airlines 777 jet crossed a runway as a smaller cargo plane was landing. and then days before that, an american airlines flight at jfk crossed in front of a delta plane trying to take off. and then there is the near miss in austin, where a fedex plane almost landed on top of a southwest flight. i want to bring in our aviation expert david soucie, who has tried to make me feel better about these things. but david, i m starting to think these are not all anomalies. it s going to feel like there s one of these a week that we report on. it seems like they are a lot more often. and that s only because they are more often right now. if you look at the traffic that s going on in boston right now, boston is at 12,000 flights in january 2021. and now it s come up to 29,000 into january 2023. so, it s nearly three times as much traffic. and they re spacing the airplanes a lot closer together to try to get them out faster. this particular one, alisyn, to make you feel more comfortable
my children were taken away from me. back with me is erica pandey, joe pinion, lz granderson, and john avlon. erica pandey, this is awful. she lost two sons to fentanyl. and what is happening, as we all know, is that kids don t know they are taking fentanyl. they are thinking they are taking something else, because these are not labeled as fentanyl. so, her son s, i believe, thought they were taking percocet. and that is, obviously, not as deadly as fentanyl. and there were something like 15,000 pounds of fentanyl last year that customs and border protection seized. what is the answer here? so, let s focus on that stat for a second. 15,000 pounds seized last year that is enough to kill every single person in this country. so, at the scale of this problem is enormous. there have already been 42 thousands pounds seized this year. and this is not migrants who are traveling migrants or asylum seekers who are traveling into this country on foot between ports of entry.
mcconnell released a statement after that press conference d. the president threatening to veto the first bipartisan infrastructure bill of the new congress must come as a shot to the american people who spoke lowly in november. it s interesting to note that the president declined a veto threat last month when a senator was trying to save her job over the exact same bill. once again the president is standing in the way of a shovel-ready jobs projects. even in the midst of the veto pen, here come the republicans trying to convince americans that 42 thousands temporary jobs is jurs the savior of the economy, but they failed to make a comment on how good things were last month when we aheaded over and replaced every job since the great recession. picking and choose been big time.
expressing increasing skepticism about this project. question believe at the end of the days ago he will reject the pipeline. bart, what kind of effect will this have on 9 economy? they re pushing this as a big jobs bill. they re pushing that it will be the catchall for our economy, and unleash unbelievable growth. watch out for those 42 thousands jobs that turn into 35 like magic. the bottom line is we had a stimulus proposal back in 2009 that was severely reduced because of support that wasn t there. as is i then if you asked moss of your viewers whether or not they would rather/a pipeline or improvement for the roads and
and get that done. instead they pick this issue that threatens our environment. senator how can the republicans be so excited about 42 thousands temporary jobs yet hardly say about the addition of 57 months of private sector growth. last month was pretty good over 200,000 jobs. we can t get a word out of them. the jobs as president obama pointed out are cribbs shun jobs. once it s constructed there s very few permanent jobs crated by this pipeline. the oil does not go to the united states. it s basically canadian oil, the dirtiest oil, going into the international marketplace. we have record-low gasoline prices today, so certainly not needed from the point of roof of our economic issues so this bill makes very, very sense. i don t know how you can have an amendment that would dictate that canadian oil would stay to the benefit of american consumers and it couldn t go