0:00

This week with George Stephanopoulos

0:02

starts right now. Striking

0:05

data. They have a lot of capability. I

0:07

have a lot more. US forces hit

0:09

dozens of targets in Iraq, Syria and

0:12

Yemen days after three US soldiers were

0:14

killed in Jordan. We're live in the

0:16

region with the latest developments, plus White

0:18

House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. Campaign

0:21

kickoff. People began to focus. Everything's

0:23

picking up across the board. President

0:26

Biden wins big in the South Carolina primary. As

0:29

pressure from his predecessor causes gridlock on Capitol

0:31

Hill. The bad border deal would be worse

0:33

than no deal at all. Is

0:35

the bipartisan immigration deal dead on arrival? We

0:38

need to have zero people illegally crossing the

0:40

border and that is the target of this

0:42

bill. What's been suggested is in

0:44

this bill is not enough to secure the border. We're

0:46

joined this morning by House Democratic Leader Akeem Jeffries and

0:49

Republican Senator J.D. Vance. Plus

0:52

the Biden reelection strategy is

0:54

begging Taylor Swift for an endorsement.

0:57

We have had enough of Taylor Swift for

0:59

now. I cannot think of a dumber political

1:01

fight to pick than one with the Swifties.

1:04

Taylor Swift takes center stage in the

1:06

2024 campaign as some Trump supporters

1:08

decide she's the problem. All the

1:10

political fallout with her powerhouse roundtable. From

1:14

ABC News, it's this week. Here

1:17

now, George Stephanopoulos. Good

1:21

morning and welcome to this week. Retaliation for

1:23

strikes against US forces and Middle East

1:25

shipping have continued through the weekend. The

1:27

US and Great Britain hit dozens of hootie

1:30

targets in Yemen Saturday following Friday strikes against

1:32

85 targets in Iraq and

1:34

Syria. The big question now, will

1:36

this spark a wider war in the Middle East

1:38

or work to contain the conflict? We'll

1:40

ask President Biden's National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan

1:43

after this report from Marcus Moore in the

1:45

war zone. Good morning Marcus. Well

1:49

George, good morning. We are right along

1:51

Jordan's border with Syria. That's Syria just

1:53

in the distance behind me and tensions

1:55

have been high here as officials confirm

1:58

that US and British forces support The

2:00

by six other countries unleashed a

2:02

new large scale attack on Who's

2:04

The Targets in Yemen, including deeply

2:06

buried storage facilities and air defense

2:09

systems. American F A Team, fighter

2:11

jets and warships with the Eisenhower

2:13

Carrier Strike Group firing guided tomahawk

2:15

missiles striking thirteen different locations. now

2:17

Us Central Command Forces also saying

2:19

earlier that they struck six Who's

2:22

The Anti A Cruise Ship missiles.

2:24

prepare to launch and destroy twelve

2:26

Goofy Drones on Friday, either mid

2:28

flight or ready to. Be launched from

2:30

Yemen and as you know, These zones

2:32

are a serious threat to international

2:34

trade transiting to the Gulf of

2:37

Aden, and a Us official saying

2:39

that so strikes in Yemen are

2:41

not linked to the retaliation for

2:43

the January Base attacks as the

2:45

several days of warning to Us

2:47

retaliating against Iran backed proxies for

2:49

the drone strike that killed three

2:51

service members at an army outpost

2:53

in Jordan a week ago he

2:55

watches. this will say sixteen people

2:57

were killed, twenty five wounded, while

2:59

a Syrian Human Rights group says

3:01

twenty nine members. Of Iranian backed militias

3:03

are were killed there. The White House

3:06

is signaling that more strikes are coming,

3:08

but they don't want an escalation. Iraqi

3:10

and Syrian government's quickly condemning the retaliation,

3:12

calling it a violation of sovereignty and

3:15

they said that it's Britain. Stability in

3:17

the reason and George or concern about

3:19

escalation is growing among many here in

3:22

the region and and the police here

3:24

is that as long as Israel's bombardment

3:26

in Gaza continues ability and as part

3:28

of the world will be threatened to

3:31

watch. And. Says Marks we have heard

3:33

from who sees around to respond. You're

3:37

a bus ride of a have bow to

3:40

keep up their tax on those ships in

3:42

the Red Sea and that this will continue

3:44

as long as the war in Gaza happening

3:47

in the Who Sees has said that they

3:49

will only stop when a cease is declared

3:51

in Georgia. Is it is worth noting that

3:53

these groups have still been able to carry

3:56

out attacks despite the Us airstrikes Source. Marcus.

3:59

More thanks his brain. President's National Security Advisor

4:01

Jake Sullivan. Jake, thank you for joining

4:03

us this morning. Just to start

4:05

out, what have our strikes achieved over the last

4:08

couple of days? Is the retaliation done? Well,

4:13

George, part of the purpose of the

4:15

strikes, the central purpose of the strikes

4:17

has been to take away capabilities from

4:19

the Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria

4:21

that are attacking our forces and from

4:23

the Houthis that continue to threaten Red

4:25

Sea shipping. And we believe they had

4:27

good effect in reducing, degrading the capabilities

4:29

of the militias and of the Houthis.

4:32

And as necessary, we will continue to

4:34

take action. So

4:36

do you expect more retaliation for the strike against

4:39

U.S. forces in Jordan earlier this week? Well,

4:43

the first thing that I would say, and you

4:45

noted it at the top of your program, is

4:47

that this was the beginning of our response. There

4:49

will be more steps. Some of

4:52

those steps will be seen. Some may not be

4:54

seen. But there will be more action taken to

4:56

respond to the death of the tragic death of

4:58

the three brave U.S. service members. And

5:01

we cannot rule out that there will be

5:03

further attacks from Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and

5:06

Syria or from the Houthis. We have to

5:08

be clear-eyed about that. The president, in

5:10

being clear-eyed about that, has told his military

5:13

commanders that they need to be positioned to respond

5:15

to further attacks as well. Are

5:17

you concerned about direct escalation from the

5:19

Iranians themselves? Well,

5:24

again, this is something that we have to

5:26

look at as a threat. We have to

5:28

prepare for every contingency. And we are prepared

5:31

for that contingency. And I would just say,

5:33

from the perspective of Tehran, if they chose

5:35

to respond directly to the United States, they

5:38

would be met with a

5:40

swift and forceful response from us. How

5:42

much direct contact

5:45

has there been with Iran to try

5:47

to contain this conflict? Over

5:53

the course of the past few months, we've had

5:55

the opportunity to engage In the

5:57

passage of messages back and forth.

6:00

Between us and Iran ah by in the

6:02

last few days the message that we have

6:04

sent to Iran has been for our action.

6:06

That to our words. They're

6:09

tell I tell us about where things

6:11

stand now on the negotiations over possible

6:14

cease fire, an album release of hostages,

6:16

and the Gaza War. Well

6:21

George, we regard a hostage steal

6:23

the release of hostages' as both

6:25

being obviously critical for getting people

6:27

home to their loved ones, but

6:29

also being critical degenerate a sustained

6:31

pause in hostilities or that can

6:34

support the flow of humanitarian assistance.

6:36

I and that can alleviate the

6:38

suffering in Gaza. So the President

6:40

has put his shoulder to the

6:42

wheel on this. He has spoken

6:44

to the leaders of both cutter

6:47

in Egypt to countries that are

6:49

centrally. Involved in try to broker

6:51

the steel, we're in constant contact

6:53

with our Israeli counterparts on it,

6:55

and a goal is in fact

6:57

to get a hostage deal in

6:59

place as soon as possible. Ultimately,

7:01

that comes down to Hamas and

7:03

Hamas will have to be willing.

7:06

To say yes to an arrangement that

7:08

sub brings hostages home and we're going

7:10

to continue pressing from every direction to

7:13

try to make that happen. Is it

7:15

a minute? I

7:19

can't say it's imminent by. Ultimately,

7:21

these kinds of negotiations unfold somewhat

7:24

slowly until they unfold very quickly.

7:26

and so it's difficult time to

7:28

put a precise time on when

7:31

something might come together. Or frankly,

7:33

if something my come together by

7:35

at sitting here today, I cannot

7:38

tell you it's right around the

7:40

corner. What is the endgame

7:42

here Dc? Any prospect at all he seems

7:44

have been rolling and are pro Prime Minister

7:46

Netanyahu have some kind of a long term

7:48

deals that leads to a Palestinian state. of

7:53

us position on this is very

7:55

straightforward the only long term answer

7:57

to peace in the region Israel's

8:00

security in the region is

8:02

a two-state solution with Israel's security

8:05

guaranteed, a Palestinian state that also

8:07

has security guarantees for Israel.

8:09

That's what we're going to keep working for.

8:11

We were doing that before October 7th. I

8:13

think since October 7th, the need

8:15

to work on that has

8:17

only increased. And we would like

8:19

to deliver an outcome over time

8:22

that has eluded administrations of both

8:24

parties for decades that

8:26

is in the best interest, we believe, of everyone

8:28

in the region and in the wider world. Will

8:31

it require a new Israeli government? Well,

8:36

I'm not going to get into Israeli politics. The

8:38

U.S. can only advance our

8:40

vision for what we think makes sense. And

8:42

President Biden has been very clear about that.

8:45

He's been clear publicly on the two-state solution.

8:47

He's been clear privately in speaking with Prime

8:49

Minister Netanyahu. And we have to let the

8:51

Israelis speak for themselves. Meantime,

8:53

the president has been pushing hard for more aid

8:56

to Israel, more aid to Ukraine. He's tied it

8:58

to those negotiations over a possible border deal in

9:00

the Senate as well. But last night we heard

9:02

from the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, that

9:04

he's going to put a provision on

9:06

the floor this week. This simply is aid

9:08

to Israel. Your reaction? Well,

9:12

the timing is interesting. The senators

9:14

have been working on a bipartisan

9:16

basis for weeks, if not months

9:19

at this point, on a comprehensive

9:21

package that involves Israel, Ukraine, the

9:23

Indo-Pacific, and the border. They

9:25

are getting close to having that done.

9:27

And at that moment, the House comes

9:29

forward with an Israel-only bill. We regard

9:32

that not as actually trying to address

9:34

the security of Israel, but rather trying

9:36

to address politics in the United States.

9:38

And from our perspective, the security of

9:41

Israel should be sacred. It should not

9:43

be a political game. And so everyone

9:45

should get behind a comprehensive package of

9:47

the kind that bipartisan group

9:49

of senators are negotiating as we speak.

9:52

No indication that the House is going to do that. So If they

9:54

pass it and it gets to the Senate, would the President veto it

9:56

if it came to his desk? The

10:00

President is going to support a comprehensive

10:02

package. she doesn't think doing these things

10:05

piecemeal make sense, and we think we

10:07

will get an opportunity for the Senate

10:09

to move forward with a package. and

10:11

then the real question should be put

10:13

to the house, not to the President

10:15

about how to move forward with that

10:18

bipartisan deal. If that deal came to

10:20

his desk, he would absolutely sign it

10:22

without hesitation. Say. Solvency

10:24

for times more. And.

10:28

And were joined now by has democratic leader

10:30

Hakeem Jeffries Carson. Thank you for coming in on

10:32

it was pick up a we left off

10:34

their with Jake Sullivan. Saw the speaker yesterday

10:36

say that is can bring a standalone Israel bill

10:39

to the floor of the house. Your response.

10:42

What? Will evaluate that legislation over the next

10:44

few days and then on Tuesday morning

10:46

House Democrats will meet as a caucus

10:48

See you might be open to it?

10:50

Well, To. Decide the way

10:52

forward as it relates to America's

10:54

national security priorities. Clearly, we've got

10:57

to support Israel's ability to defend

10:59

itself against Hamas and to defeat

11:01

Hamas. We also need to make

11:03

sure that we're doing everything possible

11:05

to bring the hostages home including

11:07

American citizens, and to be able

11:10

to search humanitarian assistance the Palestinian

11:12

civilians who are in harm's way

11:14

in Gaza through no fault of

11:16

their own. Beyond that, we also

11:18

have to address the national security

11:20

priorities of. The American people in other parts

11:22

of the world. First. And foremost

11:25

certainly to support and cranes effort

11:27

to push back against Russian. Aggressive

11:29

also to support our allies in

11:31

the Indo Pacific, Taiwan, Japan, South

11:34

Korea. The legislation being put forth

11:36

by House Republicans does none of

11:38

that. The responsible approach is a

11:41

comprehensive one, so address America's national

11:43

security prior any prospect. The sequel

11:45

personally sat on the floor. Or

11:48

that remains to be seen. I think the Senate. Ah,

11:51

is working it's way through to a

11:53

comprehensive agreement we could see tax as

11:55

early as later on this afternoon if

11:57

not tomorrow and we should have value

12:00

that when it's available how about

12:02

on the aid to israel several members progressive

12:04

members of your caucus has said that they

12:06

want conditions now on a digital including your

12:09

fellow new york are some not sundry a

12:11

acacia courtes we say to them whatever has

12:13

a right uh... to defend itself and also

12:15

of course a responsibility to conduct its war

12:18

in a manner consistent with the international rules

12:20

of conflict we shouldn't

12:22

put conditions on the

12:24

ability of any of our allies

12:27

to defend themselves particularly against a

12:29

brutal terrorist regime like hummus what

12:32

else needs to be in this bill as

12:35

the senate is working its way through

12:38

to a possible bipartisan agreement uh...

12:40

dealing with our national security

12:42

priorities in other parts of the world

12:44

supporting our nato allies stopping russian aggression

12:47

uh... which is necessary and ukraine has

12:50

done a very good job showing incredible

12:52

resilience against a brutal russian

12:54

attack we can't abandon that and we

12:56

also of course have to work on

12:58

the challenges related to a broken immigration

13:00

system will see what emerges from the senate in

13:03

that regard perhaps but isn't that dead on arrival

13:05

in house the house republics made it very clear

13:07

they're not going to consider something like that it

13:09

should not be dead on arrival fee you

13:11

know we need more common sense

13:14

in washington d c left

13:16

conflict and left chaos when

13:19

a period of divided government that means

13:21

we should be trying to find bipartisan

13:23

common ground how democrats have made that

13:25

clear on any issue will work with

13:28

our republican counterparts when it makes sense

13:30

in terms of delivering real results for

13:32

the american people how

13:34

can a bill be dead on arrival extreme

13:38

mag republicans in house haven't even seen

13:40

the tax they don't even know what

13:42

solutions are being proposed in terms of

13:44

addressing the challenges at the border house

13:47

republicans at this point are

13:50

wholly own subsidiaries of donald

13:52

trump they're not working

13:54

to find it real solutions for

13:56

the american they

13:59

are following orders from the

14:01

former president that's the height of

14:03

the responsibility that's what the american

14:05

people dislike about washington d

14:07

c at this moment it's pretty clear that this

14:10

week there is going to be a vote to

14:12

impeach on the pretty secretary my orchids do republicans

14:14

have the votes to pass it that

14:17

remains to be seen but there is

14:19

no evidence that house republicans have produced

14:21

to show that secretary my office has

14:24

engaged in a peaceful offense has

14:26

broken the law has committed a

14:28

high crime or misdemeanor which is

14:31

the standard for impeachment what

14:33

does impeaching secretary my office have to

14:35

do with fixing the

14:37

challenges at the border the answer

14:40

is absolutely nothing this is a

14:42

partisan political and

14:45

it should be abandoned by my republican colleagues when it

14:47

comes to politics president biden won the

14:49

south carolina primary ninety six percent of the vote last

14:52

night resounding victory there he

14:55

still locked in a dead heat without trump according

14:57

to some polls behind in many of the key

14:59

swing states what do they need to do right now well

15:02

it was a tremendous victory in

15:05

south carolina a decisive one and

15:07

i think it demonstrates that as

15:09

we enter into the campaign season

15:11

the american people are beginning to

15:13

focus on president biden's incredible track

15:15

record of result from

15:17

the american rescue plan shots in arms money in

15:19

pockets kids back in school rescuing

15:21

the economy from a once-in-a-century

15:23

pandemic and allowing the american

15:25

economy to emerge as the

15:27

most advanced the

15:30

world yes more needs to be done

15:33

in terms of addressing affordability and inflationary

15:35

pressures and president biden has a vision

15:37

to do that infrastructure

15:39

and investment clean

15:42

water in every community bring domestic

15:44

manufacturing jobs back home to the

15:46

united states of america lowering the

15:48

price of insulin to thirty five

15:50

dollars for millions

15:52

of americans when it had caught four thousand

15:54

dollars a year this is an incredible track

15:56

record of results an

15:59

accomplishment We will not run on

16:01

this track record simply to say to

16:03

the American people, reward us,

16:06

but we can say, trust us. We say

16:08

what we mean, and we mean what we

16:10

say. We're going to continue to put people

16:12

over politics and deliver real results for the

16:15

American people. And when the American people process

16:17

that, George, I think President Biden

16:19

will continue to be in a strong position

16:21

to be reelected. All signs do now point,

16:23

though, however, to a close election, even

16:26

the prospect of her accident could be thrown to the House.

16:28

What are the prospects that a majority of

16:30

states' delegations will be controlled by Democrats if

16:32

indeed this is thrown to the House? Well,

16:35

we're going to work very hard to make

16:37

our case to the American people, that

16:39

we are focused on finding

16:42

common ground, exercising common sense

16:44

to deliver the common good

16:47

and make progress for hardworking American

16:49

families. If we are able

16:51

to successfully articulate that vision for

16:53

the future, people over politics, lower

16:56

costs, better paying jobs, growing the

16:58

middle class, safer communities, fixing

17:00

our broken immigration system, I think we're

17:02

going to be in a strong position

17:04

in November to deliver a House Democratic

17:07

majority. Hakeem Jeffries, thanks very much for

17:09

your time this morning. Thanks, George. Coming up,

17:11

14th Amendment challenge is to keep Trump off the 2024 ballot, head to

17:13

the Supreme Court this week.

17:15

Our legal expert is going to break it down, and we're

17:17

back in two minutes. It's

17:24

2024, and in case you haven't

17:26

heard, there's a presidential election. This

17:29

fall, Americans will head to the polls to

17:31

make their voices heard. But between

17:33

now and then, there's going to be a lot

17:35

of news and a lot

17:38

of noise. I'm Galen

17:40

Druck, and every Monday and Thursday on

17:42

the FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast, we cut through

17:44

the noise with data and research to

17:46

get a clearer picture of the race

17:48

for the White House. What

17:50

do voters really think, and which

17:52

game changers will actually change the

17:54

game? That's FiveThirtyEight

17:57

Politics. Every Monday and

17:59

Thursday, wherever. you get your podcasts.

18:05

It was a masterful opinion

18:08

of constitutional interpretation of

18:11

the disqualification clause in the 14th

18:13

amendment. It is unassailable

18:15

as a matter of constitutional

18:17

law. I don't think Donald Trump

18:19

needs to be president, but I will beat

18:22

him fair and square. We

18:24

don't need to have judges making these decisions.

18:26

We need voters to have to make these

18:28

decisions. That was former

18:30

conservative judge Michael Liddy and Nikki Haley weighing

18:32

in on the Colorado ruling to remove former

18:34

president Trump from the state's primary ballot. Supreme

18:36

court set to hear arguments Thursday over that

18:38

14th amendment of the constitution which bars anyone

18:41

from holding office who engage in insurrection. We'll

18:43

talk about that with our chief legal analyst

18:45

Dan Abrams and Sheryl and Eiffel who is

18:47

launching the 14th amendment center for law and

18:49

democracy at Howard Law School this year. And

18:52

Dan, let me begin with you. What are you

18:54

watching for from Supreme Court this week? Well, first

18:56

of all, this is going to be a critical

18:58

ruling. The question is going to be what

19:00

issue does the Supreme Court focus on? I'm

19:02

going to be most interested in the oral

19:05

arguments on what questions are they

19:07

asking? Meaning there are all sorts of outs

19:09

here for the Supreme Court. There are all

19:11

sorts of ramps. The question is, are they

19:13

going to view it substantively? Are they going

19:15

to evaluate whether there was an insurrection or

19:17

not? Or are they going to ask questions

19:19

more about whether the president is covered by

19:21

this? Is this something where there needs to

19:23

be a conviction of the crime

19:25

of insurrection? There are all sorts of possible issues.

19:27

And this is where the oral arguments get

19:30

a little interesting, which is where they

19:32

focus, at least may give

19:34

us a hint as to what they're particularly

19:36

interested in. Do you go in assuming that

19:38

the majority of the court is

19:40

looking for a way not to strike Donald Trump from

19:43

the ballot? Absolutely.

19:45

Absolutely. I have no doubt in

19:47

my mind that the court will figure out

19:49

a way to allow Donald Trump to remain

19:51

on the ballot. And by the way, that

19:53

may mean even just sending it back to

19:55

the lower courts, et cetera. But I would

19:57

be absolutely shocked if the court

19:59

of upholds of the colorado will charlin you

20:02

believe the forty-nine is pretty clear on this

20:04

matter yet

20:07

the matter of law of of tax of

20:10

a legislative history of intention the

20:12

answers to all of the questions that then raised

20:15

are very clear are very cut and dried affection

20:18

three of the fourteenth amendment is

20:20

very clear that those who formally

20:22

took an oath for office to formally served in

20:25

office who participated in

20:27

in subsequently participated in insurrection

20:29

are barred from serving in either

20:31

state or federal office uh... it's

20:33

not just a dot donald trump but this happens

20:35

to be uh... the case involving him uh...

20:38

and if you look back to that legislative history

20:40

and what the framers of the fourteenth amendment we're

20:42

trying to do they understood the

20:44

need to be able to protect the

20:46

republic you know george after uh... after

20:49

the civil war uh... when they were

20:51

reconstituting the congress the vice president of

20:53

the confederacy tried to take a seat

20:55

in the united states senate uh... he

20:58

had been elected by of

21:00

the the white citizens of georgia a

21:02

four confederacy of kernels tried to

21:04

be seated general tried to be

21:06

seated and they understood that they

21:08

had to protect against uh...

21:11

what they called uh... those who

21:13

have it having been defeated in the field

21:16

seek to win in the in

21:18

the in the political realm so

21:20

they understood what insurrection was uh...

21:22

we are new to this fortunately but

21:25

this was placed in the constitution

21:27

with the vision that forevermore the

21:29

republic would need this tool to protect

21:31

itself and i think there's no question

21:33

that donald trump fits into this is in an

21:36

excellent decision from the colorado trial

21:39

court uh... and from the colorado supreme

21:41

court that this supreme court is going to have

21:43

to grapple with are

21:45

you confident that the supreme court is going to see the law

21:48

the way you do no

21:51

i'm never cut i'm a civil rights lawyer

21:53

to have never confident that the request to be

21:55

the case the way i do but you know if

21:57

you if you think about it and i've been listening

21:59

to dan you know,

22:01

whether or not Trump participated in an insurrection.

22:03

The Supreme Court is not a fact-finding court.

22:06

Those facts have already been found by a

22:08

trial court, a duly legitimate

22:11

trial court. Donald Trump and his lawyers

22:14

had the opportunity to defend him. Witnesses

22:17

were called. Evidence was heard.

22:19

Experts testified. Historians testified. And

22:22

there is a very thorough,

22:24

detailed decision that lays

22:26

out the case. So the Supreme

22:28

Court really can't ask those questions

22:31

in its role as a reviewer.

22:34

What they can ask about is the law.

22:36

And they can ask a

22:39

series of questions I think they will ask. Is

22:41

this provision self-executing, right? Does there

22:43

need to be some statute from

22:46

Congress that authorizes removal? They

22:48

can ask those kinds of questions. And

22:51

those are the questions I'm going to be focused on listening

22:53

to the argument. What I think

22:55

this court will want, a majority of this court will

22:57

want, is some indication

22:59

that they cannot act without something

23:01

else happening beforehand and that something

23:04

else being in the hands of

23:06

Congress. I agree that they will

23:08

be looking for an off-ramp. But

23:10

I would stress again by the

23:12

court's own philosophy, if one looks

23:14

at the history and tradition of

23:17

Section 3 and applies

23:19

it to this situation, this case

23:21

is cut and dried. It's

23:23

astonishing how closely this insurrection

23:26

and Donald Trump's participation in

23:28

fomenting it aligns with the goals

23:30

of the framers of the 14th Amendment in

23:32

creating Section 3. Dan, this is

23:34

likely not the last time the Supreme Court's going to be walking

23:37

into this election this year. You've got the appeals

23:39

court still dealing with whether or not

23:41

President Trump, former President Trump is immune from any kind

23:44

of prostitution. What do you make of this delay, though,

23:46

by the appeals court? First of all, the Supreme Court

23:48

could decide not to hear that issue, right? The first

23:50

question is going to be, does the Supreme Court even

23:52

agree to hear it? But yeah, look, you and I

23:55

have talked about this on the set of Good Morning

23:57

America that I expected there to be a ruling earlier

23:59

from the... appellate court they seem to be

24:01

moving pretty quickly on this question of

24:03

is their immunity and now suddenly there's

24:06

a delay and you have to believe

24:08

that this is because the three judges

24:10

are trying to figure out a way

24:12

to craft this where

24:14

maybe they all agree on something they

24:18

they recognize the importance of the case

24:20

something's going on right based on the

24:22

way that they were moving forward so

24:24

quickly initially something happened to

24:26

put a delay in the process which is

24:29

you know has now led the trial

24:31

court to say we can't move forward with the

24:33

trial date at this point until the appellate court

24:35

weighs in and by the way once the appellate

24:38

court weighs in there's going to be all

24:40

sorts of other procedural questions depending on what

24:42

the ruling is it could go to a

24:44

request for en banc which means the entire

24:46

court as opposed to just three judges hearing

24:48

it they have to make a decision there

24:50

it does go to the Supreme Court there's

24:52

a briefing schedule there's an amount of time that

24:54

each side gets so the process moves on the

24:56

top of the clock is ticking and the question

24:58

becomes does the appellate court factor

25:01

in when the election and

25:04

in theory they shouldn't in

25:06

reality it's hard to believe that they don't show anything

25:08

will see a trial in the January 6th case this

25:10

year well

25:12

it's hard to say i think george

25:15

we're unfortunately focusing on the appellate court

25:17

where we should be focusing is on

25:19

the Supreme Court which in december received

25:21

a petition from jack smith december eleventh

25:23

or so asking them to take the

25:25

court did take the case ahead of

25:27

appellate review in order to keep the

25:29

schedule and the Supreme Court declined to

25:31

do so of course the Supreme Court

25:33

has done this before and many times

25:35

during the Trump administration they did it

25:37

in the case involving a will barroths

25:39

at the uh... secretary of commerce is

25:42

deposition they did it in the travel ban

25:44

case they did it in the u n

25:46

c of the newt university of north carolina

25:48

uh... affirmative action case they did it in

25:50

the case of young people doing under climate

25:52

change they did it in doctor uh...

25:54

why did they not do it in this

25:56

case the case of of paramount public interest

25:59

involving whether or not the president can

26:01

be can be prosecuted uh... under the the

26:03

charges that jack smith is brought so while

26:05

we're focusing on the appellate court i think

26:07

it's important to uh... remember that the supreme

26:09

court fumbled the ball on this in december

26:11

and by fumbled that sounds like it's accidental

26:14

i don't know whether it was or not

26:16

but this was a at jack smith tried to avoid this

26:18

and it seemed to me a very appropriate case

26:21

in which the supreme court on a

26:23

matter of law of presidential immunity could have taken

26:25

this ahead of the appellate court and we would

26:27

be on schedule thank you both your

26:29

time this morning roundtable

26:31

republic senator jd advance are coming up stay

26:33

with us stomach

26:38

trump i think that he's noxious

26:40

and leading the white working class

26:42

to a very dark place bleeding

26:45

off political discourse to a very negative

26:47

place it comes like president he asked

26:49

me a much different and

26:52

the candidate fundamentally divisive arrogant i'm

26:54

a never trump guy i

26:56

never liked him

26:59

that was jd advance back in two thousand

27:01

sixteen now he's a republican senator from ohio

27:03

supporting donald trump and he joins

27:05

us this morning senator thank you for joining us

27:08

this morning back in two thousand sixteen you also

27:10

wrote the trump is unfit for

27:12

office why have you reversed yourself well

27:16

i think it all this actually george did a great job he

27:18

proved me wrong he also proved a lot of other people wrong

27:20

which is why i think he's doing so

27:22

well in the polls these days with her member george joe

27:25

biden promised to return to normalcy and

27:27

yet we have a world on fire we have

27:30

worn the red sea war in eastern europe war

27:32

on the southern border a terrible drug crisis of

27:34

course a lot of young americans who can't afford

27:36

to buy a home because interest rates are so

27:38

high so compared that to the track record of

27:41

four years of donald trump where we actually had

27:43

a secure border we had rising wages for the

27:45

middle class and we had the american

27:47

dream that seemed more attainable and more achievable

27:49

for more people uh... it's hard not

27:51

to conclude that i was wrong and so many were

27:54

wrong about donald trump back in twenty fifteen he delivered

27:56

george did a good job and i think it's why

27:58

we ought to give another run at it Of

28:01

course, wages are rising now and we just

28:03

saw that economic forcoming this week showing the

28:05

economy continues to grow, new job growth as

28:07

well. But since then, Donald Trump not only

28:09

lost the 2020 election and tried to overturn

28:11

the results, he also faced a series of

28:14

legal judgments and indictments. Most

28:16

recently, this E. Jean Carroll case where

28:18

juries have found them liable for sexual

28:20

assault and defamation, leading to ads like

28:22

this. Even

28:25

Donald Trump sends a message to

28:27

every abuser, every rapist, and

28:30

every man who's ever

28:34

used his power to hurt a woman.

28:39

Because if he can do it, why

28:42

shouldn't they? How

28:45

do you respond to that, that your support of

28:47

Trump is sanctioning that kind of behavior, sexual assault

28:49

and defamation? Well,

28:52

I think it's actually very unfair to the

28:54

victims of sexual assault to say that somehow

28:56

their lives are being worse by electing Donald

28:58

Trump for president when what he's trying to

29:00

do, I think, is restore prosperity. So I

29:03

think it's insulting to victims

29:05

of sexual assault. If you actually look at

29:07

so many of the court cases against Donald

29:09

Trump, George, this is not about prosecuting Trump

29:11

for something that he did. It's about throwing

29:13

him off the ballot because Democrats feel that

29:16

they can't beat him at the ballot box,

29:18

and so they're trying to defeat him in

29:20

court. This case, like so

29:22

many legal cases against Donald Trump,

29:24

they're trumped up, they're in extremely left-wing

29:26

jurisdictions, or it's actually the Biden administration

29:29

prosecuting his chief political rival. I think

29:31

most Americans recognize that this is not

29:34

what we want to fight the 2024

29:36

election over. Let's

29:38

fight it over issues. Let's fight it

29:40

over how to re-deliver prosperity to the

29:42

American worker and peace to the world

29:44

at large, not over these ridiculous court

29:47

cases that frankly they've been throwing at

29:49

Trump for well before he became a

29:51

political candidate, and they're going to be going after

29:53

him for a long time because his agenda is

29:55

actually a threat to the people who have been

29:57

calling the shots in this country for far too

29:59

long. You call it a

30:01

ridiculous case these were juries that found him

30:03

liable for sexual assault and defamation. That's ridiculous

30:08

These are juries George in extremely

30:10

left-wing jurisdictions These are cases that

30:12

are very often funded by left-wing

30:14

donors and they're cases that are

30:16

funded Explicitly to harm him

30:18

politically not to seek justice for any

30:21

particular group of individuals George If you

30:23

look at all of these cases the

30:25

through-line Twofold number one they're

30:27

funded by Donald Trump's political opponents

30:29

and the goal here is not

30:31

to help us actually have a

30:34

real Conversation about how to advance

30:36

the country forward their goal is

30:38

to defeat Trump at the courts

30:40

because these people know they can't defeat Him

30:42

at the ballot box It's really shameful actually

30:44

George if you think about so many of

30:46

these people who say We're living in a

30:49

world where there's a threat to democracy Donald

30:51

Trump or his supporters are threats to democracy

30:53

and yet They're using the courts to deny

30:55

the American people from even having a choice

30:57

if you don't like Donald Trump of course

30:59

you can vote against Them but you should

31:02

at least have that choice and it's telling

31:04

that the people who talk about threats to

31:06

democracy Are trying to destroy

31:08

the democratic process in this country. We've got to

31:10

talk about the issues George There are so many

31:13

crises happening all across the world. There are so

31:15

many problems right here at home I think Donald

31:17

Trump is the best guy to fix those problems

31:19

And I think that we have a very very

31:22

good chance of persuading the American people what they

31:24

don't want to talk about is weird Juries in

31:26

New York City they want to talk about how

31:28

to make their lives better and how to bring

31:30

the world to a more peaceful place So

31:33

juries in New York City are not legitimate when

31:35

they when they find someone liable for sexual defamation

31:37

and assault Well

31:40

when the cases are funded by

31:43

left-wing donors and when the case

31:45

has absolute left-wing bias all over

31:47

at George Absolutely, I think that

31:49

we should call into question that

31:51

that particular conclusion We have to

31:53

remember of course that these cases

31:55

exist not because they were trying

31:57

to seek justice Reed Hoffman a

31:59

far-left or did not fund this

32:01

case because he cares about what happens

32:03

to sexual assault victims, he funded this

32:05

case to harm his political opponent, Donald

32:07

Trump. It's pretty weird. It's a weird

32:09

thing to do to use the courts

32:11

in this way. It's never happened before

32:13

in American history. And yes, I think

32:16

it should call into question the entire

32:18

apparatus that's being used to go after

32:20

Donald Trump. So you're

32:22

not troubled by the sexual assault and defamation. Let

32:24

me ask you about January 6th. You've been mentioned

32:26

as a possible vice president for Donald Trump. Had

32:28

you been vice president on January 6th, would you

32:30

have certified the election results? Oh

32:34

George, this is such a ridiculous question in

32:36

part because the law has changed here. We

32:39

of course had a- I didn't ask you about going forward. I

32:41

asked you what you would have done. I

32:44

asked you what you would have done. George, here's

32:46

what I think happened in 2020. And

32:49

I know you guys are obsessed with talking about this.

32:51

I have to make a point here. You constantly say

32:53

to people like me, why do you talk about January

32:55

the 6th? Why do you talk about the election of

32:57

2020? And then you ask

32:59

about us multiple times during a six minute interview. But

33:01

look, you asked the question and I'll answer it. Do

33:03

I think there were problems in 2020? Yes,

33:06

I do. Do I think it was

33:08

a problem that big technology companies working

33:10

with the intelligence services censored the presidential

33:13

campaign of Donald Trump? Yes. Do

33:15

I think it's a problem that Pennsylvania changed

33:18

its balloting rules in the middle of the

33:20

election season in a way that even some

33:22

courts in Pennsylvania have said was illegal? Yes,

33:25

I think these were problems, George. And I

33:27

think there is a political solution to those

33:29

problems. So litigating which slate of

33:31

electors was legitimate, I think is fundamentally

33:34

the political solution to the problems that

33:36

existed in 2020. It's

33:38

a reasonable debate to have. And I

33:40

find it weird, George, that people like

33:42

you obsessed with what I call what

33:44

happened in 2020. You're so incurious

33:47

about what actually happened in 2020, which is why

33:49

so many people mistrust our elections in this country. We've

33:51

got to be better, George. I'm not the least

33:53

bit incurious. In fact, you laid out a litany

33:55

there, but you didn't answer the question I asked. Would

33:57

you have certified the election results had you been vice

33:59

president? president. If

34:02

I had been vice president, I would have told

34:04

the states like Pennsylvania, Georgia, and so many others

34:06

that we needed to have multiple slates of electors.

34:09

And I think the US Congress should have fought

34:11

over it from there. That is the legitimate way

34:13

to deal with an election that a lot of

34:15

folks, including me, think had a lot of problems

34:17

in 2020. I think that's what we

34:19

should have done. So it's very clear you

34:21

would have done what Donald Trump asked you to do

34:23

there, not what Mike's President Mike Pence did. You said

34:25

that that's about the past. No, no, George. Well, that's

34:27

what you were saying. It's

34:31

not about what Donald Trump asks somebody to

34:33

do. It's about what do we

34:35

do when you have a problem like what

34:37

happened in 2020? How do

34:39

you respond to it? How does the

34:41

political system respond to this? You can't

34:43

have a media apparatus that looks, for

34:46

example, at the intelligence services working with

34:48

technology companies to censor Americans and say,

34:50

well, we just can't deal with this. There's

34:53

no solution to this problem. And by the

34:55

way, George, I don't want to talk about

34:57

this stuff because I think what happened in

34:59

2020 is far, far less important than what's

35:02

happened since 2020. The

35:04

wide open southern border, the fentanyl crisis

35:06

plaguing our communities, the inflation crisis that

35:08

is making it hard for Americans to

35:10

afford a good middle class lifestyle. We

35:13

need to litigate the 2024 election about

35:15

those issues. You

35:18

guys are obsessed with talking about 2020. I'm

35:20

happy to answer the questions, but I think it's

35:22

a disservice to the American people that you're so

35:24

preoccupied with it. Well, it's the President

35:26

Trump is preoccupied with it. He's the one who's

35:29

talked about pardoning those who participated in the riots.

35:31

And you did this answer the question. You would

35:33

refuse to recertify the election. I do want to

35:35

talk about the agenda for 2024 because you also

35:37

have laid out very clear advice for what you

35:39

want Donald Trump to do. Let's listen. I

35:43

think that what Trump should do, like if I was

35:45

giving him one piece of advice, fire

35:48

every single mid-level bureaucrat, every civil servant

35:50

in the administrative state, replace them with

35:52

our people. And when the courts, because

35:54

you will get taken to court and

35:56

then when the courts stop you stand

35:59

before the country. like Andrew Jackson did

36:01

and say the chief justice has made his ruling

36:03

now let him enforce it. Fire

36:05

everyone in the government then defy the Supreme Court.

36:08

You think it's okay for the president to defy

36:10

the Supreme Court? No,

36:13

no George I did not say fire everyone

36:15

in the government. I said replace the mid-level

36:17

bureaucrats with people who are responsive to the

36:20

administration. Every civil servant in

36:22

the administrative state. No George, I

36:25

said the mid-level bureaucrats and one of the problems

36:27

that we have in this government. You said

36:29

every civil servant in the administrative state. Actually who

36:31

don't, who let me

36:33

finish the answer George, you asked the

36:35

question we have a major problem here

36:37

with administrators and bureaucrats in the government

36:40

who don't respond to the elected branches.

36:42

Let's just give one very real-world example

36:44

of this. In 2019 Donald

36:47

Trump having defeated ISIS said that we

36:49

should redeploy our troops in Syria and

36:52

Jordan out of the region. You had

36:54

multiple members of the Defense Department bureaucracy

36:56

who follow on that. So what happened?

36:58

We have people who are sitting ducks

37:00

in the Levant right now, three of

37:03

whom just got killed because the bureaucrats aren't

37:05

listening to the political branches. That's a fundamental

37:07

component of our government George that whoever is

37:09

in charge agree or disagree with them you

37:11

have to follow the rules. If those people

37:14

aren't following the rules then of course you've

37:16

got to fire them and of course the

37:18

president has to be able to run the

37:20

government as he thinks he should. That's the

37:22

way the Constitution works. It has been thwarted

37:25

too much by the way our bureaucracy has

37:27

worked over the past 15 years. The

37:29

Constitution also says the president

37:31

must abide by legitimate Supreme

37:33

Court rulings doesn't it? The

37:35

Constitution says that the Supreme Court can

37:38

make rulings but if the Supreme Court

37:40

and look I hope that they would

37:42

not do this but if the Supreme

37:45

Court said the President United States can't

37:47

fire a general that would be an

37:49

illegitimate ruling and the president has to

37:51

have Article 2 prerogative under the Constitution

37:54

to actually run the military as he

37:56

sees fit. This is just basic constitutional

37:58

legitimacy. You're talking about... hypothetical where the

38:00

Supreme Court tries to run the military, I

38:02

don't think that's going to happen, George. But

38:04

of course, if it did, the president would

38:07

have to respond to it. There are multiple

38:09

examples throughout American history of the president doing

38:11

just that. You didn't say military

38:13

in your answer, and you've made it very clear you

38:15

believe the president can defy the Supreme Court. Senator, thanks

38:17

for your time this morning. No, no, no, no, no,

38:19

George. Round tables up next. We'll be right back. Back

38:24

now at the round table, joined by former DNC chair

38:26

Donna Brazile, former RNC chair Trump

38:28

chief of staff, Reince Priebus, Washington

38:30

Post congressional reporter, Marianne Sotomayor, and

38:33

political senior columnist, Jonathan Martin. Thank you for

38:35

being here. Donna, let me begin with you.

38:37

We saw 96% of the Democratic primary vote,

38:39

pretty low turnout in South Carolina yesterday for

38:42

Joe Biden, but a new NBC poll out

38:44

this morning show you still trailing Donald Trump

38:46

by five points. What does he need to

38:48

do now? Well, George, this was the

38:50

beginning of the Democratic process. And I think

38:52

as we go along, including in Nevada next

38:55

week and on to Michigan and Super Tuesday,

38:58

Biden will pick up additional momentum. This is

39:00

up until now. It's been really a race

39:02

for the Republican nomination. And so

39:04

this is an opportunity for Joe Biden to

39:06

once again show up, to turn

39:09

out his base and to begin to figure

39:11

out how to pivot to enlarge that

39:14

base that he built in 2020. What's

39:16

the case that Donald Trump needs to make right

39:18

now? Well, I think you're going to see that

39:20

the Trump campaign is going to start shifting their

39:22

focus on just general chaos in regard to Biden's

39:24

administration, whether it be in the Middle East, whether

39:27

it be crime, whether it be the border, turning

39:30

the whole chaos word on its head

39:32

against Joe Biden. And look, Joe Biden's

39:34

two things have happened this week, not

39:36

good for him. One, Trump's

39:38

court cases seem to be fizzling

39:40

down the road and away from being

39:42

resolved before the election, which has been

39:45

the Democrats' real hope here. And they're

39:47

losing that. And

39:49

Biden's polling is still stuck. It's stuck at 37, 38%

39:51

approval is very low. And

39:55

he's behind in every battleground state on

39:58

average in America. comes

40:00

with all the court cases, all

40:02

the attacks on Trump, yet Joe Biden is

40:05

losing everywhere across the country. Mariana, we just

40:07

heard Ryan say that the Trump campaign wants

40:09

to use this chaos theme, and it seems

40:11

pretty clear you cover Capitol Hill on every

40:13

day, that Trump and his allies are determined

40:16

to make sure that nothing happens on

40:18

Capitol Hill this year. Oh, absolutely. I mean,

40:20

we have seen Republicans fall in line, especially

40:22

when it comes to any directive that Trump

40:24

has given, most notably on border security. That's

40:27

the big debate that we should expect on

40:29

Capitol Hill. This week, I mean, it's not

40:31

surprising. And you actually hear Republicans saying the

40:33

quiet part out loud. Why are we going

40:36

to give Biden any wins? He doesn't deserve

40:38

any wins. We shouldn't be tackling a number

40:40

of these issues in a presidential year. Just

40:43

let the voters kind of figure it out. That's

40:45

actually a point that a lot of Republicans now,

40:47

when it comes to the question about impeaching Biden,

40:50

that's a little bit trickier on Capitol Hill.

40:52

And Republicans are saying, just let this election

40:54

play out. They're trying to not actually answer

40:56

that question. Is there any chance that this

40:58

bipartisan border deal, Ukraine and Israel funding gets through,

41:00

or is that dead on arrival? I mean,

41:02

it seems pretty true. We're still waiting for the Senate

41:04

to release the text of this. It's

41:07

possible to get through the Senate, getting

41:09

it through the House. I mean, we

41:11

basically saw Speaker Mike Johnson admit that

41:13

they're going to delay putting that on

41:15

the floor. And he also

41:17

has a number of Republicans in his conference already

41:19

publicly saying that if he puts a border security

41:21

bill on the floor, if he puts a Ukraine

41:24

funding bill on the floor, it's a stable motion

41:26

to vacate him. So this is a bigger question

41:29

for House Republicans. It seems,

41:31

I don't want to say it's dead on arrival, but it

41:33

seems like it's headed in the back. Jonathan, you

41:35

have a column in Politico this morning saying

41:37

the Democrats are not keeping their eye on

41:39

the ball when it comes to third parties,

41:41

that the real threat is not no labels.

41:43

It's a third party on the left. George,

41:46

there's a precedent for this. Twice in the last

41:48

25 years, Democrats lived this

41:50

nightmare. Ralph Nader in 2000,

41:53

Jill Stein in 2016, that they understand

41:55

this risk and that this risk has

41:57

been elevated in the last few months

41:59

because of the war in Gaza

42:01

and it's a straightforward math issue

42:03

if joe biden loses thirty thousand

42:05

forty thousand votes wisconsin

42:07

in michigan places like in arbor dearborn

42:10

madison that election that the presidency and

42:12

there's been so much focus in washington

42:14

on no labels will be joe mansion

42:16

who's gonna run this and that we

42:18

know the threat to biden today and

42:20

today it's joel stein robert f kennedy

42:22

junior cornell west they don't need to

42:24

get a lot of votes are they

42:26

going to get on the ballot in

42:29

the place where i'll ask the

42:31

key not all three will kennedy's

42:34

florida with the libertarian line now style once

42:36

again the green party line that's important because

42:38

that makes it easier for them to

42:40

establish parties if you can get on those

42:43

lines and and and key states that

42:45

is the place the question is what a

42:47

list of makeup for that is one of

42:49

the biden campaign looking at

42:51

right now i think i don't bring this

42:53

to you because uh... a box news only

42:55

several of the person i've been practicing to

42:57

become obsessed with the idea of taylor swift

43:00

helping joe biden from even going so far

43:02

as to say that it's part of a

43:04

conspiracy a psychological operations conspiracy led by the

43:06

pentagon well

43:09

i i i i i i i

43:11

i'm not going to go there look

43:13

i think the whole thing well i

43:16

i i i i think

43:18

it's a part of keg of stupidity uh... you've

43:21

got popular there was the talk about

43:23

two of the most popular things in

43:25

america right now taylor swift in the

43:27

nfl and we've got

43:29

a party that wants to you know grow

43:32

the tent i don't think

43:34

attacking those too uh... taylor

43:36

swift in the nfl is obviously the way

43:38

to go uh... i

43:40

think we ought to have a few things

43:42

in america that we can agree on uh...

43:45

and uh... those are two things and even

43:47

if he does take a political position she

43:49

doesn't like trump fine that's not going to

43:51

change i don't think anyone's votes in november

43:53

but what could change people's votes is if

43:55

you know you start coming up with these

43:58

kinds of conspiracy theory that they were to you

44:00

know moving from your intune republican voters you're in

44:02

tune with foxes where do we have to follow

44:04

com uh... look at it you

44:06

know i think a lot of the things that

44:08

are out there are clicks i think it's popularity

44:10

it's the it's the it's the race to saying

44:13

something you know outrageous to get people

44:15

that to listen to you and and it's a bit

44:17

part of politics today i mean look we live in

44:19

a world where division is profit unity

44:21

is a loser uh... social

44:23

media algorithms are driving i think

44:25

our country further apart and this

44:27

is just one more of many

44:29

things that you can read online or

44:31

are in social media that you have to

44:34

just julie bond it also which side are

44:36

you want to write and kill us what

44:38

that's basically picking team blue effectively is over

44:41

to you read that's that

44:43

but you know it is puzzling

44:45

though because as ryan's point

44:47

out it's like going after like oxygen

44:49

or like golden lab puppies i mean

44:52

it's like it's hard to find more

44:54

popular figures then the nfl the last

44:56

remaining unified institution in america it's your

44:58

with the biggest problem i can i

45:00

just say something if someone who loved in that that

45:02

before it's a list with started dating one of his

45:04

famous started at uh... but

45:08

that's a good picture with drew brees that they thought

45:10

i'm still trying not to wear the same clothes

45:12

but the fact is is that she's

45:14

a cultural icon she speaks to many

45:17

voters under the age of forty

45:19

both republican and democratic voters so

45:22

i don't get the fact that the

45:24

republicans are attacking someone such

45:26

a unified with young people

45:28

i didn't become a swiftie

45:30

until after the song karma

45:33

of course the album midnight which is up

45:36

for another a grammy album of the year

45:38

but that the tackle her as a d

45:40

it's it's similar to the kind of the

45:42

nfl in in in in the part of this

45:44

is the nfl viewership i mean if you took

45:46

nfl viewers and you did a poll of the

45:48

election are you going for biden or trump trump

45:50

would win that election in the idea that you'd

45:52

attack uh... really a uh... i think

45:54

one of the day you know you're going to have a

45:57

lot of a learn how

45:59

to count votes and and and

46:01

and i'm not republicans rent but i

46:03

can't get my head it's not republican

46:05

attacking taylor swift it's some people on

46:08

the internet right better hitting the

46:11

send on it on a tweet that's all

46:13

this is and so there are plenty of

46:15

other people like me that are calling it

46:18

what it is it's not going to address

46:20

one issue this whole

46:22

issue chaos you know i've been sitting here thinking

46:24

chaos chaos when they are joe

46:27

biden is not only delivering on his

46:29

promises to get us out

46:31

of the the pandemic we're the envy

46:33

of the world when it comes to

46:35

the economy we he's growing the economy

46:37

he's investing in manufacturing uh black unemployment

46:39

is the lowest in american history but

46:41

no it's not so yes yes

46:44

it is oh seriously black unemployment

46:46

black unemployment i mean look we're not

46:48

going back to slavery okay we're i'm

46:50

saying that in terms of what joe

46:52

biden has been able to do to

46:54

help ordinary americans middle-class americans he's done

46:56

a great job and why are republicans

46:58

holding up a bipartisan border deal when

47:00

we can finally resolve the crisis at

47:02

the border but they want to get

47:04

down on 99 of what you just said is

47:08

wrong and my question is why why

47:11

aren't the voters in these battleground states in agreement

47:13

with you why is joe biden losing outside the

47:15

margin of error and that's gonna we're gonna have

47:17

to end on that question i'm sorry that is

47:19

all for us today thanks for sharing part of

47:21

your sunday with us check out world news tonight

47:23

and we'll see you tomorrow on gma