you have rand paul, a libertarian minded republican who wants to vote on this resolution and express his view that this is not the constitutional way that we should have power going to the president. this will be a very interesting vote. to some degree, it is a free vote because the house has already voted and they do not have an overwrite majority. they cannot do the two thirds in the house. this will pass the senate, go to the president's desk and not be overwritten in the house. how much political strength does the president have with the senate republican? he is at 90% approval with republicans back home. you are taking a risk if you vote against the president. you have a lot of senate republicans who consider this emergency declaration to be either constitutionally questionable or unconstitutional. it is going to be a gut check. host: are we on track for a thursday vote? >> with the senate -- guest: with the senate it could happen at any time. it could be a get out of town vote. next week is the recess for st. patrick's day. i think it is likely to be at the end of the week. the

this is about the president -- lou: as rand paul claimed it was? >> exactly.is about the president doing what congress failed to do, and by him voting against the president's declaration, he's actually saying to the experts and to the president that this isn't a crisis. he's joining the democrats by voting no -- lou: at what point do the people of kentucky say to the hell with this kind of representation? they have the senate majority leader who he might as well be basking by the pool in the koch brothers backyard for crying out loud you know and doing all his bankings a closelys a he can with goldman -- as closely as he with goldman sachs it is pitiful. >> it is. 70,000 illegal aliens were apprehended by the united states border patrol last month. 70,000. if it keeps going, we will be in excess of 700,000. those are just what we apprehend. throw in a couple hundred thousand that we don't. we will be looking at over a million individuals that we apprehended this year. lou: i can remember what the ratio used to be including when you were running the joint, it w

senator rand paul saying he will vote to block the president's national declaration. that makes four republicans in the senate to keep the president from building the wall at the southern border. this means the resolution of disapproval will most likely make it to the president's desk, where he has warned he will use his first presidential veto. let's check in with cnn's boris sanchez, and a number of republicans were needed to block this. it looks like they have them. >> reporter: we sort of expected this to happen because republican lawmakers privately and publicly warned president trump that his national declaration could potentially splinter the party, and now you have rand paul, including susan collins of maine, lisa murkowski of alaska and tom tillis of north carolina essentially voting to block this declaration. i want to read to you a little bit of what rand paul told supporters last night in kentucky when he announced he would cast his vote against the declaration. he said, quote, i can't vote to give the president the power to spend money that hasn't been ap

rand paul.o block the president's national emergency making it the -- he's number four of the republicans. so that will then go to the president's desk which he has vowed to veto. here's rand paul's rationale for why he is going to block it. i would literally lose my political soul if i decided to treat president trump differently than president obama. every single republican i know decried president obama's use of executive power to legislate. we were right then, but the only way to be an honest office holder is to stand up for the same principle nose matter who is in power. isn't it nice to see his long-term memory is intacts. he remembers when they went after president obama for executive power. >> yeah, well, this was a very big issue for republicans all through obama's presidency that, you know, that he was this sort of tyrant ruling through executive order. so kudos to rand paul for being consistent. he's one of the few people in washington, frankly, on either side that does that. i don't

rand paul's marker sounds very firm. i don't know how you back away from that.e susan collins, relatively moderate republican senators. and thom tillis, the north north carolina republican generally votes with president trump. he's up for reelection. he was one of the first out of the gates with an op ed saying he cannot do this in good conscience after he criticized president obama for using extraordinary executive powers. >> when you talk about the politics, this is the president's signature issue. he's shown no signs of backing down. and yet, republicans have said just rescind your order. do you have any expectation that we would see that happen? when you think about reelection chances, i thisnk the president sees his reelection chances tied to the border wall. >> the senate feels differently. a lot of republicans feel differently about this. this is not their signature issue. many of them disagreed with him from the jump, but they've gotten behind him because he's the president from their part. we should watch, rand paul is it's not about change his vote, it

coming out ads he did. >> rand paul is the fourth vote that the democrats would need to get thepporting of the resolution of the president's national emergency in the senate. i expect that number to go higher. most like i upper single digits, maybe even ten republican senators, that's how deep this opposition to the president is. i mean, you're talking about a fiery speech from senator lam alexander, senator cruz and senator mike lee have shared similar concerns of senator paul who said in a fox news op-ed are i would literal will he lose my soul if i opposed president obama for using his executive powers and not this one. at the end of the day it appears there won't be a veto proof majority in congress, but there could be some political issues for republicans who do go along and support this disapproval resolution. i've had very smart republicans tell me that for the base, for the republican base this vote to disapprove of this national emergency is going to be did you support the president on this wall or not. that's why you've heard a lot of republican senators who are uneasy

here's more of what rand paul told supporters. he said, quote, i can't vote to give the president the power to spend money that has not been appropriated by congress. we may want more money for border security, but congress did not authorize it. if we take away those checks and balances, it is a dangerous thing. so rand paul essentially signing the potential precedent that it could set for a future democratic administration to then declare a national emergency on an issue that republicans oppose. president trump has made clear that if this resolution does reach his desk, he would veto it. listen to this. >> will i veto it? 100%. 100%. and i don't think it survives a veto. we have too many smart people that want border security, so i can't imagine it could survive a veto, but i will veto it, yes. >> reporter: so this move is largely symbolic because we don't believe there are a number of votes sufficiently to overcome the the vote. they have about two weeks to hold a vote on this, amara. >> clearly what would be an extraordinary re

senator rand paul, republican senator rand paul, we should say, has now announced publicly that he will go against the president and vote to overturn donald trump's emergency declaration at the border. the senator telling the bowling green daily news, "i can't vote to give the president the power to spend money that hasn't been appropriated by congress. we may want more money for border security, but congress didn't authorize it. if we take away those checks and balances, it's a dangerous thing." that makes senator paul the fourth republican to publicly announce a planned vote against the emergency declaration, which would be enough to overturn it along with democratic votes, though not yet enough for a vetoproof majority. it is widely expected that the president will veto that resolution. let's bring in my panel, kimberly atkins, senior washington correspondent for npr and an msnbc contributor. kevin serilli, bloomberg news chief washington correspondent. and nick achorman here in studio, former assistant special watergate prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst. kimberly, let me begin with

senator rand paul says the supreme court could overrule the president and side with them. is circumventing congressional spending powers. is the president really circumvejt their spending powers? or is he speaking to spend money already appropriated for the same mission congress spelled out. the declaration of the president of a national emergency, the president can spend the money already appropriated for military construction. he can build fenlss and barriers to combat drug smuggling. >> i listened to what rand had to say. i think he's taking a philosophical approach to it. i think it's clear when the president ran in 2016. border security was at the top of the heat when it came to what he wanted to do. i think rand and a few on the -- i -- and a few others, and myself, i had a little heartburn with an emergency declaration. but i think it is an knowledge and a crisis at the border. nothing we vote on here is pure and simple. i think rand is right. we have probably give and lot of power to the executive branch over time. that means we need to be more awere tough. too pre

we're following the fast-moving developments with rand paul. fox team coverage with catherine herridge on the mueller fallout and democrats speaking out. we begin with katherine. >> thanks, neil. bill barr told republican senator lindsey graham it will be weeks, not months to get a version of the mueller report to the hill. a senior justice department official said barr did not telegram that he intends to share the report with the white house in advance of the public release. on capitol hill earlier today, the president take aim at democrats. >> i don't think they're talking about impeachment. we have the greatest economy we've ever had. our country is in incredible shape. they created a fraud with this ridiculous witch hunt where it was proven strongly no collusion, no obstruction, no nothing. >> separately these text messages between former acting fbi direct or the andrew mccabe and lisa page obtained by fox news raise new questions about a high level meeting among senior intelligence officials after the 2016 election. the meeting includes ja

and finally rand paul and tom udall, also bipartisan, have a bill to phase out the war in afghanistan and repeal the 2001 authorization. congress has finally woken up to this problem that i've been shouting about for years, which is presidents like to just do whatever they want without congress. congress has to take more making powers back as the framers as the constitution contemplated. >> it's in the constitution, there's no question they have forfeited their spons responsibility when it comes to this again and again. notably you are not calling for an end to the 2001 measure. i want foam listen people to li

senator rand paul says he has to stand up for that again.ikely if it doesn't make its way to the white house, the president will veto it. i doubt he's going to change his mind on the emergency declaration but as a political message, there's a lot of pressure on him which is never a good look. the presidentseen launch offensives before what he wants to get things done. do you see anything coming up for senators who might be on the fence? there's probably enough for it to get to the white house. people probably meet behind closed doors with some senators to explain, but nothing for my legislative point will be changed. not sure how much work they have to do behind the agency he does have that veto power. have we seen senator mcconnell respond to this? guest: he might not, he might want to talk about other topics. this is not something -- senator mcconnell is not thrilled about having to bring up something that opposes the president under the procedural rules of congress, it does have to come up in the senate. i do think that when it comes to t

well it's rand paul and tamu dollar and they are putting forward a bill that if it were to pass would immediately declare victory in the afghan war it would then begin the process of withdrawing all u.s. military personnel from afghanistan within a year and it would pay out thousands of dollars in a dividend to every combat service person who served in afghanistan in addition it would begin the process of reconciliation among afghans now rand paul when he put forward the legislation he said quote it's time to declare the victory we achieved long ago bring them home and put america's needs first kind of echoing donald trump's america first slogan now the war in afghanistan is actually the longest in all of us history it's been over eighteen years that the united states has been in afghanistan and each of those years has cost the american taxpayers roughly fifty billion dollars now at this point senators are coming forward putting forward this legislation and we've heard from mike pompei o that negotiations are taking place however my pompei of the u.s. secretary of state has referred t

xfinity, the future of awesome. >>> republican senator rand paul says he will vote to block president trump's national emergency declaration. paul says he cannot give the president extra constitutional powers. and that means there are enough votes in the senate to send the disapproval to the president's desk. president trump has vowed to veto that. join sing us now is matt, the chair mapp of the cpac and the former director for george w. bush. great see you. >> good to see you, alisyn. >> let me read to you what senator rand paul wrote about his reasoning. he said i would literally lose my political soul if i decided to treat president trump differently than president obama. every single republican i know decried president obama's use of executive power to legislate. we were right then. but the only way to be an honest office holder is to stand up for the same principles no matter who is in power. what do you think of his rational? >> i'm a great admirer of rand paul. i think there's the legal question as to whether or not dru donald trump has the legal right to declare this emergency

steve: mentioned rand paul tweet. before congress asap. we'll ask senator paul about that in 20 minutes on fox news. ainsley: that will be breaking news. we'll want to hear more about this. brian: james comey said last night he believes there was obstruction. the report in the summary says pretty much up to you, attorney general barr. he doesn't see obstruction. steve: president tweeted in the last 20 minutes, adam schiff should be forced from office because he has been lying for the last year or two. we'll ask the senator about that. we have busy final hour. brian: he keeps doubling down. he says he knows more than bob mueller. ten minutes after the hour, nobody knows more than jillian. jillian: i know everything. fox news alert, a illegal immigrant is charged with murdering a missing mother. the mexican man was picked up during a traffic stop in austin, texas. the woman's body was found in shallow grave. he and accused killer knew etch either but relationship is unclear. she had been missing since february 23rd. >>>

rand paul is the fourth which means the house and the senate will be able to pass the resolutions. as to why rand paul said he was going to do this, this was an op-ed in fox news where he said i would lose my political soul if i decided to treat president trump different from president obama. every republican i know decried president obama's use to use executive power to legislate. it's worth noting the expectation is that enough republicans would join democrats to pass this. the question has always been, how many. i am told there are about a half dozen others who are considering this. and then the magic number of 20. 20 republicans crossing over would make it veto proof. everybody i'm talking to has made it clear they believe they will fall short of that. this almost guarantees the president will take the pen out and veto. it is likely he will not face a an override because the house and the senate won't have the votes. >> thanks very much. up next, we will speak to a democrat pushing for more information on the president's tax returns plus protesters filling the streets in venezu

congress being discussed put forward by the two two senators rand paul and tom gall so at this point people are looking at this situation and saying it looks somewhat optimistic that this long war the longest war in u.s. history might actually come to an end at some point in the near future. but as well the faces yet u.s. sanctions as washington tries to cripple caracas financially in its bid to oust president nicolas maduro by simply recognizing opposition leader as far as where the interim president the u.s. seems to think it's already succeeded in effecting regime change in the state department even going so far as to be right journalists to say otherwise we have noticed in news coverage that some outlets are incorrectly referring to one going to go as the opposition leader. or the self proclaimed president. neither is corrects relying on venezuela's constitution one guy joe became interim president of venezuela on january twenty third and millions of americans and more than fifty countries recognize why go as interim president of venezuela and get this straight you're complaining

i don't think it includes rand paul and others. he's standing on a principal ideology that is conflated here. whether you think they're presidential powers that shouldn't be exercised because they've been exercised dozens of times over four decades. he seems to be conflating the idea that the use of a national emergency may be that there's a problem down there is the wrong tactic and yet he's going to hamstring the ability to take real action, isn't he? >> let me be clear. i'm not saying all congress people hate this president. democratic leadership does. i respect rand paul. here's where i think the issue is. is there a national security or not? some of the democrats republican congressmen i hearsaying, we don't want to do this because the democratic president can do the same to us. they've already done it. president trump did it -- president obama did it with daca. he said you can't do it. it's not constitutional. he did it anyway. he went around congress, gave amnesty to 800,000 people. why weren't people mad them? we have to su

rand paul really laying it out there yesterday. what are you hearing about that?what rand paul put into print was essentially what a lot of republican senators have been telling me behind the scenes that their position when it came to president obama and what they viewed as executive branch overreach puts them at a rough position. you really needed to focus on two numbers when it came to this in the united states senate. four republicans ended up joining the democratic senators. and then 20. it would take 20 republican senators to join with democrats to make the resolution veto proof. we know the president is going to veto this. what i'm being told is republicans feel like they are far short of the 20 that would be needed to make it veto proof. what you are seeing with rand paul, susan collins who come out and said they will support this effort to block it is just how unsettled republicans are. there was a closed door meeting where vice president mike pence was up here. people who were in that meeting came out and basically told me that the republican conference w

look, it's always tough, rand paul, to be the 51st vote.verybody else to just pile on. and there's, you know, two different branches of republicans that have got concerns here. one are groups, appropriators mostly, when are very concerned about the president using money from military construction funds that's going to come out of their states and go somewhere else. but you also have the strict constitutionalists in there, the folks like rand paul or ted cruz, mike lee who are simply very concerned that congress has the power of the purse, and they're not necessarily convinced that this national emergency declaration is straight up in terms of the separation of powers. charles: dan, it feels that, ultimately, the constitutional part of this will be answered by the supreme court, and then there's the part about the president you surgeoning the power of the purse -- usurping the power of the purse from congress that resonates with a lot of folks. >> that's right, charles. meanwhile, there is this event going on down on the border, and secretar

. >> and in another review, mcconnell's fellow kentucky senator and trump apologist rand paul is the fourth republican to say he'll vote with the democrats saying republican disapproval is even more widespread. >> i will vote for the motion to disapprove of this. and i will continue to speak out. i do believe that there is at least ten republican no votes. we'll see. possibly more. >> joining me now from the white house and nbc ha in. hans nichols. so what is happening behind the scenes at the white house about this? >> chris, the white house is preparing for a quiet defeat. and that is what they want. that's the direction they want this to go. it's obviously they are going to lose this. and so according to "the washington post," there is some mid level communications, conversations on how to paper over their differences. now we normally know that meetings like this take place. >> the instructions reportedly are if you can't say something nice about the emergency declaration, shut up? >> keep your powder dry. i think that is the quote from "the washington post." right? it's not like

. >> on another issue we've seen rand paul writing an editorial.o oppose the president's emergency declaration. that makes four republicans. enough to get a majority in the senate to oppose this but certainly not to override a presidential veto which has been promised. speaking to republicans on the hill, do you see any momentum for it to get to that number of 67 or is that just not going to happen? >> at this point probably not. but rand paul sealing the deal and becoming the fourth republican, gives other republicans who have been critical of the president's national emergency declaration to vote with democrats here. and as you said, this does seal the deal and confirms that the senate is ready in the next few weeks to reject the president's national security declaration. a big rebuke to president trump and what he wants to do to get his border wall. rand paul over the weekend in the op-ed writing, i could literally lose my political soul if i decided to treat president trump different than president obama. every single republican i know decried

this weekend, rand paul coming out against the president's move. mcconnell says he believes the resolution blocking the executive order will pass. today, this from republican senate homeland security committee member rob portman. >> i support his plan. i want to be sure we have the funding for it. on the other hand, the way the president has chosen to fund part of it through a national emergency -- i think that's the wrong way to go. one, i think we'll set a bad precedent. in other words, future presidents would be able to use a national emergency going against the will of congress for other issues. save a green new deal. second, it's going to get tied up in the courts. which i think everybody acknowledges. >> marie: meantime, politico is reporting that president trump is doing little to halt this rebuke which will likely lead to the first veto he will cast as president. the report says, "despite previous warnings, the g.o.p. lawmakers could put themselves in great jeopardy by defying him. wavering senators say trump is not directly lobbing them to

rand paul becomes the fourth republican senator to vow they would vote in this way. he joined susan collins, lisa murkowski and thom tillis. ultimately, rand paul said he didn't want to give the president unconstitutional powers, effectively saying he didn't want to empower a future potential democratic administration to cite president trump's move as precedent and declaring a national emergency on an issue that republicans may not necessarily favor. clearly this is a symbolic gesture, because president trump has vowed he would veto any such measure, and neither party has a veto-proof majority in congress to try to override the president. still, it is notable, because republicans both privately and publicly have asked the president not to take this step. but he ultimately decided to do it anyway. this being one of the main promises of his 2016 campaign in building that wall, ana. >> boris sanchez at the white house. thank you. >>> joining us now, cnn senior political analyst and former adviser to four presidents, david ger ggen and garrett graf author of "the threat

senator rand paul, thank you very much, sir.ee you tonight. >> thank you. >> martha: coming up next, how the president could win a second term if he keeps saying this: >> i have said it before, and i'll say it again, america will never be a social list country. socialist country. [cheers and applause] go to sleep. wake up. grab a bite. maybe some racquetball. and boom - your money's on the way so you can get back on the road fast. well, not that fast. the editor had to make it fit in 30 seconds. it's pretty tricky actually trying to ... and ... tagline. when insurance is simple, it's surprisingly painless. when insurance is simple, stimulant laxatives forcefully stimulate i switched to miralax for my constipation. the nerves in your colon. miralax works with the water in your body to unblock your system naturally. and it doesn't cause bloating, cramping, gas, or sudden urgency. miralax. look for the pink cap. i had a few good tricks to help hide my bladder leak pad. like the old "tunic tug". but always discreet is less bulky. an

did rand paul make the right decision? were other senatorial republican decisions rooted in the same set of principles? >> i'm not in the position of trying to read lisa mr. -- murde --murkowski's find. the president has been given some emergency powers given them by congress, but to spend money that congress has said, they don't' to spend money, is not one of those power. so, while you are right that the republicans probably will not enough of them will join to override the president's veto, they ought to, republicans of supposed to be the ones that care about the constitution. kennedy: and limit the government, and keeping checks and balances where they are necessary. >> it is even a separate issue from the wall. i think we have a problem at the border. but emergency powers are for something like where congress can't gets it acts together in time if there is something where the president needs to act now because a hurricane just hit, they can't enough people there until monday. they are not for i think this a problem, an

senator rand paul says he has to stand up for that again but if it does make its way to the white house the president will veto it. i doubt at this point if he will change his mind on the emergency declaration. as a political message there is pressure on him which is never a good look. >> host: we've seen the president launch it before we want to get things done so you think i think getting it done might be opposed to what he wants? >> guest: at this point, they do have enough to get to the house and he will veto or meet behind closed doors to explain his position but nothing from allegedly the point will be changed so not sure he how much work they have to do anything to make sure things go with the veto power. >> guest: i am sure there will be a response when he comes although you might want to talk about other topics to be honest. it's not something that senator mcconnell is not thrilled about having to bring up something that opposes the president but under the procedural rules of congress because the weight is passive house and has to come up in the senate. when it comes to behind-

a republican he plays golf with, senator rand paul, who says the president's emergency declaration is a bridge too far. >> most of us think it would be an emergency if there's a television show or state of the union, everything closed up, everybody dies, that would be an emergency. people incapacitated by anthrax, that's an emergency, but wanting to fund something congress wouldn't give you the money for doesn't. >> reporter: the junior senator from kentucky join susan collins of maine, lisa murkowski tom, tom tillis of north carolina in opposing the president. the 47 senators who caucused with the democrats against the national emergency and it passes the senate. >> what is clear in the senate, there will be enough votes to pass the resolution of disapproval. which will be vetoed by the president. >> reporter: this is the math mitch mcconnell is counting on, even with four republican senator seen as possible additional defectors it is nowhere near close enough to the 67 votes in the senate needed to override a veto. the original resolution the house past with 245 votes, will short th

i congressionally i think rand paul is right. i disagree.s the authority to do it. i'm glad they pushed back. i think it is stretching executive authority. i think it's a stretch and therefore i am sort of glad they are pushing back and standing up for themselves in congress. it's a good thing. >> it's for republicans in the senate that are pushing back and all of the democrats before the president declared a national emergency many republican senators expressed reservations includi including alexander. we don't have huge numbers of republicans matching those concerns. i talked to congressman, republican of michigan. he is one of 13 republicans that voted against the national declaration. take a listen. >> do you think that republicans who are supporting are abdoe kating their responsibilities to the constitution? >> i think so, yes. >> why aren't more republicans putting their money where their mouth is? >> it could be they feel nervous about primary challenges, perhaps they feel republicans, this is one of the issues where the base has mov

lisa murkowski of alaska, tom tillis of north carolina, and rand paul of kentucky are already on board. we expect if push comes to shove and there has to be an up or down vote on that resolution as it is, there are several other republican senators who have been waiting to see what the department of defense wants to reprogram where military housing or construction projects or whatever, what they take the money away from to build the border wall. if the vote occurs before any of that information is public, it probably becomes a more lopsided vote. >> you wrote about the majority leader, mitch mcconnell, his view on the emergency declaration itself. what has been his view of the resolution to end it, and how is he influencing other republicans? niels: senator mcconnell seems to be sort of keeping his powder dry in terms of the influence on other senators. mcconnell had said he would support the president's emergency declaration, but he has not exactly been very strident in his support for it. he has generally demurred when asked about the legality of the emergency declaration. so i think

senator rand paul said he would vote to disapprove of the president's declaration.in an op-ed posted on fox news website late yesterday. paul says he can't vote to give trump the power to spend money that has not been approved by congress. reportedly telling the hometown crowd if we take way those checks and balances, it's a dangerous thing. senator paul is now the fourth republican in the chamber who has pledged to vote in favor of the disapproval resolution when it comes up for a vote this month. that means along with the democratic votes it will pass setting a stage for trump's first veto of his presidency. the president dismissed the efforts within congress to block his declaration. >> a lot of people talk about precedent. precedent. that if we do this, the democrats will use national emergency powers for something that we don't want. they are going to do that anyway, folks. i watch good people, friend of mine, we're very concerned with setting precedent. that's precedent, not president. precedent. we're very concerned about setting precedent. i'm very concerned

if they have a principled position against this like rand paul, they can tell the constituents aboutt in a compelling way. >> we'll see if it extends to other difficult questions for the republicans in coming weeks. thank you so much. >>> just ahead, the green new deem with 2020 on the horizon, it's a focal point for members on both sides of the aisle. former senator heitkamp tells us if it's a viable plan for her party to run on. ♪ did you know you can save money by using dish soap to clean grease on more than dishes? using multiple cleaners on grease can be expensive, and sometimes ineffective. for better value, tackle grease with dawn ultra. dawn is for more than just dishes. it provides 3x more grease cleaning power per drop, which cuts through tough kitchen messes, pre-treats laundry stains, and even tackles grease build-up on car rims. tackle tough greasy messes around your home, and save money with dawn ultra. brand power. helping you better. they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any

do you believe that to be the case with senator rand paul? this is what he writes.very single republican i know decried president obama power to legislation with executive power. i need to stand up for the same principles no matter who is in power. go ahead. >> all right. look, i completely understand what senator paul is saying and none of us want the president to do executive order. executive power right away. let's look at this. president trump tried to work with democrats. he proposed things, all right? and he couldn't get anything done. so i'm going to sit there and focus on results. i understand why other people have taken a different position but i want to get something done. i came up here to get something done and do everything i can to make it happen. >> sandra: as far as public support is concerned. the latest polling. "wall street journal," nbc poll on the national emergency declaration. 39% approve. a majority disapprove of this act. 60% said so. how do you respond to that, senator? >> if you ask the question do americans want border security, i think o

rand paul says he will vote against the national emergency.it. norwegian cruise line. feel free. guys go through a lot to deal with shave irritation. so, we built the new gillette skinguard with a specialized guard designed to reduce it. because we believe all men deserve a razor just for them. the best a man can get. gillette. to be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best to make you everybody else... ♪ ♪ means to fight the hardest battle, which any human being can fight and never stop. does this sound dismal? it isn't. ♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth. ♪ ♪ >> charles: california just reresponding to president trump's plan to take back $3.5 billion for the high speed rail project calling it legally indefensible and disastrous. california telling the trump administration that 2,600 workers could lose their jobs if the administration pulls funding. rand paul breaking the president trump saying he will vote to block the national emergency declaration for the border wall. how is this playing out on capitol hill? mike eman

senator rand paul says he has to stand up for that again.y if it doesn't make its way to the white house, the president will veto it. i doubt he's going to change his mind on the emergency declaration but as a political message, there's a lot of pressure on him which is never a good look. the presidentseen launch offensives before what he wants to get things done. do you see anything coming up for senators who might be on the fence? there's probably enough for it to get to the white house. people probably meet behind closed doors with some senators to explain, but nothing for my legislative point will be changed. not sure how much work they have to do behind the agency he does have that veto power. have we seen senator mcconnell respond to this? guest: he might not, he might want to talk about other topics. this is not something -- senator mcconnell is not thrilled about having to bring up something that opposes the president under the procedural rules of congress, it does have to come up in the senate. i do think that when it comes to the b

a black to the emergency declaration gets support from republican senator rand paul. >>> good morning from the studio 57 newsroom at cbs news headquarters in new york. good to be with you. i'm anne-marie green. this morning, there is destruction and heartbreak in southeast alabama where a powerful tornado killed at least 23 people. the search for survivors resumes this morning. one of the hardest hit areas was lee county, that's near the georgia border. the tornado was part of a violent storm system in the southeast. laura podesta is here in new york with more on this. laura, good morning. >> reporter: good morning, anne-marie. that death toll number of 23 is expected to rise. one meteorologist who is on the ground this morning estimates that in some areas the tornado was half a mile wide. a deadly tornadoedhrough lee county, alabama, on sunday. >> there's damage, serious damage. >> reporter: the town of beauregard took a direct hit. >> houses completely destroyed. homes that just basically slabs left where once stood a home. specific areas, the contents of one residence we know for a

well it's being put forward by two legislators rand paul and tamu dall and essentially what it would do would be to declare victory in the afghan war remove all u.s. troops within one year and pay out the service members a one thousand dollar difference a dividend i guess and the law also would frame for political reconciliation to be implemented by afghans now senator ron rand paul when he was putting forward this legislation he said it's time to declare the victory we achieved long ago bring them home and put america's needs first now the war in afghanistan has been the longest in u.s. history it's lasted eighteen years and each of those years it has cost the american taxpayers rough largely fifty billion dollars now at this point as this legislation is come forward we've heard the u.s. secretary of state mike pompei o talk about negotiations going on with the taliban but he also referred to them as terrorists let's take a listen just in afghanistan trying to find a way to achieve in afghanistan the war. now he was later asked to clarify these comments because the united nations no

rand paul said it might be as many as 10 republicans that vote against this. we will likely see one or two more who have been questioning this and that is what the white house does not want. they want to minimize the damage . grudges wheno hold it comes to these things and lindsey graham has been on record saying we will hold you to account, other republican senators. we will not forget this if you vote against the president. host: we will see mike pence -- will we see mike pence back on capitol hill ahead of this vote? kathryn: it is very likely. he has been the person the administration has sent. again, it is how visible do they want this to be? behind closeda doors not in public view kind of lobbying we are seeing. host: plenty more to talk about in washington but we will it you chat with some callers. first, in new york on our republican line. thing hasis whole confused me because i watched one american news network every morning and they published a calculator with estimates from the department of homeland security. last year, $136 billion was spent to fa

let's say this just get challenged in court, something rand paul has suggested. he's gone so far as to say that the supreme court may rebuke him on this. what are you hearing in how this may play out? >> the white house certainly has expressed quiet confidence. they feel like there's a decent chance this will end up in the courts. this could take months and months and months. they're not necessarily even opposed to that. because as someone put it to me once around the president, whether it's the wall or other issues related to do border. he believes in the wall, but what he cares about more is the fight. he wants to be a political issue. he wants this to be something he can talk about on twitter and his rallies. >> some said that cpac speech may have been the kick off. >> in some ways. it was a remarkable performance from him. you know, and i think that they are quiet late confident that the supreme court leans conservative on a lot of issues. they think they will side in his favor. that's no guarantee. we've seen justice roberts be the swing vote. there is a pos