even though we are playing in the national scene, all politics are local. >> luis miranda, the book is called "relentless," it is available now wherever you get your books. i hope i see you again soon. that does it for all in on this thursday night. alex wagner tonight's text right now. good evening, alex. >> i love the spirited conversation. it is a palate cleanser. >> he's a great guy, it's a great book. >> thank you for doing that for all of us. today, we got the news that the prosecution and donald trump's new york hush money case does not plan to call karen mcdougal to testify. if you remember, karen mcdougal is the former playboy model who received $150,000.00 in the lead up to the 2016 election as part of a catch and kill scheme with "the national enquirer" to stay quiet about her affair

with donald trump. that means stormy daniels testimony, the testimony that wrapped up today, will be the only testimony this jury hears that is directly from a woman accusing donald trump of trying to keep her quiet about affair before the 2016 election. now, there are lots of reasons why karen mcdougal might not want to testify and there are lots of reasons why the prosecution might not want to call on her to testify. we are going to get some expert help unpacking all of that and what that means for this case in just a second. but, karen mcdougal not testifying also makes the testimony we did get today from stormy daniels all the more important and it makes the cross-examination of stormy daniels today, it makes that all the more important. the defense cross-examination today is probably most accurately described by a phrase i am loath to say, that it really does describe what happened today when stormy daniels was questioned by trump's lawyer, susan necheles.

the focus was pointing stormy daniels as promiscuous and somehow unreliable as a narrator. i'm going to warn you if you have children in the room or you simply don't want to hear about donald trump's alleged life, now is a good time to meet your television. this is trump attorney susan necheles speaking to stormy daniels. "you have acted in 200 films, right? you were to and directed 150 films? you have a lot of experience making phony stories about appear to be real, right?" here is stormy daniels . "that is not how i put it. the in the films is very much real , just like what happened to me in that room." susan necheles, "you've bragged about how good you are at writing porn movies and writing really good stories and with a good dialogue, right?" daniels, "yes."

susan necheles, now you have story you've been telling about president trump's. daniels, "if that story was untrue, i would have written it to be better." susan necheles "you have acted in 200 porn movies, right?" according to you, seeing a man on a bed and a t-shirt and boxer shorts was so upsetting that he got lightheaded, plotless your hands and feet and you almost fainted, right? because he was supposedly in a t-shirt and boxer shorts, you were so upset that he wanted to have with you that you couldn't speak up and say you didn't want to have with him ." daniels "correct." susan necheles " this is not the first time in a lifetime had made a pass at you, was it?" "no." but it was the first time they had a bodyguard staining site the door and they were twice my

age and they were bigger than me. stormy daniels wasn't having any of it. that didn't stop the defense from 20 is the fact that she was an adult film star to discredit her and say her story doesn't add up because, well, she's had before . that is how trump's defense framed this alleged sexual encounter in court today. meanwhile , when it came to trump's role in that same alleged sexual encounter, here is how fox has been describing it. >> the testimony of stormy daniels that was salacious, that was the point of it. listen, there is no person on planet earth that beliefs donald trump has been celibate all his life. that is not news. >> stormy claims she blacked out in this tryst with trump but she wasn't on any drugs or alcohol. it could be that you really blacked out after having with trump , which is a compliment. truly he screwed the brains out of her. that makes him agod. everything i've heard makes

trump more synthetic, more likable, and what, do you have a context at all for a tryst between a porn star and a billionaire? do you have anything to compare this against? stormy called it an imbalance of power. that is why you met him. if he were a mechanic, if he was a high school teacher, it wouldn't have run out and slept with him. it was all about the power. it was all about the imbalance. that is how this transaction works when you are a porn star. >> donald trump, god. it is a classic double standard . if a boy and a girl have , even a lot of with a lot of people, the boy is considered a stud and the girl is considered a the female lawyer

for the former president of the united states try to use that double standard to destroy the credibility of someone who allegedly slept with the president. that was the strategy. while the trump team were intent to get mr. ingalls to recount the sleazy details during the cross-examination today, they also had the chutzpah to say that the details of stormy daniels testimony were too explicit and could prejudice the jury. and then they yet again filed a mistrial motion on those grounds. and, yet again, that motion was denied. joining me now r duncan levin, former u.s. assistant attorney for the eastern district of new york and kristy greenberg, former federal prosecutor who served for over a decade in the u.s. attorney's office in the southern district of new york. thank you both for being here. i was flabbergasted. i believe you were down there today. she says with a resigned fashion. i was flabbergasted that they would really entreat stormy

daniels to revisit the sleazy moments in the hotel and then say we need a mistrial because this information has been too prejudicial. >> the hypocrisy of it. this is what judge juan merchan was saying when he denied the mistrial motion. and defense, and opened the door. you said she was a liar and you said this never happened. and yet then they go into questioning and the state says, okay, now we have to go into details because that lends her story credibility. then on cross, rather than maybe stay away from that to kind of preserve this issue from appeal in saying maybe this is too prejudicial, instead, they dove right in. and, they were getting into it. if your argument is it never happened, i'm not sure why they are pointing out so many details about whether in the situation she would have consented or not. it made no sense. it was not really driving to a

point that there were inconsistencies. the only inconsistency they get put into once, it felt like forever about whether or not he fed her dinner. >> i want to get to some of the belabored points. there were a number of very elaborate moments in this trial today. but, the hypocrisy, even to the casual observer, seemed remarkable. i wonder, though, as we sort of joke about the hypocrisy or not joke about it but i liked it, how much of a threat of a mistrial there really is. the fact that karen mcdougal is not testifying, duncan, do you see that as evidence that the prosecution is hesitant to get into more sexual allegations vis-@-vis donald trump as potential grounds for calling, again, for a mistrial? >> the judge called it out because he said i've been

objecting to this testimony as it has been coming in myself in order to give trump a fair trial and i shouldn't have to do that. you are not doing your job appeared to have let all the stuff in. the rest of that came in, much like donald trump is an uncontrollable quiet, stormy daniels once an uncontrollable witness. she was offering so much that at some point, the judge said why don't you talk to ms. daniels and have her just answer the question that is being posed. he said i've been objecting to things myself. you have let all of this in. there were some details about mr. trump having without a condom, things that should not have come into the trial. and it is a family show. that stuff does not need to come into this trial. it is prejudicial and the fact is that if mr. trump is convicted, you can guarantee this will be part of his appeal, he can say he had ineffective assistance of counsel. they didn't do anything while she was getting all this in front of the jury. this will be the basis for his appeal. >> the judge pointed it out again today, kind of like a, defense, do your job, object two more things. i basically play on your wall. is that the strategy to get this done out on appeal?

>> you have to object in order to preserve the issue for appeal. there is no strategy of not objecting, they needed to object, they didn't do it, they were sitting on their hands. then the strategy was on cross to actually go into all these details to dirty her up and say you just shouldn't believe anything she says because she is a porn star and a porn star in a hotel room with trump couldn't be uncomfortable because he is a porn star. going back to the jury, this is a jury that is in manhattan jury, a very highly educated jury . their jobs most of them are college educated. they have jobs in finance, in law, in engineering. this is not a jury, and they are split, there is about seven men, five women. split between married and single. you have to figure this is not necessarily the jury where that is going to play where it was just the tone. she was not

only, when susan necheles was doing the questioning, it was not only that the words were insulting, and they were, but it was this mocking tone that she used and it was just, it was really offensive to listen to and it was unnecessary. and, if you like, again, that was my feeling sitting there but i have to think that a manhattan jury that is that make up would feel that way too. >> how much, their strategy was to shame stormy daniels for her career and suggest there's no way she could have been traumatized, i guess is the word or caught off guard by donald trump sitting there in his boxer shorts. do you think it made her more sympathetic as a witness ? >> 100%. remember that, at the end of the day, it solidified what came out on the direct examination, which is that trump was almost like a predator. there is this testimony in direct examination that he sitting there in his hotel suite in his silk pajamas like his hugh hefner. her hands are shaking as she's putting on her old heel shoes.

that was very credible, real stuff that portrayed him in a terrible light. the cross-examination today almost solidified as the attack dogs going after this woman who has been in the situation and stormy daniels, remember, is a witness the da office did not need to call. they took a risk and i think tonight, they are celebrating the risk that they took in calling her. they didn't really need to call her because, arguably, they've already at this point in the trial established the elements of the crime. they've established the false business records, they've established the intent to defraud the voters, they've established the intent to conceal this conspiracy between "the national enquirer" and michael cohen and donald trump, they've established all of this. the reason they called her is that it gives voice to this

horrific story that trump was so desperate not to come out, right on the heels of the access hollywood, he found out, the trump campaign found that these two women, karen mcdougal and stormy daniels were about to sell the story. the jury got to hear what that story was and it was terrible. now, they visually can see what the story is and that is why they called her. it was a risk because she's a witness who has baggage. she is subject to this kind of cross-examination. i think the defense took the bait, fell right into the trap and just make themselves look terrible and they bolstered her credibility. >> they went after her on these details about whether or not she ate dinner with donald trump in his hotel room, whether or not she took a car to the hotel. i guess the idea was to poke holes in her recollection but these were such small details that seemed so meaningless compared to the broader narrative she was telling. what did you make of those extended question >> i didn't feel like they actually pointed to any inconsistencies. the way she does what it was i said i met with him at dinner time, he never said we ate anything. i was starving. and, these were shorter interviews and she didn't tell

every detail in the interviews that she had and they didn't point to anything where she had really said something that was contradictory. that was one and then as you said, these are small details and this happened 20 years ago. so, you expect witnesses and duncan, i'm sure you've seen, we've both seen when you meet with witnesses, sometimes recollections fade as to things that are not the key details. on the key details, she has been consistent. so, again, this was really not effective. the other thing is, again, they opened the door by calling her a liar in the opening. so, when you do that, then the jury would want to hear from her about what happened. so, are going through the story, again, that was a defense tactical error. we think that will lead to a mistrial or an appellate issue? not necessarily. these are retained lawyers, these are very good lawyers with strong reputations. i don't think it will get that far. they have definitely been

sitting on their hands and not making very good strategic decisions during this trial. >> i have to talk about not good strategic decisions. today, you know, there has been a lot of back and forth on the gag order. trump's team asked judge juan merchan to amend the gag order to allow the president to respond to stormy daniels. judge juan merchan said no. earlier, a few hours ago, stormy daniels tweeted " real men respond to testimony by being sworn in and taking the stand in court. oh wait. nevermind." duncan. >> there's a problem in the fact that the witnesses are not subject to the gag order. we've been seeing tweets from michael cohen attacking mr. trump as well. i think there is a bit of a disconnect between the fact that he can't say anything and that the witnesses can. that being said, there is a long history here of mr. trump inciting violence against not only the witnesses but the das office, the members of the das office staff, the judge, the family. there is a real background, there's a reason the gag order

exists. i think that, at the end of the day his right not to modify the gag order because there are more witnesses coming. if you left the gag order right now, these witnesses coming up will know that the minute they are of the stand, they will be subject to all these attacks. it cannot stand given the history of these violent attacks on people. i think the judge is right to keep it in place and keep it as it is. >> may be stormy daniels, don't poke the bear on twitter. just a layperson's advice. again, kristy, please don't go anywhere. we need you very badly. we have a lot to get to tonight, including what happened after stormy daniels left the witness stand. we learned a whole lot about trump's financial habits. here's a hint, he really, really, really doesn't like spending money. also, republicans are furious about president biden's latest move in the war on gaza. someone should tell them it is a move republican presidents have made several times before. that is ahead, stay with us. u.

that means tidying up, then spraying my febreze air mist, to leave every room smelling fresh and clean. with that done, it's time to get to work. ♪ la la la la la when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... being me. keep being you... and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there

whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today.

try killing bugs the worry-free way. not the other way. zevo traps use light to attract and trap flying insects with no odor and no mess. they work continuously, so you don't have to. zevo. people-friendly. bug-deadly. >> tech: at safelite, we'll take care of fixing your windshield. but did you know we can take care of your insurance claim? people-friendly.

that means less stress for you. >> woman: thanks. >> tech: my pleasure. have a good one. >> woman: you too. >> tech: schedule today at safelite.com. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ my frequent heartburn had me taking antacid after antacid all day long but with prilosec otc just one pill a day blocks heartburn for a full 24 hours. for one and done heartburn relief, prilosec otc. one pill a day, 24 hours, zero heartburn.

the stormy daniels testimony now complete, the prosecution appears to be into the second phase of its argument, showing that donald trump was aware of and engaged in the hush money payments. they began by calling trump's former executive assistant, who testified to both trump's frugality and his focus on his

personal expenses. here she is testifying about asking trump's assistant to purchase a tiffany picture frame for mr. trump. prosecution, "can you read the response?" it says "these no difference on the pricey side. is it the jt want to spend that much?" $650.00 for the billionaire. does the jt want to spend that much? here is madeleline westerhout testifying about trump, self- proclaimed cleaner and a sitting president attending to the matter of his golf club dues at the winged foot golf course. prosecution what is the total amount of the invoice? madeleline westerhout, $6974. can you read what is written? madeleline westerhout "if winfred will allow me to suspend remember ship for four or eight years, do you want me

to look into it what you want to continue being annual dues and the food minimum?" in the prosecution had madeleline westerhout read trump's handwritten response written in his signature sharpie. prosecution, "what is written in trump's handwritten? " "yes, asap, okay." if president trump's was personally attending to golf club dues and would've been concerned about the cost of a $650.00 picture frame, he likely would not have only been made aware of the multiple $35,000.00 hush money payments that were cut on his behalf, he almost certainly would have been involved in signing every single one of them. back with me now or duncan levin, former assistant u.s. attorney for the eastern district of new york and kristy greenberg, former federal prosecutor and deputy chief of the criminal division for the state of new york. in these examples, the picture

frame, the fact that the president of the united states had time to liaise with his assistant about the golf club dues, are they indicative of the point the prosecution is trying to make, do you think? >> these are relatively small amounts compared to each month writing to and signing a check for $35,000.00. if he cares about $650 and $6000, he certainly was asking questions about why his pain is where $35,000.00 each month. she was an effective witness just for the testimony that he is in the weeds and even when he's at the white house, when the defense has tried to argue his in a transition, he wouldn't have been focused on anything going on relating to the trump organization, she said no, when he would get his checks, i would send them, they would be stapled to an invoice and he would look at those, he would read the materials, he was interested in his information, in his finances. he would sign the checks

generally. she saw him sign the checks. just for that testimony alone, it was effective at making the point that donald trump's, he personally signed a number of these checks and he likely would have asked questions about what these invoices were for. >> the check signing process, duncan, is like a really, it is stunningly convoluted. we have like a graphic of it. the trump organization cuts the check and the trump organization executive assistant send the check to the oval office director. that would be keith schiller's home, not the white house. trump signs the check, the trump organization executive assistant receives the signed check and back invoices and be signed checks go back to the trump organization for accounting. number one, this involves trump. he's part of this convoluted process but also it seems rather secretive, doesn't it? it seems like they are avoiding something. >> there's nothing fishy about sending checks to the residence body man at his home address, nothing fishy about that at all. what was interesting was the

way that this fits together because this testimony they are reading from his book earlier in the trial, how to get rich and think like a billionaire saying this guy negotiated down to the paperclips and he trusted the cfo implicitly. this is a guy she was in the weeds, is famous for not paying his lawyers, they are doing a good job of showing that not only is this person, the defendant very involved in every piece of the finances of his business, this particular thing was done very secretly and getting to him in the oval office, the oval office while he's president of the united states because what they are anticipating is the defense will get up there and say he's the president, is not paying attention to any of this. they have done a really good job through this jigsaw puzzle of different witnesses to show this is somebody who not only was paying attention but it was being done very secretively. >> do you want to suspend your golf club membership for four or eight years? what was he planning?

madeleline westerhout had something in common with hope hicks, who was brought in. both of these women, very close to donald trump and thought of them as daughter like figures, both broke down on the stick and . i wonder what you think in terms of character and what this does to buttress the prosecution's argument that this isn't about anti-trump coming out of the woodwork, these are some of his closest people giving pretty incendiary information. >> she testified that she wrote a book because she thinks that donald trump has been treated unfairly and she wanted to tell his story. that is a pretty significant weakness in terms of everybody that has testified so far, she was the one who really seemed to testifying most strongly in his favor. she talked about the utmost respect that she had and the admiration for donald trump and it was a lot. it was a lot. at the point where she is

breaking down because she left and she felt like there was some betrayal, then on cross examination, there is you know resident trump is forgiven you and she's tearfully saying yes. it was a lot of information. she was clearly very friendly to president trump's. anything she said that was positive for the state should be believed. >> i wonder, we are teeing up the star witness here, michael cohen. given all that we've seen thus far, duncan, how critical is his testimony and will it, i mean, how much does it matter that his character is quite flawed? >> there's no doubt that they have saved him for a later point in the trial so that by the time the jurors hear him, they not only know he is a flawed person, every single person has already testified, keith davidson, stormy daniels lawyer, what a jerk the guy was, he said difficult to deal with. everyone knows he's difficult, everybody knows his baggage. it has all come out. at the time that he is going to testify, there are so many corroborating details in the testimony and they have done this on purpose.

they have saved this for last. he is an aborted witness. he is the conduit to mr. trump. mr. trump is basically the cover-up is a conspiracy between "the national enquirer" and dave pecker, michael cohen and mr. trump and they are trying to place him. michael cohen's testimony will place mr. trump directly in the middle of this conspiracy. so, his testimony is important. it is corroborated by all these details. please save it for last but i think on purpose. >> trump's own words, trump's own people, all of them buttressing the argument that michael cohen will eventually make., for, kristy greenberg, so great to have you guys here. thanks for joining me tonight. coming up, what did donald trump promise oil industry ceos in exchange for $1 billion at a mar-a-lago meeting last month? first, president biden's paws on deliveries of major weaponry to israel has led to howls of protest from across the aisle but no apparent recognition that it is very

much a republican move. i'm going to explain that, coming up next. up next. or zo? don't panic. with etsy we can find the perfect gift, and send her a preview right away. i love this. thanks guys. ooh, that's a relief. it sure is great to know when something's coming. [ surprised scream ] don't panic. gift easy with etsy. >> university of maryland global campus isn't just an innovative state school, it's a school for real life, one that values the successes you've already achieved. that's why at umgc, you can earn up to 90 credits toward the bachelor's for prior learning and life and job experience, why we offer scholarships

and affordable tuition, and why we have online classes and the support you need from your first day to graduation day and beyond. no application fee if you apply by may 31st at umgc.edu. type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone. ♪ ♪ i got the power of 3. i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. i'm under 7. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. i'm lowering my risk. adults lost up to 14 pounds. i lost some weight. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had

medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. living with type 2 diabetes? ask about the power of 3 with ozempic®. listen up, america! meat has problems. and it's going to take us meat eaters to solve them. so, when the world says too much meat is bad and we should eat less of it, we say... no, world! we should eat more! because now we can turn plants into burgers and hotdogs... even meatballs! now, plants can be meat! come on people, let's punch cholesterol in the face! heyo! we're solving the meat problem... with more meat! impossible. meat from plants!

it was the summer of 1981 and this was the headline in the washington post. reagan halts f-16s for israel. quoting from that report, "president reagan indefinitely delayed shipment of u.s. f-16

fighter bombers to israel in an effort to restrain what secretary of state alexander haig called the escalating cycle of violence in the middle east. was quote of the time, israel was in the middle of a military conflict with palestinian dissidents in lebanon. president ronald reagan was pushing israel to agree to a cease-fire. a cease-fire that israeli prime minister did not want to agree to. >> israel's prime ministers said no to the american appeal for a cease-fire in lebanon and israel solved a offensive against palestinians went on. despite appeals from president reagan and secretary of state haig, israel rejected any idea of an immediate spokes cease- fire. israel believes there is a cease-fire, the deliveries will resume. other israeli officials called

the new suspension and unjustified attempt to pressure israel. >> an american president pushing israel for a cease- fire, israel resisting those calls, the president withholding transfers of military equipment to try to get israel to agree, does it sound familiar? president biden has dispatched negotiators to try and broker a cease-fire agreement between benjamin netanyahu and his government and hamas. those talks have stalled and the benjamin netanyahu government is threatening a full invasion of rafah, the area in the south of gaza where most palestinian civilians are sheltering. so, president biden, like president reagan before him, is threatening to withhold weapons shipments to israel. >> civilians have been killed in gaza as a consequence of those bonds and other ways in which they go after population centers. if they go into rafah, i'm not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal

with the cities, to deal with that problem. >> republicans have wasted no time in pouncing on the president's decision. donald trump posted on his social media site that "crooked joe is taking the side of these terrorists." earlier today, republican senators held a press conference to attack the biden administration over its decision. >> president biden's decision to withhold critical ammunition to israel is a total betrayal of our friend and our ally. >> joe biden's de facto position is for a hamas victory over israel. >> i urge the president of the united states to not be the very first president not stand with israel. >> the biden white house has been the most anti-israel administration this nation has ever seen. >> this is unprecedented. >> unprecedented. the biden administration is taking a tougher line with israel. it is new. but, it is far from unprecedented. in fact, it is exactly what ronald reagan did 43 years ago in order to broker an end to hostilities in the region.

so, how does the biden administration work to bring this conflict to an end while navigating the political fallout each decision brings in an election year? i will talk with former obama advisor ben rhodes and former biden press secretary jen psaki about just that, coming up next. next. i love your dress. oh thanks! i splurged a little because liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, right? i've been telling everyone. baby: liberty. did you hear that? ty just said her first word. can you say “mama”? baby: liberty. can you say “auntie”? baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪

with my aunt and my grandma, i've built this connection through sports. it's definitely been passed down, from generation to generation. giving the dna test became a bonding experience with my family. we're very persistent. let's just say that. we are.

—persistent. —and driven. that is definitely a family trait of ours. absolutely, we're definitely endurance athletes. —yeah, let's see. —yeah. —so... —that explains it here. now you know. it's actually a part of your dna. wow! this is great for athletes! voices of people with cidp: cidp disrupts. cidp derails. let's be honest... all: cidp sucks! voices of people with cidp: but living with cidp doesn't have to. when you sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com, you'll find inspiration in real patient stories, helpful tips, reliable information, and more. cidp can be tough. but finding hope just got a little easier. sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com. all: be heard. be hopeful. be you.

the biden administration has repeatedly warned that a full-scale israeli invasion of the gaza city of rafah would have catastrophic human consequences. sequences that could dramatically increase the already staggering death toll. yet, president biden's latest move, threatening to cut off delivery of certain weapons if the israeli government moves forward with a full-scale offensive in rafah, that decision has ignited a political firestorm republicans and some democrats see the move as a betrayal of israel. younger progressive democrats say biden's move is not enough. the president of young democrats of arizona told abc news that "while this is a step in the right direction, there needs to be a much more permanent solution." joining me now to discuss this, two former obama officials, also a former biden official, former deputy national security advisor ben rhodes and my colleague jen psaki, host of

msnbc's insight with jen psaki, and author of, because she needs more credentials, the new book "seymore, lessons from work, the white house, and the world." we will talk about the lessons and maybe you can employ them in the current situation this biden white house finds itself in. this is a very difficult place for the president to be. what do you make of the strategy as it stands right now? >> i certainly think this step in using leverage, which as you just outlined in your last block, is not unprecedented, despite katie britt and others claims. there's moments in history can all look them up. it is significant for the biden administration for a number of reasons. one is clearly the president has a long history of supporting israel. he has had a rocky and tricky relationship with my minister benjamin netanyahu, way back to the time. then will remember this well. as vice president, he went to visit israel and there was an announcement of settlements built while he was in israel. he has had a rocky relationship but he's been very supportive. it is significant because they reached this point we are holding back military

commitment weapons, which israel is reliant on, is a step that i don't think people would have predicted he would have been six month ago. it is also a step that many people would have liked him to do earlier. it is, i think it will be applauded. somebody said it is a step and more needs to happen. you can't just wave a magic wand and get a cease-fire. that would be great. this is a step that hopefully will show the u.s. is willing to use leverage, the president is willing to use it and we will have to see what the impact is. the question i sort of have for ben, i will add it to your list, they already have a lot of weapons. they already have weapons they need. >> that is why we both work here. i was going to ask the same thing. there are still billions of dollars of weaponry in the pipeline for israel here, in terms of meaningful effect of this decision, this isn't going to cut president biden's choice at this present moment but to understand what actually will and can happen in the next several weeks now that the cease-fire talks have fallen

apart. >> well, i think there's two effects. practically, yes, israel has a lot of weapons but they also plan for a pipeline of continued resupply from the united states, of munitions, shells, the 2000 pound bombs they've been dropping. at some point, it would have a military effect. more importantly, though, it sent a message, a substantive message, not just a rhetorical message, of the u.s. opposition to a military operation in rafah, where you have over 1 million palestinians, over 600,000 palestinian children. you have the main border crossings for aid, which are there to avert a famine. the u.s. is signaling to the world and to the israeli people, as well as the american people, that we don't support this and we don't want to be a part of this. that i think to be medically puts a lot of pressure on israel. back in 2014, jen may remember president obama begin to get concerned about an israeli military operation in gaza, he was held a weapons shipment, and that public and substantive

pressure helped bring about a cease-fire, i to be faster than would have otherwise. this doesn't guarantee that israel will not go forward with some type of operation in rafah but it does begin to bring leverage to bear to get this to a cease-fire or to at least get israel to move forward in ways that take into much greater account of the civilian norm that has been created by this war in gaza. >> that isn't a good point. the republican outrage over this decision, jen, embedded in that, is a test sentence that the full-scale invasion of rafah has to go forward. if you look at the naked political reality, more than two thirds of this country believes that there should be a cease-fire. cbs, "the economist," it is like 63, 67, 60% of the country believes a cease-fire should happen. i do think there is a reality that support for this war is changing in this country. >> that is true. and, i think that the substance of what is happening on the

ground, our colleague chris hayes made this point. it is much harder to talk about and debate and it is more important and vital and impactful than even some of the domestic politics in our country. but, i would take him on the republican front, what today exposed in terms of their reaction, and is a reminder to the public, is that even for people who may be frustrated with the president's response or the president's support for israel, the contrast on the other side is that donald trump, the members of his party, republicans, many republicans in congress think that israel should have a free license, that benjamin netanyahu should to do whatever they want here and that they should have any weapon they want, that it should be unchecked, this is the view of not all but many. that is a reminder to people, for those who are frustrated about the presidents pace they are frustrated by his continued support for israel and for prime minister benjamin netanyahu, the other side is much worse. and, much more unfettered and today was kind

of a reminder of that. >> ben, the republican outcry over campus protests has obscured the fact that they apparently actively support a war that has cost 35,000 lives. >> that is a much better articulation of the point i was trying to make. exactly. there outcry and alarm, and there are real issues happening on campuses, not all protests are monolithic. there's also a pessimism that is on the rise in our country. but the of made that an issue that is their predominant issue while simultaneously giving unfettered support for, attested support for any action that the israeli military is doing and that is an important contrast for people to understand, even those who are frustrated. >> ben and jen, it is a franchise already, please stay with me. i have many more questions for you. very important topic. we have one more story to get

to, what donald trump told a gathering of oil industry ceos at mar-a-lago last month will likely shot but not surprise you. trump's billion dollars proposal is next. when you have chronic kidney disease, there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure which can lead to dialysis. ♪ far-xi-ga ♪ ♪♪ farxiga can cause serious side effects,

including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections and low blood sugar. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. when you have chronic kidney disease, it's time to ask your doctor for farxiga. because there are places you want to be. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ far-xi-ga ♪

people who have a lot of money. i know. we are going to give you tax cuts. we are going to pay off our debt. we are going to do all of the things. >> that is leaked audio from a high to get fundraiser in april with former president trump promising to extend tax cuts for the very wealthy if they would support his campaign. now the washington post is reporting trump had a similar message for oil executives at another fundraiser last month. help me get elected and i will kill biden's environmental regulations. more precisely, trump's said, you all are wealthy enough that you should raise $1 billion to return me to the white house and then he vowed to

immediately reverse dozens of president biden's environmental tools and policies and stop new ones from being enacted. thank you for sticking around. does this remind you of the obama administration? i just. >> yes, the similarities are very slight, alex. look, there is so much happening here. it is basic pay to play corruption. our government is for sale, policy is for sale. basically if you are rich you get a tax cut. if you are destroying the environment with fossil fuels, give me $1 billion and we will make those regulations go away. in addition to being corrupt at its own face, it is something he has in common with autocrats around the world. in putin it was like i will create some puppet autocrats by taking care of them when i come to power and then they can finance me in power and we will have a smaller and smaller number of people who control things in this country. that is exactly what is happening in hungary.

with victor orb on that they have such affinity for. if you care about corruption and integrity of the government and a government working for you instead of rich oligarchs, then you can see the danger of donald trump. if you introduce the subject -- the substance to it, as well, alex, he is basically saying he will destroy the planet that our children, three of us have young kids, will grow up in just so these guys will write him a check. you should be mad about the process, mad about the character and mad about the things he is doing shoveling tax cuts to the rich and shredding environmental regulations. >> to put a finer point on that, this is what he was trying to do in ukraine. this is the playbook and he has not learned anything from the first time they tried to impeach him over it. >> that's right. >> go ahead and then i will go to you. >> go ahead. we are all getting to that

point. >> ben, speak. >> ben, speak. >> no, that's it. at some point he is saying all of the quiet things out loud, saying them on camera and look, we have every reason to look around the world and see where this brand of politics goes and it is nowhere good for the people of the country. >> jen, putting on your white house hat, if you are biden this seems like a gift to biden. >> for all of those reasons, yes. >> what do you do with it? how do you tell the story to the american public in a way that is not just about climate change, but about the central integrity of the man on the ticket? >> first of all it is something people very much care about. you can't talk about it like tree hugging. you have to talk about it as an issue that impacts health and impacts national security and the economy in a range of parts

of our country including places like southern florida, to be honest. so you talk about that. i think an event he did in wisconsin would be an interesting type of model, because he went to a place that trump had failed this company, fox con, and did a bit of an edgy event and an edgy speech. his language is getting harder and sharper. this is a clear contrast. it may be harder to break through on domestic issues, but people care about this and you can do a clear contrast event with trump ready to be paying off oil executives and wasting away, getting rid of safe air and safe drinking water for your grandchildren. i'm going to protect it. and do it in a place that people are reminded of because it is present in their lives. it is a historic moment, but it is also something that people in a lot of communities would deeply care about. that is his audience in about six or seven states.

>> have to ask, because you have a new book out and if it is not abundantly clear to people watching the show, you guys have been friends for a long time. it is a beautiful cover. it covers time in the white house and lessons learned. then, when you think about jen psaki and your time with her, what is your favorite memory? >> oh gosh. first of all, this book is great. it is basically her personality and incredible personal story. she has been in the room for so many different things and has learned so many lessons. some of the best stories maybe did not make it into that book. my favorite thing about jen, you know, she was there as a friend if i was ever really in trouble. >> what you were constantly in. >> yeah and i think my favorite thing is the calming effect. my favorite story -- i picture this in my book, actually.

we are idiots, so we all grew playoff beards. jen was this kind of calming force along the whole last stretch of the campaign. she is simultaneously briefing the press, making sure we don't get in the wrong way. because we are people used to being on the campaign plane. everything we went through, jen had this calming demeanor that was focused, laser focused, on what we were trying to get done, but also the people getting it done. i think what people have learned that msnbc is she is the best friend you would want in your living room. that is how we felt when we were serving in government with her and that is why everyone should buy this book. >> thank you, ben. i love you. >> this is what friendship is all about. the show is over, however. we have to leave it there, but not before plugging one more time jen psaki's book. it is called, say more, lessons from