, because they simply wouldn't trust her. >> it'll be interesting if we hear from mark warner coming out of that meeting for sure. um, also in the house, the focus now turns especially for republicans pushing f

>> i support tulsi gabbard. she is amazing in that she has been a member of congress and a combat veteran, a decorated combat veteran for work under fire in iraq. you're right, it's a paperwork problem right now with the office of government ethics. we had hoped to have the hearing later this week. it looks like it will be the following week. but she continues to have promotions in the military. she's a lieutenant colonel. she now has top-level security clearances. she is the right person to keep america secure and safe. >> she took the unusual measure of releasing a public statement reversing some past policy positions she had taken when it came to surveillance. are you concerned that you don't have enough republicans who are willing to vote for her? >> i'm not concerned at all about that. senator tom cotton, chairman of the intelligence committee, has met with her on numerous occasions. she will have a hearing. she has to raise her right hand, take an oath at the time. she will be telling the truth, and the is

gabbard has also been accused of amplifying russian propaganda. perhaps most notably in early 2022, shortly after russia invaded ukraine in march of that year, gabbard published a post on x about, quote, us funded biolabs in ukraine, which many people pointed out echoed kremlin propaganda that russia used to justify its invasion of ukraine. she received pointed criticism for that post from the likes of then senator mitt romney, who wrote on x, quote, tulsi gabbard is parroting false russian propaganda. her treasonous lies may well cost lives, end quote. gabbard clarified that she was warning about the possibility of pathogens escaping from laboratories during the war. joining me now is john brennan, the former cia director during the obama administration. he's also an msnbc senior national security and intelligence analyst. he's the author of the book undaunted my fight against america's enemies at home and abroad. director. good to see you this morning. thank you for being with us. i want to talk about this because there are many americans who ar

i think he's going to sail through. >> you think gabbard is the one. >> i think gabbard is the one andyper focus on her and make it a national security issue. this is not about politics, this is about the security of our nation and allies. >> thank you so much. that is all for today. thank you for watching. we will be back next week because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." and go birds! >>> breaking overnight. the country of colombia now agreeing to accept

kash patel. >> and tulsi. >> gabbard, this. >> is about.u will ever have where you have to choose between your personal political future and what's good for the country. and these senators know this. they know they know this in private. >> they know this. >> in their hearts. they have to choose. they have to make a decision. >> people like thom tillis have to make a decision. what's more important, my continued. relevance in the republican party. or taking a vote that might put men and women in the military at risk, our national intelligence at risk. so this is one of those moments where, again, it feels very, very familiar watching the republican party, you know, bend the knee to donald trump. but the clarity of the. choice and the clarity of the choice that that they they know it, and the fact that even mitch mcconnell. would say, yeah, no. >> i you know. >> he's he's sending a signal to others. but it was interesting that nobody picked up. >> nobody followed him. >> and that's exactly the thing that i mean, the clarity of the choice, cha

the remaining two are tulsi gabbard and kash patel for the fbi. not only are they not qualified, they have done things through the course of their career that show they don't have the judgment or the character, frankly, to hold such sensitive positions. i think this is this is a real danger for the united states. in both cases. i think in tulsi gabbard's case, she said things and done things that show a lack of judgment that should keep her as far away from classified information as possible. >> what's the danger on the on the kash patel side to you? obviously, the tulsi gabbard side has got associations that we haven't cleared up with with the former syrian regime. she's got associations with the putin regime and has some just some very strange foreign policy positions. what's your fear about kash patel, other than the fact that he's got an enemies list and thinks that the fbi should be used to weaponize, to be weaponized against the enemies of the current president, >> against the enemies? >> well, i had an op ed in the wall street journal about

senator langford saying he is in yes on tulsi gabbard.ncerns in her uphill bat snl. >> as garrett said this hearing will be extremely critical. not only the public part of the hearing but, remember, this is in front of the intelligence committee. they will adjourn to go into a classified session. we will not have access to that, but that also is going to be extremely important for these senators. i have heard that some of her meetings with some senators have not gone particularly well and there are a lot of concerns. and the senators we are looking out for are the ones who are most concerned with national security, where this is a top priority of theirs. lindsey graham falls in that category. >> yeah, i mean, carlos, it is fascinating. the national security concerns, the concerns over her two meetings with syrian president bashar al assad, the dictator there. this is really becoming a bit of a loyalty test for republicans in the senate. what are you hearing? >> well, remember, kristen, since the advent of the tea party the greatest fear f

tulsi gabbard and kash patel.re are reports that tulsi gabbard in particular could be on some shaky ground. um, kind of over her relative inexperience. and this public adoption of positions on syria and the war in ukraine that some national security officials view as russian propaganda. what do you think of that? especially knowing what how mitch mcconnell voted on, on on pete hegseth and that thom tillis kind of was wobbly there at the end? >> well, first of all, i do think she has some work to do and she has questions to answer. that's true for every nominee for every office. but this also applies to her. number two, i don't think she has a lack of qualifications. i mean, she's a in the u.s. armed forces. >> i mean, she's never served in. intelligence, right? >> uh, well. >> as far as i know, the preference of congress when creating this office. was that someone be a commissioned officer in the u.s. military? that was a preference that they said someone who was trained in these matters would hold this job. i thi

rfk jr, tulsi gabbard, kash. >> patel they're all.esday and thursday. pete hegseth won an extremely narrow confirmation vote on friday to be the next. defense secretary, despite deep concerns about his qualifications. it's unclear what that means for this latest round of trump nominees, including. tulsi gabbard for a director of national intelligence. critics point to her, well, lack of. intelligence experience. past statements supporting russian president vladimir putin. and a meeting gabbard had. >> in 2017 with. now deposed. >> syrian president bashar al assad. on meet the press, senator lindsey graham wouldn't comment. the comment wouldn't commit. >> to voting. >> for her. >> senator. >> can you say. >> right. >> now, are you. >> a yes. >> on tulsi gabbard? >> i'm going to see how the hearing goes. i'm inclined to be yes on everybody, but there's some questions she will be asked that i want to hear the answers to. >> inclined to be yes. >> joining me now, doctor basil smikle. >> junior professor of practice at the school of. >> pr

clinics -- >> more now from tulsi gabbard in her own words. president-elect trump's pick discussed election fraud, government overreach, and democrats attempting to remove president-elect trump from ballots. >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome congresswoman and author her new >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome four-term senator and author of her new book "for love of country," tulsi gabbard. >> thank you. thank you so much. aloha. such a critical time. our democracy under attack. the perpetrators of this attack are those who in the name of saving democracy are destroying it. everyone of us who cherish and freedom to be alarmed by those driven by hunger for power actively undermining all that we stand for. in washington doing all that they can keep us, the american people having the freedom to choose who want to be our next president so terrified we the people they make what they think is the wrong choice. saving us from ourselves destroying our democracy and taking away our freedom and we can see many examples of evildoers who find so

gabbard, we reported last week she's made some changes on fisa.his is a surveillance law, is unpopular on the left and the right. uh, she made some changes there. she used to oppose it. she wanted to get rid of it. now she's changed her position on this. so i think, you know, they're working through gabbard. i do think there's a lot of concerns here. a lot of concerns from really high up in the senate republican ranks about gabbard. i think, you know, if she's going to if she's not going to get through, they would draw her. i don't think they would vote on her. but right now it's she still seems on track to get a hearing and a vote. >> fair enough. i do want to talk a little bit about what we saw play out in the hearing room yesterday with pete hegseth, because democrats really did throw everything that they could at him, and he had at least one, you know, somewhat embarrassing moment around. let's actually let's watch it. tammy duckworth asked him to name the asean countries, and he he sort of couldn't. let's watch. >> can you name the importance

you look at what they're trying to do to tulsi gabbard which is disgusting. to say she's a russian asset. she isn't. she has been through five background checks. she is a reservist. she's in the military. they do not see her as a russian asset. alicia: phil, do democrats have to be careful here? >> they do, because democrats know that the name of the game is not them voting all together, t getting republicans to jump ship, to join them. and thus far what we've seen is that with noem who is less controversial than tulsi gabbard, she got seven democrats. with hegseth it came down to the wire. yes, there were some defections like mitch mcconnell, susan collins and murkowski, but this white house, they're more than happy to send the vice president to to capitol hill the cast that tie-breaking vote. with democrats and tulsi gabbard, i think they're trying to appeal to that old guard of sort of neo-conservative, national security republicans, but that's an increasingly rare breed on capitol hill. and some of these attacks and allegations against tulsi gabbard like

kash patel and tulsi gabbard. we've got reporters and analysts in place covering all these new developments, and we're going to start with nbc's jillian frenkel in florida, where donald trump will be this week. so, jillian, on friday, trump did that mass firing of the inspectors general. has he offered any further explanation for the move? >> yeah, alex, he said over the weekend that this is a very common thing to do, but reminder that trump is required to give congress a 30 days notice before these firings take place and to give real reasons for the firings. as far as we know, that didn't happen on friday night when it was announced, and it still hasn't happened as far as we know. now, a reminder that these inspector generals are watchdogs over these federal agencies looking for things like fraud and abuse. our own vaughn hillyard spoke with one of the inspector generals who has impacted this one from the department of the interior. i want you to hear a bit of their conversation. take a listen. >> this was. >> so

tulsi gabbard, kash patel, rfk jr they are going to. face a real fight, especially. >> i think. >> tulsi gabbard. all eyes are. going to be on mitch mcconnell, susan collins, lisa murkowski. those will probably be no votes against tulsi gabbard. and we'll see whether there are four, five. >> 6 or. >> 7 republicans who may go against her. a lot's going to depend on her hearing and how. it goes. if there are any red flags that come up or if she can sort of put on the. performance that donald trump most likely wants to see, that sort of fiery fighting back against woke liberals or whatever they would say. that's what the trump white house. >> wants to see. >> from her. >> we'll see if that performance will. >> be accepted by the more mainstream republicans. and there are fewer. >> and fewer. of them left in the senate. >> well, trump really likes her, and the white house has warned that there will be consequences for republicans who don't support his nominees. what's that going to look like, dave? >> well, you can finish what luke was doin

in a confirmation hearing from tulsi gabbard about this meeting?well, lawrence, you know, the story in the washington. >> post is her staff. >> trying to figure out why the meeting happened, whether it was 90 minutes or 3 hours. that's not the question. the question is, why in god's name did the meeting happen to begin with? >> what does. >> the dni need to be a dni? and i've known a bunch of them. director of. national intelligence needs to be prudent, careful, truthful, a sense of integrity, a sense of risk. you know, there's. >> a reason. >> why it's a bad idea to meet with assad at all, whether it's 90 minutes or 2 minutes. why? because there can be photographs that he will use to say, look, an american congresswoman supports me because there may be a compromise of that congressperson. there's a thousand reasons. and again, it doesn't matter whether it was two minutes, 30 minutes, 90 minutes or 3 hours. what matters is that it shows a almost grossly negligent naivete about how a brutal murderer assad could use her presence in his service. now,

he's not hurt. >> in. >> maine if she votes against tulsi gabbard. >> you've seen with gabbard. >> and kennedy, i building on what he was saying, these are people who were not republicans ten minutes ago. and so you're asking a lot of the entire republican apparatus to say, these people who worked against us, who weren't part of our party in. >> the case. >> of rfk jr, who was an environmentalist, we never would have. >> confirmed anything. >> before donald trump. >> this is now the litmus test. >> you as a republican must support them. you are seeing resistance from some outside republican conservative forces. the new york post, for example, that don't owe tulsi gabbard or robert f kennedy jr anything. and so, yes, the consequences are less than for pete hegseth. pete hegseth. >> is. >> someone who, if you were a fox news viewer, if you were a conservative activist, you knew him for 15 years. you trusted him. that is not the. case here beyond what their record is and the way democrats have responded in these hearings, more aggressive, i'd say tim kaine, for example, more aggressive th

in a confirmation hearing from tulsi gabbard about this meeting?rence. >> you know, the story in the washington post is her staff trying to figure out why the meeting happened. >> whether it was 90 minutes. >> or. >> 3 hours. >> that's not. >> the question. the question. >> is. >> why in god's name. >> did the meeting. >> happen to begin with? what does the. >> dni need. >> to be. >> a dni? and i've. >> known a bunch of them. >> director of national intelligence. needs to be prudent. >> careful. >> truthful. >> a sense. >> of integrity. >> a sense of risk. you know, there's a reason why it's a bad idea to meet with. >> assad at all. whether it's 90. >> minutes or 2 minutes. why? because there can. >> be photographs. >> that he will use to. >> say, look, an. >> american congresswoman supports. >> me because there. >> may be a compromise. >> of that congressperson. >> there's a thousand reasons. >> and again. >> it doesn't matter whether it was two minutes, 30 minutes, 90 minutes or 3 hours. what matters. is that it shows. >> a almost. >> grossly neg

>> with the nomination of tulsi gabbard for director of national intelligence. kash patel for the fbi. pete hegseth for defense. john ratcliffe for cia. what you are seeing is an element of trump's desire to decapitate the national security. establishment of the united states. >> decapitate it, meaning disable it. >> by putting in empty heads in. >> charge of it. >> you've written so much about the structure and history of the cia, and also the fbi is the person at the top determinative in terms of not only the actions of the agency, but potentially the fates of these agencies and these functions. >> once, when. >> i was in afghanistan. >> a mujahideen. >> said, we have an old saying in our country, the fish stinks from the head. which is a universal truth. >> yeah. >> if you. put in charge of the american national security establishment, crackpots and fools whose only qualification is their deathless loyalty to donald trump, you are not going to get good intelligence. we are in a very dangerous moment in this world. we are approaching a state of total war. in t

watch this gabbard nomination as well. given what's emerged just in public reporting on tulsi gabbard's background, public reporting more recently on how how poorly she has been doing in her meetings with senators. also, we're all listening very attentively to the conspicuous silence from capitol hill in terms of whether or not there is going to be sufficient support for her to even make it through committee. it has been a deafening silence. so if anybody is next to be pulled, it might be, well, there's a bunch, it might be, but tulsi gabbard is one to watch. and for me to be able to say that with a week left in the transition before anybody's confirmation hearings have even started sort of tells you all you need to know about this transition being a botched job. but there is so much more from all the way at the top, right? i mean, trump himself went on meet the press with kristen welker and told her that he won the election because of grocery prices. i won on groceries. then he went to time magazine and said, yeah, i don'

so let's talk about tulsi gabbard and her nomination.n friday, she reversed her past criticisms of section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. it had made some republican senators nervous about her nomination. she had public comments on friday. she said that the program is crucial and must be safeguarded to protect our nation, while ensuring the civil liberties of americans. talk to us about section 702 and what you make of that flip flop. >> well, section 702 is the authority that congress has given to the intelligence community to collect intelligence on non-u.s. citizens who are believed to be serving or living abroad. but sometimes in that collection, you pick up information about u.s. citizens. and so there have been some changes that have been made to the section 702 authority that tries to protect the privacy and civil liberties of american citizens. but i think what this reflects is tulsi gabbard knows that her nomination is really quite questionable in terms of getting the approval from the senate. and so, therefor

but tulsi gabbard is one to watch. and for me to be able to say that with a week left in the transition before anybody's confirmation hearings have even started sort of tells you all you need to know about this transition being a botched job. but there is so much more from all the way at the top, right? i mean, trump himself went on meet the press with kristen welker and told her that he won the election because of grocery prices. i won on groceries. then he went to time magazine and said, yeah, i don't think i'm going to be able to bring down grocery prices. it's really hard to do. did you know, trump said, that he was going to end russia's war in ukraine in one day, and he didn't even say he'd do it. one day after he was sworn in, he said he'd do it. one day. after he was elected back in november. well, gee, that didn't happen. now, his ukraine envoy says maybe we'll need a 100 days, trump says. i think we'll try for six months in this transition, trump, explicitly and out loud and in public, told the republicans in

hearings for tulsi gabbard and rfk junior.hannon: lucas thompson from vegas thank you for joining us now tom cotton's got a brand-new book out by the weight next month entitled seven things you can't say about china. senator will see if we get teddy the seven we're definitely going to talk about china. don't ask about the reporting that lucas had about the firing of these inspectors in general. i've heard from some your gop colleagues who we are concerned sent did not get the proper notification even if ultimately the notice wasn't there and president trump is signaling he is just going to observe which laws he wants are not others. >> time and time again the supreme court is said congress can impose restrictions on the president's power to remove officers. he remove the director of consumer finance protection bureau despite limitations on the president's constitutional power to remove officers was linked litigate at the serene court and the president one. the inspectors general served at the pleasure of the president but he w

>> with the. >> nomination of tulsi. >> gabbard for director of.el for the fbi, pete hegseth for. >> defense. >> john ratcliffe. >> for cia. >> what you are. >> seeing is. >> an element of. >> trump's desire. to decapitate the. national security establishment of the united. >> states. >> decapitate it, meaning disable it. >> by putting in. >> empty heads in charge of it. >> you've written so much about the structure and history of the cia, and also the fbi is the person at the top determinative in terms of not only the actions of the agency, but potentially the fates of these agencies and these functions. >> once. >> when i was in afghanistan, the mujahideen said. >> we have an old saying in our country. >> the fish. stinks from the. >> head. >> which is a universal truth. >> yeah. if you put in. charge of the american. >> national security. >> establishment, crackpots. >> and fools. whose only qualification. >> is their. deathless loyalty to. >> donald trump. >> you are not. >> going to get. >> good intelligence. we are. >> in a very. >> dangerous

and as the week goes on, tulsi gabbard, another one of trump's more controversial choices, she will also appear here. and in the weeks ahead, robert f kennedy jr. kash patel and the like. but this week it starts. starts tomorrow. and it starts with pete hegseth. >> speaking of robert f kennedy jr, did you see the times story yesterday about fluoride? yes. so in other countries, not in america because our our numbers are lower. so the studies don't apply there. but in other countries too much fluoride in the drinking water has an impact on children's iq. so i'm sure we're going to hear more about that over this week as well. >> yeah, we certainly will. as well as his skepticism for other vaccines that most americans feel like are settled matter. >> yeah, but not skepticism that my mother gave me way too much fluoride when i was growing up. i've always had that. this morning, ana cabrera picks up the coverage right now. >> right now on ana cabrera reports new wind warnings in california bringing new danger this morning, with firefighters still racing to contain wildfires around los angeles

know about the gabbard? >> i reported last week republicans and democratic senators who met with her were unclear on her position in the security according. from national security moving in the trump transition will await the it was nominated on the job and she supported section 702. it is the statement in its federal for two reasons. she proposed four years ago to get rid of section 102 (she >> she came out in support of section 70. those on the fence were looking for her to give a full endorsement of the authority. it's not just sort of an abstract thing and relies on what congress does as it relates to reauthorizing section 702. if confirmed, she will have to recertify the program as early as april of this year. if she doesn't recertify it the program goes dark. this is not an abstract concept. something lawmakers care a lot about. they came out publicly. >> over the last four days from gab gabert. i will uphold and ensure it safety. more to that why the change of heart. >> yeah, look, number one she knew

and kash patel and director of national nominee tulsi gabbard and patel and critics called gabbard aional security risk sthib to u.s. adversaries. kennedy expected hearing expected on wednesday hearing for patel and gabbard expected for thursday. charlie rachel and jason. >> thank you madeleine. >> bring in fox news anchor shannon bream how are you shannon? shannon: good morning charlie rachel and jason great to see you guys. carley: we've got -- we've got pretty good hearings on the hill set for this week. >> it is going to be busy and they directly implicate one of the guests he's now chair of the chair intelligence committee they have to shepherd through tulsi gabbard and questions from both sides of the aisle about positions that she's had in the past from, you know, the way sha she views foreign dictators to the use of intel weapons and tools for surveillance. so she's going to have a lot of in-depth questions and a bit of an uphill battle, i think. jason: what about kick things off on wednesday there are other hearings going on like howard lutnick and really the focus will be o

tulsi gabbard still doesn't have a confirmation hearing date set. director of national intelligence. the concerns, of course, revolve around gabbard's 2017 unauthorized trip to syria, in which she met with then dictator bashar al assad, whom she has spoken positively about since that meeting. there's now a new reporting fascinating, important reporting surrounding that trip and a possible possible connection to a missing american that three presidents have tried to bring home. in a piece titled tulsi gabbard, sean penn and the hunt for an american hostage. let's bring in right now the reporter behind the story, senior editor at the economist, steve coll. steve, always great to see you. this really is such an important story. fascinating story about not only tulsi gabbard and sean penn, but also austin tice. tell us what you learned. >> well thanks, joe. i think the most important element is that while they were on this trip that you highlighted to syria in 2017, a member of representative gabbard's traveling party was led by the syrian regime to mee

and tulsi gabbard, you know, she's someone who's willing to give peace a chance.t's not a democrat value anymore. jason: can we just call out daniel driscoll? i am giving him a solid shout-out on thursday, secretary of the army, when you put up your eighth grade picture, i don't know him, but he's going strong with that picture. rachel: he's definitely the doogie house hauser of the army -- [laughter] charlie: he just walked in from splitting system firewood, and he's glad to be there. jason: yeah. be the best eighth grade secretary of the army that we've ever had. with all drew respect -- due respect. charlie: seriously. i kind of admire that. getting the glam shot is not what -- jason: if you were nominated, there's no way you're clipping on tie -- charlie: i'd be wearing shorts. no, i admire that. that's called having your priorities straight right there. jason: i'm all in with daniel. rachel: somebody who has their priorities straight is donald trump. so during the biden administration, biden decided there weren't enough irs agents -- [laughter] and so he devo

. >> you think gabbard is the one. >> i think gabbard is the one and my advice to democrats would be hyper focus on her and make it a national security issue. this is not about politics, this is about the security of our nation and allies. >> thank you so much. that is all for today. thank you for watching. we will be back next week because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." and go birds! >> estimates are. >> that there. >> are 11 million undocumented. >> immigrants in this. >> country right now. >> how can you possibly afford to deport all of those people? >> i'll leave up to congress. i think congress has a mandate. this is the number one issue that people voted on. i think congress has a mandate. to give us the money we need. how much? what price do you put on national security? my success can be based on what congress gives us more money, the better we're going to do. that was. >> tom homan, trump's. border czar. making it clear. >> he expects. >> congress to pay, or at least help pay. >> for the deportation. >> of millions of migrants. >> it comes. after hundreds. >> of ice

, but i feel tulsi gabbard will ultimately get through. two things important to know about tulsi. she's a career military servant, who has had a classify kaicatio level at the highest level. she has an impeccable record of service and is a person that will bring back trust to the intelligence services. the bureaucrats at our intelligence services have gotten out of control. they've been part of the weaponization of our political system, the weaponization of our justice system. we need to have good intelligence services to keep us safe, but part of that is restoring trust in those services, and she's the right person to do it. she recognizes the bureaucrats have gotten out of control, and we need somebody there who will rein them in and return those services to identifying information that will keep us safe. >> you campaigned on lowering prices for consumers. we've seen these executive orders. which ones lowers prices? >> we have done a lot, and there have been a number of executive orders that have caused already jobs to start coming back

we saw vance out there today really backing gabbard. and like you said, the white house is trying to send a message here. you know, trump even after the vote to advance hegseth, you know, he made a comment that he was very surprised. collins and murkowski, you know, voted against advancing this nomination. and so i think we're going to expect a whole lot of, you know, pressure from the white house this week for the senate to continue approving his nominees. >> last word to you, jillian. what's the expectation you're hearing? do they all get through or not? >> that remains to be seen, alex. but there is certainly immense pressure to get them all through. pete hegseth was only turned down by three senate republicans. but we know that with rfk jr. there are questions about his past comments on vaccines. tulsi gabbard has faced criticism. >> for. >> her comments towards russia and syria, and kash patel has questions about his leadership and some past comments he made about qanon. so we'll watch those hearings closely. alex. >> okay, maya. j

gabbard thursday. these are considered some of trump's weaker candidates. kennedy for health gabbard to run the national intelligence. both will face a severe grilling. but they got this far. and when they get this far, that out of committee, you're doing pretty well. that's interesting. yeah. thanks, scott a lot to continue to watch there. well, in other news, nearly four years since the murder of a beloved south bay drag queen. the man convicted of killing her has been sentenced to life in prison. yesterday, 26 year old elijah cruz segura was sentenced for the deadly stabbing of his partner, natalia smart. the santa clara county da's office says this may be the first time they've prosecuted a case of transgender domestic violence. prosecutors say segura killed smart in milpitas back in 2021, after the couple had been dating for several months. happening today, alameda county leaders will select a new district attorney. it follows the recall of pamela price last november. nbc bay area's bob redell is live outside the east county hall of justice in dublin,

he has appointed — though we don't know if she's going to be confirmed — tulsi gabbard to be director past of being far too close to vladimir putin and not being interested in the suffering of the syrian people, so how can you be confident that donald trump is going to pursue a syria policy that will please the people of syria and not vladimir putin? so, tulsi gabbard, initially, my big opposition to her was i was worried what her effect would be on syria, helping save or keep assad in power or take off sanctions from him or support his normalisation, but we saw very quickly assad is gone. the reason i advocate against tulsi gabbard's appointment is for the sake of the united states, for the country that gave me a home after leaving syria when i was young, and for the sake of our allies. this is a person that does not believe in the same worldview as democracies and actually supports the worldview of tyrants and authoritarians. and i'm confident... ..or not confident, but let's just say very optimistic that the senate will not confirm her, that she will not become the director of nati

most notably, i would say watch the tulsi gabbard space. there's a lot of rumblings of discomfort about her in republican ranks. whether that will amount to four republican senators jumping ship. i don't think we know that yet, but but clearly she has a confirmation fight on her hands as well. and the rfk jr.. one wolf, you know, he may end up getting a sort of cross section, and it may not be a cleanly across party lines. when his confirmation goes up for a vote, he still, of course, we're going to wait to see his hearings take place. so there's more work to do for the trump teams that are trying to get these nominees across the finish line on on some of these more controversial picks. >> and the republicans do have a 53, 47 majority in the u.s. senate. should trump be worried by this early defiance, at least from a couple members of his own party? >> i think there's reason for concern. i think. there is. >> there are a. >> lot of issues with gabbard that senators. who are. >> rightly looking out for the best interests of our. national sec

>> you know, in some ways, i actually see tulsi gabbard as the most vulnerable.ublicans that she met with expressed real concern about her comments with respect to edward snowden. and this is one of those areas where because of her comments, because of her relationships, you can draw a line between or at least her opponents will draw a line between, you know, her, her positions and challenges and dangers to the united states. that that seems to be the most controversial to me. >> and susan. >> i would also. agree with basil. >> in saying. >> that it's. >> tulsi gabbard only because it comes down to national security. but i also think jfk, jfk. >> jr is certainly. >> in the running. >> to be. knocked out of his of. this nomination. i'm sorry. >> rfk jr apologies. >> thank you. julie and. >> susan del percio and basil smikle. thank you so very much. appreciate it. >> up next, we'll talk. >> to the aunt of naama. >> levy, one. >> of the four. >> women hostages released by hamas over the weekend. and back home, we'll go live to el paso, texas for an on the. ground up

even so, only one gop senator has publicly expressed concerns about gabbard.hts on her qualifications, and do you think republican senators will defy pressure from trump and vote against her? >> well, they should defy pressure from trump, because i'm telling you right now that tulsi gabbard is completely unfit to be in any position in united states government at that level. and i think the word reservations actually equals holy crap. i mean, that's that's actually what people are thinking about when you look at her past meeting with assad, when she didn't even really know what fisa did. i mean, this is somebody who's wholly unqualified. and you look at her past, you know, i know it pretty well. i think it's somebody who shouldn't even be there. i think actually, her name should be withdrawn as far as republican senators, they're going to do what trump tells them to do. i think it's just a lack of courage and conviction on what's right for the american people, because in her, in any position, looking at intelligence data should frighten any real professional, a

>> the name that keeps getting mentioned is tulsi gabbard.ch a sensitive position, so critical. >> to national security, which is where we've. >> seen republicans. >> raise objections in in recent weeks. >> and i remind people that republicans, even before president trump took office, did torpedo one of his nominees, matt gaetz, for attorney general. so there are certainly. >> people in. >> the senate republican conference who are willing to buck the president. the calculation is what ryan explained. obviously, trump is making a primary threat to anyone who defies him. but senators have to calculate that together with what they think is best for the country. and for some of them, their general elections next year, which the midterm for the party in power always tends to be challenging. and we know that swing voters in a lot. >> of these. >> swing states like to support candidates. >> who are. >> willing to stand up to their own party from time to time. so a lot for these members to. process here. but this week, i think we could see a surprise

job actually is, and when republican senator mike rounds asked gabbard how she would handle specificments of the job, she said she would have to just wait and see when she gets there. yeah! just wing it! this is exciting! she could be our first improv intelligence director. "thank you for coming out tonight, everybody. can we get a suggestion of a country to destabilize and an occupation? seriously, what is my job?" [applause] is a reminder to all of you, the top of tonight's monologue, biden's president the next few days and he spending his last weekend promoting new front of pack food nutrition labels that would rank the contents of sugar, fat, and salt. ooh, ooh, that's a tough one! i would marry sugar, i would screw fat, and i would kill salt. or salt would kill me. one of those two. to simplify the info on the labels, the amounts of different nutrients will be marked low, medium, or high. still too confusing. keep it simple. they should go with color coded: green is healthy, yellow is caution, and red, as always, is cherry or flamin' hot. but if they really want to stop people f

tulsi gabbard with her friendship with syria, that monster. so, yeah.s going to be something. >> i shudder to think how much worse it could get. tom, as we have seen, the door seems to be flying off the hinges here and maga seems to be splitting the seams. how likely is it that steve bannon, elon musk, vivek ramaswamy are all going to stay under the same tent as their views begin to diverge into terms of how to go about executing this new agenda that donald trump, the heritage foundation, whomever is trying to advance around the rights mandate? >> they are not under the same tent now and they are making it clear that they are not. they are already publicly fighting with each other. the reason this happens is because trump ran for reasons that had -- and this was just an unfortunate truth during the entire campaign. trump ran for reasons that had nothing to do with policy. when you see congressmen saying we must enact trump's bold agenda, you know the first question anybody should ask, what is that exactly? because he ran for vindication. he ran to prove

a yes on tulsi gabbard? >> i am going to see how. >> the hearing goes. >> i'm inclined. >> to be yes on. >> everybody, but there are some questions she will be asked that i want. >> to hear the. >> answers to. >> so you're a. >> we'll see. >> not a. >> yes, we'll see. >> and the pressure campaign from the white house is enormous. so these senators like graham, if they're inclined to vote yes, the assumption is that they ultimately probably will. >> anna and then ryan, when. >> it comes to this late night purge of 18 inspectors general that happened over the weekend, what departments were they in charge of and what happens now. >> that departments that were affected by this are broad and affect almost every part of government? you're talking about the department of education. you're talking about homeland security. you're talking about all these different, different departments that have these independent watchdogs and inspectors, generals who who's responsibility it is to oversee the way that business is con

i mean, both he and gabbard are democrats. i guess gabbard switched parties, but they're, you know, career democrats, and so they may get some democrat votes, which, of course, could change the math on the senate floor. but i still think gabbard has some work to do to get confirmed. and obviously she hasn't come up for any votes yet, but will in the near future. rfk is an interesting guy. i mean, he's a kennedy and he's a democrat and he's a pro-choice democrat at that. so my assumption is he may have a fighting chance at getting democrat votes, which would mitigate some of these republican no votes. >> we will see from the hill, though, as to what this might mean at the pentagon. i mean, vice president jd vance had to cast a tie breaking vote for hegseth. this was a razor thin. margin. could that possibly undermine his authority at the pentagon, where his qualifications were already challenged during his confirmation hearings? >> absolutely. and i definitely think that it will, because, i mean, we've already seen letters from

also, tulsi gabbard has been a name. those are really the only other two that senate republicans have even quietly said. i have a lot of questions about them, but but is there a pressure campaign given they saw it work successful here? paul? what does that look like? >> i think they're very different people. gabbard comes out of my party. she used to be a democrat, and i don't literally don't know. and i don't think she has that kind of goodwill that mr. hegseth developed, uh, with this very stressful job of sitting on a sofa on weekends and yapping on fox news. i mean, the guy ran his mouth. now he's going to run a pentagon. >> he is a veteran. >> and god bless him, he ran a company of 200 men in women in the national guard, and i admire that. he ran two veterans services organizations and by all reports, not well. and now listen to what rahm said. it's very important for the democrats. rahm didn't go at the allegations of sexual abuse, right? he didn't he didn't mention it. we have to cover it. i understand that, but i