he faces a new setback in the senate. a green light for russia. ukraine's new warning that biden's words could help pave the way for an invasion. nato's secretary-general is our guest. and a big win for the january 6th committee. the supreme court decides against trump over hundreds of documents that he wanted to keep secret. now they're headed to congress. we begin this hour with a new concern over the crisis in ukraine after president biden's marathon news conference last night. the white house is now trying to clarify what the president said about what he thinks putin will do, how he thinks the u.s. will respond, and whether nato allies will be unified. >> it's one thing if it's a minor incursion and we end up having to fight about what to do and not do, et cetera. but if they actually do what they're capable of doing with the force amassed on the border, it is going to be a disaster for russia if they further invade ukraine. my guess is he will move in. he has to do something. >> the initial response, shock and dismay from ukraine. the administration now working overtime to make clear the president of the united states was not trying to give a green light for russian president vladimir putin to attack ukraine. but can they unring this bell? more on that in a moment. the president also marked a year in office by repeatedly defending his accomplishments and push back against any suggestion he's fallen short. >> i didn't know overpromise. i have probably outperformed what anybody thought would happen. >> hours later, though, the president suffered another setback when the senate failed to win enough support to change their voting rules that would have made it possible to pass the democrats' voting rights legislation. two members of biden's own party voting with republicans to keep the filibuster in place. cnn's john harwood is live at the white house to start us off at this hour, where we are expecting this hour to hear and see the president. john, after last night, what are you hearing there today? >> reporter: well, first of all, as you just indicated, kate, we're about to hear from the president on one of those things that he did get accomplished last year that he sbenlds to talk about more this year. that's the infrastructure bill. he'll talk about the implementation of that. but largely what we're hearing today is the white house attempting to clarify things the president said that were either confusing on their face or interpreted in ways that the president didn't intend. so on build back better, he said yesterday break up the bill into smaller chunks. they're still looking at only one substantial bill of the scale of $1.7 trillion or thereabouts if they can get 50 votes for that. the breaking it up part refers to things that are getting thrown overboard. they'll try to get those later. in terms of voting rights, the president got some criticism for saying just like trump he's suggesting our elections are illegitimate. he was not, like trump, questioning the counts of votes. he was talking about the structure of elections about legal votes being thrown out. that's why they're seeing the voting rights bills that they were unsuccessful on. but the most important thing is the clarification on ukraine. for obvious reasons, ukraine was concerned, upset about things the president said that were interpreted as giving a green light to the kremlin to have a smaller incursion rather than a large-scale one, and vice president harris was on all the morning shows this morning to try to say that's not the case. >> we will interpret any violation of ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity by russia and vladimir putin as an aggressive action and it will be met with costs, severe and certain. we are very clear and we've been very clear with putin that any aggressive action taken by russia will mean a cost, a severe cost. that the president has been very clear and we as the united states are very clear. if putin takes aggressive action, we are prepared to levy serious and severe costs, period. >> reporter: the things the president said yesterday in public were things that diplomats and national security officials have been saying in private about the sort of sliding scale of reactions depending on whether there's a cyberattack versus an incursion of russian troops across ukrainian territory. the question is whether that changes the course of events. the president's remarks did not make clear exactly what he was talking about, and the white house is cleaning that up today. >> thank you, john. that is the view from washington. let's get the latest as the view from the region as ukrainian leaders are not mincing words saying that there is no such thing as a minor incursion. nic robertson is live in moscow with the very latest. the reaction was swift and clear. what are leaders saying there? >> reporter: well, in russia, the kremlin i think is really trying to make up its mind and understand what president biden was meaning. there was some optimism from the kremlin spokesman, dmitry p peskov, saying there were some things in what president biden had said that gave them some small sense of optimism. but, you know, still a lot of questions remain, and that clear expectation and demand there is a written response to russia's demands, their security demands or proposals as they call them, that there must be this written response from the united states. but the kremlin spokesman also holding out the possibility of more interpresidential diplomacy saying that president putin would be ready to have a conversation with president biden, no indication of when, but that's what we're hearing again today as the kremlin tries to make up its mind. but in ukraine, a completely different picture. the president there, volodymyr zelensky, very clear in a tweet, and i'll read it for you, because he is clearly upset with what he heard last night, saying we want to remind the great powers that there are no such thing as minor incursions and small nations, just as there are no minor casualties and little grief for the loss of loved ones. i say this as the president of a great power. the foreign minister in ukraine doubled down on it saying there's no such thing as half aggression. >> translator: one can't be half invaded or half aggressive. aggression is either there or not. it's concrete fact that the aggression of the russian federation against the state of ukraine has been going on since 2014. >> reporter: ukrainians want to see the message from the united states and the europeans zipped up, tied up, absolutely watertight. we heard this from the european commission president today saying, again, as he said before, as so many european leaders have said, that if russia acts with aggression in ukraine again, there will be consequences, financial and economic, she said. >> so important to hear that. nic, thank you so much for that. joining me now is another key voice in this crisis and any path to return to stability there, nato secretary-general jen jens. you have a distinction in the response to a minor incursion as he described it by russia and ukraine and a full-scale invasion. what was your reaction to hearing that? >> well, this clearly is all nato allies have made it clear several times that we will react if russia once again conducts aggressive actions against ukraine. we have made clear we are ready to step up our support. allies are stepping up support to ukraine. we are ready to impose sanctions. and of course we are also considering to increase deployments of nato troops in the eastern part of the alliance. at the same time, we also invited russia for a series of meetings, trying to find a political solution. >> do you know what -- what is your view of a minor incursion? do you know what president biden was speaking about when he talked about a minor incursion? >> there are many different types, a wide range of aggressive actions ranging from cyberattacks, sabotage, efforts to try to undermine the ukrainian government, destabilize the ukraine society to a full-fledged military intervention. all of this are examples of aggressive actions, and nato allies are ready to respond. we have made it very clear that aggressive actions against ukraine will come at a high price. allies support ukraine and that will increase the cost for russia. allies training and equipment, and of course that will increase the cost of russia for any kind of action against ukraine. we helped them with cyber defenses and allies making sure that they are ready to impose political, economic sanctions. >> the reaction as we know from the region, especially from ukraine, was swift and they reacted with dismay. would you agree with the statement that the president's words, how he said it last night, did not help with the crisis as it is currently? >> well, the united states has as nato ally, made it clear repeatedly in different statements, nato meetings we heard today from washington that we stand united. allies are united. we have proven not only in words but also in deeds that we are united in responding to russia's aggressive actions against ukraine. since 2014, there have been serious sanctions. we have provided significant support to ukraine. the ukrainian armed forces are much better trained, equipped, and stronger now than in 2014 than the first time. and we are going to increase our presence in the eastern part of the alliance. since 2014, we have deployed groups for the first time and we are considering to do more of that to send a clear message to russia. >> sorry, secretary-general. i want to ask you about unity amongst nato alliances. but i need to drill down on this point because ukrainian officials, the foreign minister even told "the wall street journal" today that the comments that the president made, president biden made last night, could serve as an invitation for putin to attack. no matter what biden intended to say, do you think a green light is what has effectively been offered or put on the table here for putin? >> not at all because the united states has been very clear all along period of time ever since this started, the united states has said they will get the nato allies that we will not in any way accept further use of military force against ukraine. and the united states has stepped up support for ukraine with equipment, with training, as other allies do. and the united states is leading the efforts to coordinate all nato allies in our response to aggressive actions from russia against ukraine. so what we see every day at nato is the united states playing a lead role and sending a clear message to russia. and i thank the united states for being so important in coordinating the joint efforts, united efforts of nato allies. >> i want to play for you what president biden said last night about the nato alliance and a possible collective response to russia. listen to this, please. >> so i've got to make sure everybody is on the same page as we move along. i think we will, if there's something that is -- where there's russian forces crossing the border, killing ukrainian fighters, et cetera, i think that changes everything. but it depends on what he does and to what extent to get total unity on the nato front. >> biden said in another point, secretary-general, that nato nations are not all on the same page here. is that true? >> we are 30 different nations from both sides of the atlantic, and of course we need to discuss so we need to sit down and coordinate and consult. but the strength is that we are always able to come to the same conclusions and agree and to decide and implement decisions to get things done after extensive consultations, also in response to russia's aggressive actions gen ukraine. we have done so since 2014. their biggest reinforcements are collective defense of nato, especially the eastern part of the alliance with more nato there and support ukraine. this is something we have proven. therefore, i'm absolutely certain that if we see further russian aggression there will be further reactions from nato allies as we have stated and as we are preparing for and closely consulting and coordinating every day here at the nato. but this is two approaches. it's about strength sending clear message that costs of any further incursion from russia, but also an invitation to dialogue, so therefore this week i invited russia to sit down in a meeting, and actually check whether they are serious about seeking a political solution. >> and finally on that, i wanted to ask you, if russia interprets, if vladimir putin interprets what came from the president last night, despite clarifications this morning, if they interpret that as some kind of weakness in the resolve to respond to aggression against ukraine, if they see that as a green light even though you say that you do not think that is the effect, if they see it as that, what is your message to putin from the nato alliance today? >> that the 30 allies are united. they have a very clear message and that is that if russia further invades ukraine, further uses military aggressive means against ukraine, there will be a high price. nato allies will make sure that that happens. as we have done in the past and as we will do in the future. we are training, helping ukraine with equipment, training their forces so they can assist in their self-defense. and we are as we speak considering to deploy more nato troops in the eastern part. if russia wants less nato in the eastern part of our alliance, their aggressive actions are leading to the exact opposite, more nato in the eastern part. >> secretary-general, thank you for coming on. >> thank you so much. coming up for us still this hour, the supreme court delivered a major blow to donald trump, rejecting the former president's fight to keep white house records secret from the committee investigating the january 6th insurrection. what is the committee now going to get? a live report is next. ure. new gold bond pure moisture lotion. 24-hour hydration. no parabens, dyes, or fragrances. gold bond. champion your skin. this is the sound of nature breathing. and this is the sound of better breathing. fasenra is a different kind of asthma medication. it's not a steroid or inhaler. fasenra is an add-on treatment for asthma driven by eosinophils. it's one maintenance dose every 8 weeks. it helps prevent asthma attacks, improve breathing, and lower use of oral steroids. nearly 7 out of 10 adults with asthma may have elevated eosinophils. fasenra is designed to target and remove them. fasenra is not a rescue medication or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. this is the sound of fasenra. ask your doctor about fasenra. looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? once-weekly ozempic® can help. ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ♪ oh, oh, oh ♪ ozempic® is proven to lower a1c. most people who took ozempic® reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. and you may lose weight. adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. in adults also with known heart disease, ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. ozempic® helped me get back in my type 2 diabetes zone. 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. 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. looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription. (vo) this year, t-mobile for business is here to help you hit the ground running. when you switch to t-mobile and bring your own device, we'll pay off your phone up to $800. you can keep your phone. keep your number. and get your employees connected on the largest and fastest 5g network. plus, we give you $200 in facebook ads on us! so you can reach more customers, create more opportunities, and make this the best year for your business yet. visit your local t-mobile store today. ♪[music]♪ at aetna® we're shifting medicare coverage into high gear with benefits you may be eligible for when you turn 65. benefits that may include a $0 monthly plan premium. telehealth emergency coverage while you travel an over-the-counter allowance plus dental, vision, and hearing because the right medicare plan should help you feel...yeah, like that. aetna medicare advantage plans call today to learn more. announcer: tired of pain radiating down your leg and lower back? get relief finally, with magnilife® leg and back pain relief. and get living. available at your local retailer. the final decision from the supreme court last night, meaning hundreds of documents now from call logs to handwritten memos will now be transferred to congress as part of the committee's investigation. cnn's evan perez is live with us now with more details on this. evan, what's the impact now of this ruling? >> it's far reaching, beyond just the documents. just a few minutes ago in federal court, a judge cited the supreme court's ruling to say that this shows that the select committee overseeing this investigation has a legitimate purpose, that it does have a legitimate legislative purpose, which is one of the arguments that the former president and some of his allies have been making for what they say is -- you know, they shouldn't be turning over documents or the committee does not have any right to these documents. for, former president trump, however, we're talk about 6,700 pagess of documents that claims should be protected under his claim of exec privilege and they range from call loggings, things that showed what was happening inside the west wing, inside the white house, in those key weeks and days around january 6th, including memos, handwritten notes written by mark meadows and other white house staff, white house lawyers who were seeing some of the activity that the former president was making, was involved in in trying to overturn the election results. obviously, for the committee, this is a very important step because they have a limited amount of time and they're trying to put together a story, a narrative of what was happening, what was the president thinking about in those key times. kate? >> absolutely. thanks for laying it out. nick ackerman served apz an assistant special prosecutor during walterg watergate. you cal this a significant decision for the rule of law. tell me why. >> i think because if you took it from donald trump's standpoint, he truly believes the three people he appointed to the supreme court have to be loyal to him, that they owe him. he looks at it as a quid pro quo type of arrangement he's used to in business. the fact of the matter is these supreme court justices stick to the rule of law and in this particular case what they did is they relied on the 1974 decision of u.s. v. nixon where nixon tried to do the same thing and conceal his office tapes from the prosecutors based on executive privilege. what the court did was essentially adopt the same decision that was given on nixon. i mean, this was history repeating itself. back in the nixon time, everybody was concerned that, well, he appointed a number of justices to the supreme court and therefore the supreme court was going to go in nixon's way. that was also an 8-0 decision. this decision was 8-1. so i think both decisions are a resounding plus for the rule of law in this country, and it shows how important it is to have an independent judiciary. >> for sure. so the court did leave still unresolved the question about an ex-president's ability to claim executive privilege. i want to read part of this from the order, because the court of appeals concluded that president trump's claims would have failed even if he were the incumbent, his status as a former president necessarily made no difference to the court's decision. what does this mean, then, nick, for all the other people who were leaning on executive privilege to keep them from having to cooperate with the committee? >> well, i think it leaves them nowhere. there's no executive privilege they can assert here. because executive privilege as the court said in the nixon case, you can't use it for conversations in furtherance of criminal activity. with nixon, it was in furtherance of the conspiracy to obstruct the watergate chase. here it's relating to basically an insurrection that was perpetrated on the congress. and there's no way under any circumstance that any court is ever going to say that those conversations are legitimate, executive privilege covered conversations. the exec privilege relates to legitimate government business that the president is engaged in, most notably military actions, national security, and the like.engaged in, most notab military actions, national security, and the like. this is certainly why they're saying it doesn't make any difference whether trump is a sitting president or not. these conversations are not covered by executive privilege. >> you've also said, nick, that between this supreme court decision on trump's records and the sedition indictment last week of the oath keepers, that trump is inching closer to facing a major criminal indictment. what do you see that suggests that? >> well, i think the big issue here is if he's going to be indicted on tim crimes the oath keepers or for obstructing congress in any way, the key element here is showing that he acted with a corrupt motive. and the courts define that as being an improper purpose. right now, the state of the evidence is that trump got up at that rally and basically told his supporters to go up there and fight. during his second impeachment trial, he basically said, look, i was just exercising my free speech, i didn't tell them to go commit violence or perpetrate violence on anybody. so the real question here is now that they've got all of these white house documents, what evidence is going to be in here that's going to relate to his knowledge about the violence, whether or not he encouraged the violence, knew that he was encouraging the violence. this all goes to his state of mind. and so whether it comes up in these tape recordings that were done where he was doing a video to tell supporters to go home, where there were several different takes on this because his staff wouldn't allow those to be issued, or whether it's in the notes or memoranda or emails, this really is going to answer the question, can they make a criminal case on donald trump for obstructing congress, which is an extremely serious federal felony carrying imprisonment of 20 years. >> a lot to come before then. thank you so much, nick. appreciate it. thank you. coming up for us, one year in, the president insists that he has outperformed expectations. but he suffered another defeat in the senate last night, and now the white house is shifting focus. that's ahead. san francisco was a beacon of hope for my family to reach the middle class, and i've been helping others ever since. when the pandemic hit bilal was right there, helping restaurant workers make ends meet. in the obama administration, bilal worked tirelessly on innovative policies. the status quo isn't working. bilal is the best shot we have for meaningful change. i'm bilal mahmood, and i know our city can become a beacon of hope once again. at this hour on capitol hill, democrats are trying to figure out where they go from here after a big blow to their strategy last night in the senate. democrats tried and failed to change the filibuster rules to help them pass voting rights legislation without any republican support. it didn't work. two democrats joined republicans to block that effort. lauren fox joins me with more. really, the question is what's next. what are you hearing about that? >> reporter: there's palpable frustration with kyrsten sinema and joe manchin given that they were not willing to change senate rules to push forward with the voting rights legislation that was before the u.s. senate last night, despite the fact they do insist they support the voting rights legislation. they did not think it was worth breaking the filibuster over. now, that is where the democrats stand this morning. you heard last night marie sanders, an independent from vermont, once again doubling down that he may support a primary challenge against both manchin and sinema. the question now, do they pivot back to build back better? that is the legislation, of course, that before christmas manchin said that he was not going to get to yes on. you heard the president yesterday saying maybe there was a possibility he could break it into smaller pieces. here's what house speaker nancy pelosi said this morning about that push. >> what the president calls chungs i would hope would be a major bill going forward, maybe more limited, but it is still significant. >> reporter: and you hear there that she wants this to be a big, bold piece of legislation just like the house passed. so big question mark whether or not moving forward with build back better in smaller pieces is really going to be possible. kate? >> lauren, thank you so much for that. we have breaking news. we head back over to the white house because president biden is meeting with his infrastructure task force right now. but just moments ago at the top of that meeting he started off by talking about russia and ukraine. let's listen in together. >> let me start with russia and ukraine. i've been absolutely clear with president putin. he has no misunderstanding that any assembled russian units move across the ukrainian border, that is an invasion and will be met with severe and coordinated economic response as i've discussed in detail with our allies as well as laid out very clearly to putin. there is no doubt, let there be no doubt at all that if putin makes this choice, russia will pay a heavy price. that's not the only scenario we need to be prepared for. russia has a long history of using measures other than overt military action to carry out aggression, and paramilitary tactics, so-called gray zone attacks and actions by russian soldiers not wearing russian uniforms. remember the little green men? they were dealing with those who were russian sympathizers and said nobody in there. that includes little green men in uniform as well as cyberattacks. we have to be ready to respond to these as well in a decisive, united way with a range of tools at our disposal. the ukrainian foreign minister said this morning he's confident of our support and resolve and he has a right to be. now let me turn to the topic of the day. by enacting the bipartisan infrastructure law, we demonstrated that democrats and republicans can actually work together to get something done. by implementing it efficiently and effectively, we're going to demonstrate that government can also work for people efficiently and effectively. in just two months, investments are under way to modernize our roads, our bridges, our ports, our airports, our rail, delivering high-speed internet and clean water, an expajded, modernized, as i said, rail as well as strengthening the energy grid, and the list goes on. up until now, our nation has never fully made this kind of investment. in part the reason why we've had the whole problem with regard to supply chains. but when we start moving stuff faster, when bridges don't have weight restrictions, when there's less traffic on our roads because there are more roads to travel on and people aren't backed up bumper to bumper and more capacity in our rails, that's how we resolve the supply chain problem and get goods to people and get them to them quicker and cheaper. i know you've been all over the country, mr. mayor, former mayor and my buddy, meeting with mayors and governors, county commissioners, tribal leaders, and like i did with the recovery act, which was a similar kind of operation. we need to stay on top of it. you remember has the a mayor. detail matters. execution matters. looking forward to an update on where we are now and where we're going from here. thank you very much. i'm going to turn it over to the guy who i asked to -- >> all right. the president very clear ly trying to clear up his remarks from last night that have created reaction here in the united states and around the world over the crisis with russia and ukraine. let me bring back in cnn's john harwood, who's live at the white house still for us. he says i've been absolutely clear. but he had a reason clearly to need to clarify this morning, john. >> reporter: he was not clear at the news conference yesterday, and that's what he was trying to fix today. he said he'd been clear to vladimir putin but in terms of what he said to the american public, to the global community, to the ukrainians in particular, he seemed to suggest yesterday that there was a gradation of a minor incursion or invasion if you want to use that word and a major one. what he just said there was no. any crossing of the border by russian forces would be an invasion that would be met with the severe consequences that he's talked about. he also said that russia has a history of using other means, cyber, other things that are different from troops across the border, and those would also be met with a response but a different response. that's what he meant to say yesterday, did not say, caused confusion, caused consternation in kyiv, and that's why he was clarifying it just now. >> it also seems -- i don't know if you had a chance to listen to my conversation with the nato secretary-general at the top of the hour, john, but it seems the secretary-general is in much the same place. he doesn't even seem to be seeking clarification from the biden administration. he was more saying actions speak louder than words, and that's what he takes in terms of he knows where biden's position is on this and he does not see what he said last night as a green light for russia. >> reporter: that's right, kate. what biden said publicly yesterday he said privately, not artfully, but privately, national security officials and diplomats have been saying there would be a sliding scale of a response. but the president said it out loud in ways that obscured rather than made clear what he was talking about. putin probably knows -- knew what he was talk about. but many others did not, and there's why he needed to speak today. >> very interesting. let's see what the rest of the day brings, john. great to see you. thank you so much. coming up for us, the world heart federation with new guidance on alcohol and how much of an impact it may have on your health, how much is safe to drink. you'll want to see this ahead. sorry, one sec. doug blows a whistle. [a vulture squawks.] oh boy. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty♪ ♪ three times the electorlytes and half the sugar. pedialyte powder pks. feel bettefast. to see my ancestors' photos was just breathtaking. wow, look at all those! what'd you find? lorraine banks, look, county of macomb, michigan? oh my goodness... this whole journey has been such a huge gift for our family. at university of phoenix, we have scholarships for everyone hard at work, no matter where you work. get up to a $3,000 scholarship, starting with your first course. explore your opportunities at phoenix.edu (vo) for me, one of the best things about life is that we keep moving forward. we discover exciting new technologies. redefine who we are and how we want to lead our lives. basically, choose what we want our future to look like. so what's yours going to be? now this morning, there is no safe level of alcohol consumption. that is a stark declaration from the world heart federation on just how much alcohol is safe to drink. the policy brief, this new policy brief, states that when it comes to your heart, any amount of alcohol can lead to a loss of healthy life, not just heavy drinking, which is a very different message as you can probably guess than we most often here, which is moderation is key, and some studies suggesting a glass of red wine a day is beneficial. a lot of questions on this one. joining me is cnn medical analyst and cardiologist dr. jonathan rinhinehart. what do you make of this report from the foundation? >> well, i think most cardiologists always believe that alcohol is not good for you. in the past, there's been some suggestion that small amounts of alcohol can help to raise the beneficial cholesterol, which is the hdl, but the studies that have tried to link, you know, moderate alcohol consumption with improved outcomes are observation until and all limited by all kinds of confounding factors. what we know for certain is that alcohol is a cardio toxin. it's actually poison to the heart muscle. large amounts of alcohol can cause cardiomyopathy, a weakness of the heart. binge drinking can cause arrhythmias like iatrial fibrillation. from a global health perspective we know that alcohol causes probably somewhere between 2 million and 3 million cases of cancer in the world every year in. head and neck cancer, stomach cancer. there's never within a, quote, safe dose of alcohol. when my patients ask me about how much, you know, they should drink, i remind them that a glass of wine would make them feel better, but may not make them live longer. >> when i look at the guidance, though, from the american heart association, leading heart health group in the united states, the message there is moderation is key, though. is this new guidance in conflict with that? >> it's difficult to tell people not to do something ever. so when i talk to patients about, for instance, their diet, i talk act low fat, heart-healthy diet, but i never tell somebody they can never again have a hamburger, because it's hard to live like that. you want to change behaviors and move them in different directions, but for the same reason, if people enjoy a glass of wine, i don't tell them they can't drink. i tell them they need to drink in moderate amounts. if somebody has a couple of glasses of wine per week, it's hard to detect a deleterious health issue with that. the problem is most people drink more than that and underrepresent the amount they drink. underestimate the amount that they drink. if people are drinking wine and spirits every single day, people need to take a look at that and say how much do they really need to do that and can they modify it because there are really no physiologic effects for any amount of alcohol and the more you drink, the more you increase your risk of heart problems and as i said cancers, and these are discussions that people should have with their doctor. >> i think it's kind of -- you talk about modify. i think that this is an important to modify the way we talk about alcohol consumption and conversations that really should be happening. great to see you, doctor. thank you. >> thanks for having me. >> really appreciate it. coming up next for us, two arrest in the uk as part of the investigation into the texas synagogue hostage standoff. the very latest on that investigation is next. new this morning. two men have been arrested now in the uk as part of the investigation into the texas synagogue hostage standoff. the man, killed by the fine after taking four people hostage, had arrived from the uk just step days prior. cnn's scott mclean joins me now from london with more on this. scott, what more do you know now about these two men arrested. >> reporter: hey, kate. still very little at this point. police, it seems, are releasing very little information. we know that one of the men was picked up in birmingham a the other one was picked up in manchester. of course, this is all related to the synagogue hostage-taking. in that case the hostage-taker was malik faisal ecram, 45 years old, known to the british security services. they arrested him back in 2020. relatively brief though and once they figured he was no longer a threat they closed the investigation and moved on. clearly there was more to the story back thench it's difficult to know at this point what exactly to make of the arrests and there's a couple of reasons of that. first, they are not the first arrests made in this case. there were two teens arrested in this country in the aftermath of this. they were released though on tuesday without charges. you might also remember there was another terror attack, this one in liverpool, when a bomb detonated outside of a hospital by a man wearing a suicide vest in a taxi. in that case there were three men who were arrested. they were questioned and when police were satisfied that they weren't involved they were released as well and until we know the relation to the hostage-taker, until we know what communications they might have had with them, whether it was in the united states, it's real hard to know. there's still a lot of detail yet to be filled in here. surely, us and uk investigators are combing through communication records, travel data, that type of thing to find out whether or not this was a lone wolf attack or whether there may have been others involved. of course, his family said that he had mental health issues. he visited a mosque some ten days before and seemed to be acting quite erratically, so on the surface this seems like a pretty unsophisticated attack, but, again, these arrests raise questions about whether others were involved. kate? >> absolutely. much more to learn as that investigation continues on both sides in the uk and in the united states right now. it's good to sigh, scott. thank you very much for that. thank you all so much for joining us at this hour. i'm kate balduan. "inside politics" with john king begins after this break. 's like to get your money right. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ move to a sofi personal loan. earn $10 just for viewing your rate — and get your money right. ♪ ready to turn your dreams into plans and your actions into achievements? explore over 75 programs and four-week classes at national university. your future starts today at nu.edu. re-entering data that employees could enter themselves? that's why i get up in the morning! i have a secret method for remembering all my hr passwords. my boss doesn't remember approving my time off. let's just... find that email. the old way of doing business slows everyone down. with paycom, employees enter and manage their own hr data in one easy-to-use software. visit paycom.com for a free demo. hello, everybody. welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king in washington. thank you for sharing your day with us. the supreme court says no again to the former president. the january 6th committee gets access now to white house notes and records detailing what donald trump did and what he refused to do as his supporters stormed the capitol. plus, president biden closes a consequential first year and says going smaller is the path to success in year two, and just moments ago the president cleans up a mess of his own