world in all the alliances that various countries were in all over the world. ultimately the germans started sinking our ships in the atlantic even though we technically weren't part of the war yet. other countries in our hemisphere started getting dragged into it. by the spring of 1917, not even six months after wilson had been reelected on that slogan, he kept us out of war. six months after that election, the u.s. congress, in fact, voted to declare war. and we jumped in. but the political wrangling over that decision in our country was really something back in 1917. and it turns out that political wrangling back then in 1917 over the decision to turn america around and abandon our previous isolationist pose and get ourselves involved in world war i, all the political wrangling around that hard decision in 1917 left us a little parting gift that we're still enjoying today. a little parting gift, in fact, that is still totally screwing us up today. because one of the many objections that people had at the time to us entering world war i was cost. it was going to be expensive. we didn't have the means to pay for it at the time. and then like some finite expenditure on something we needed to build here at home in the u.s. entering that giant mega war in europe that was already years old, it just seemed like it would be a bottomless expenditure that we would never be able to control. and there is logic to that. war does have a way of doing that fiscally. but while the u.s. was turning itself around and getting ready to enter the war, anyway, while arguably we are being sort of dragged into that war, part of the way they tried to win over people who had objected to us joining the war on cost grounds, people who are worried about the expense of it all. part of the way they decided to placate those critics was to create a new thing in u.s. law. a new limit in the law on what our country could spend on anything. we could spend up to x amount, but if for any reason the government wanted to spend any more than that, the congress would have to affirmatively regroup, write a piece of legislation and pass a new limit on what we could spend. that process was created in 1917 to placate the isolationists who didn't want us to enter world war i. that is the very specific history of how we got what we call the debt ceiling. we got it in 1917, the same year we did finally declare war on germany. and, you know, we eventually got over the whole gigantic, endless, apocalyptic war with germany thing, it took two tries, but we didn't get over the debt ceiling gimmick that we used to placate people who object to the first one of those wars. we kept that for some reason for more than a hundred years we have kept that. and it doesn't function at all, really at all, as a barrier to our government spending money, obviously. it doesn't even keep us from spending rapaciously on wars. it gives congress something to do that they have to do every so often because the country economy will fling itself into a debt because nobody thought to stop this stupid thing we turned on in 1917 because we need to do placate people who felt bad that we changed our minds over entering that war. and over the 100 plus years that we have been saddled with this thing, it has loomed larger and small, depending on the decades, but just in 1916, congress had to vote to raise the stupid debt ceiling dozens of times, nearly a hundred times, under presidents of both parties. again, it's work that you have to do for no benefit. you get nothing positive for doing it. but if you don't do it, fiery financial disaster on a national, and indeed, international scale. it's like if you have a backyard at your house or your apartment and you decided you were going to keep a piranha-filled lagoon right next to the swingset. i mean, yes, theoretically, having the piranha-filled lagoon might make your kids more careful on the swingset, really good balance, so they don't fall in and get eaten by the piranhas. theoretically, there's some benefit to it, but honest, it's all downside. anything could happen. why would you do that? they might fall in. why would you set a trap like that in your yard? why would you set a trap like this in american law? thanks to this trap, if congress fails at any time for any reason to do this dumb procedural thing they don't want to do for which they get no credit or no benefit, at any reason at any time the congress fails to do that, the country gets it. default on our debt, downgrade our credit rating. potentially trillions of dollars in extra expenses for our country for no reason. why would you put a piranha-filled trap like this in our law? i mean, i do know when they first visited in 1917, when woodrow wilson was doing it. we have kept it ever since. there it is. this time four years ago in 2017, donald trump was in his first year as president of the united states, crazy as that still seems, right? in 2016 he had been elected president. republicans in that same election also secured majority to both the house and senate, and that trifecta of republican control set all kinds of things in motion, some of which we're not recovered from yet. one problem they did not have that first year donald trump was president, they didn't have a problem over raising the stupid debt ceiling. this time four years ago, september 2017, democrats are out of power in the white house. they're in the minority in both houses of congress, but nevertheless, september 2017 democrats agreed. they voted to pass a spending bill that kept the government from shutting down, keeps the lights on, and in that bill they agreed to raise the debt ceiling. september 2017 passed both the house and senate by overwhelming margins. not a single democrat voted no in the senate. not a single democrat voted no in the house, even though there was a republican-controlled congress and a republican president, democrats voted unanimously to not throw the country into the proverbial piranha pit. to not hit the debt ceiling on purpose. yes, the other party's in charge, but let's not raise our bills and put our world into more debt for no reason. it doesn't matter if republicans are in charge. nobody wants that for our country. we should vote unanimously that does not happen. that was four years ago, september 2017. now it is september 2021 and it's the mirror image in terms of partisan control in washingtons right? now we have democratic president joe biden who is in his first year as president. in the 2020 elections last year, democrats secured narrow majorities in both the house and the senate. and just like september 2017, once again, it is time to do that thing that we have been doing since world war i. once again it is time to take that dumb vote to, a, keep the government funded so avoid a government shutdown, and also raise the debt ceiling in order to placate the ghosts of the austria-hungarian empire. if we don't do it, real problems, high prices, self-inflicted wound. it is time to do that again. and this time it's democrats in control. republicans say they won't do it. they will not vote to keep the lights on. they will not vote to avoid a government shutdown, and they will not vote to raise the debt ceiling. in fact, they say they will filibuster the debt ceiling vote, which means that democrats can't even raise the debt ceiling with just a majority vote. it will mean that democrats can't raise the debt ceiling unless they get ten republican senators to side with them, and republican senate leader mitch mcconnell says no republicans are going to do that. when trump and the republicans were in charge four years ago, democrats did this unanimously for the country. now that biden and the democrats are in charge, republicans stand unanimously against it. so apparently we're going to take a deliberate leap into the piranha pool unless something changes soon. tonight the house just in the last half hour has voted for legislation to keep the lights on to avoid a government shutdown, and for our country to stay out of the proverbial piranha pool. the house has voted to raise the debt ceiling. democratic house speaker nancy pelosi knows how to drive the bus here, so there's not much suspense as to whether the white house would get this done. that said, zero republicans voted with the democrats to do this. it was a pure party line vote. it has now passed the house, again, just within the last few minutes, so this means it goes to the senate. and in the senate, republicans say they won't do it. they say, listen, if democrats are in control, then the u.s. should default on our debt, crash our credit rating because something, something, neener, neener, we don't like you. we're not going to allow you to do it. it doesn't matter that the democrats voted unanimously to do that when the republicans were in control. when democrats are in control, republicans say no, just screw it. as i mentioned, passing that ceiling legislation doesn't actually get you anything. it doesn't do anything for the country except avoid a self-inflicted disaster. but while the senate is going to have to try to get through this murder-suicide plan from the republicans, democrats are simultaneously also right now trying to definitely pass legislation that has a big upside as far as they're concerned. they're trying to pass legislation that encompasses most of president biden's agenda for his first term. something they will also have to do without republicans and something the democrats will have to agree to pull together on in order to get it done. so we've got to deal with stopping the government shutdown, we've got to deal with this debt ceiling thing, and nobody knows how they're going to do that, but there's also this positive legislative agenda that the democrats will have to get done and it is an agenda for his whole term. it's lies now. it's going to happen now or it's not going to happen. a handful of conservative democrats in the house, a couple contrarian democrats in the senate have gotten attention for weeks, for months, in their attempt to block president biden, to block every democratic priority themselves if they don't get what they personally want as conservative democrats but look to the other side, too. this was the scene today -- look at this shot -- this was the scene today when the leader of the progressive caucus came out of a 90-minute meeting with house speaker nancy pelosi. you have to take my word for it that camilla jayapal is in there. you can't see her because she's trying to hear what reporters are saying to her about what went on in that meeting. that press corps there is actually a healthy development in terms of the coverage here, because pramila jayapal doesn't oppose what the democratic president and the democratic party are trying to do here. pramila jayapal represents closer to the 200 democrats in the congress. 95 members are the ones which jayapal leads. and no, the progressives do not want to purposely, you know, jump into the pool of piranhas and hurt the country for no reason. that's what the republicans are doing. the progressives have the opposite plan. today, today, are voting to keep the government open and to raise the debt ceiling so we don't hit those crises, but they're also working on this positive legislative agenda in a very muscular way. today they are flexing their muscles as progressives, counting their members of whom there are many. taking a stand today and tonight that they want to go big. they want the president's bill to pass in its entirety, this $3.5 trillion bill that encompasses much of the agenda for the whole first term. they do not want to pass this bipartisan bill. the progressives are insisting that nobody is going to get anything until the infrastructure bill, the big one, moves as well. pramila jayapal in response to questions that you just saw, she said they're not bluffing? >> are these packages still coupled or have they been decoupled? >> no. she is very clear that she doesn't have the votes to pass the infrastructure bill without reconciliation. >> the progressives were bluffing about tanking the bill. what do you say to them? >> try us. i got more than half the caucus who feels very strongly we're going to deliver the entirety of the agenda to the president. >> try us. some people say you're bluffing by your strategy here. try us. pramila jayapal leads the democratic caucus. democrats are hitting crunch time. they are trying not to hit the debt ceiling. thanks, republicans. trying to avoid a government shutdown. thanks, republicans. they're trying also to pass the legislation that contains the bulk of president biden's agenda. it is jayapal's progressive caucus that has the numbers here. they are using them aggressively to try to get this done. what are the prospects? joining us now is congresswoman pramila jayapal. she's chair of the progressive caucus, she's kind enough to join us tonight even though it is her birthday. happy birthday, congresswoman, thank you for joining us. >> i can't think of a better way to spend my birthday than with you. >> i can think of tons of better ways to spend your birthday than being on cable tv with or without me, so it makes it all the more great that you are here, especially since you're in the middle of high stakes negotiations and having high stakes meetings, and really in the middle of crunch time now. tell me in your own words where you think this process is right now and how close the democrats are to a decision. >> yeah. and, rachel, you characterized it perfectly. i just want to take it back a minute to when president biden got elected and before that, what he campaigned on. it was on universal child care, paid leave, making sure we repaired housing, making sure we addressed climate change, expanding health care. addressing immigration, these are all things that he campaigned on. and when he came president, this was the agenda that he put forward, and it was called the build back better agenda. we progressives three and a half months ago just said, let's pass the whole thing together, jobs, infrastructure and all of these other pieces that i mentioned, which are the largest part of the president's agenda. when it became clear that some moderate democrats, conservative democrats, whatever you want to call it, wanted to have a bipartisan infrastructure bill, we said, we're not willing to leave out women by cutting back the workforce by getting child care, we are not willing to leave out health care, so we will agree to that bipartisan bill, if and only if, we also pass the reconciliation bill first. that was our position, we whipped our members on it. over half the caucus three months ago today said we will vote for both bills. we will vote for the bipartisan infrastructure bill which is much smaller, and frankly, rachel, it has a lot of things our members don't like. but if we can get the reconciliation bill that has the majority of the president's agenda in it, the majority of what we ran on, then we will vote for both bills. that has been our position three months ago, it remains our position today. now, when the senate passed the bipartisan bill, senator sanders, senator warren, many other progressive senators only voted for that bipartisan bill because they were given a commitment by the senators in the democratic party and the president that we would move these two things together, the reconciliation bill, the build back better act, as it's called now, and the bipartisan bill. so they come up to the house, and all of a sudden the tables get turned on us and we are now finding people are saying, oh, no, just pass the infrastructure bill, and you know what, we'll get to child care later. we'll get to paid leave later. well, rachel, we are committed to delivering the entirety of the president's agenda to the president's desk. and that is what we have had to do. the speaker says it beautifully. she says, the children have the leverage and we're not going to give that up. this is the leverage for transformational investments that people will wake up feeling differently about themselves and will know that government delivered for them. over half of our caucus has said that they will not just vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill, we have to vote on the reconciliation bill first and then we will, even though some people don't like it, we'll vote for the bipartisan bill because we all understand we're part of the democratic team, this is the democrats' agenda and we're willing to vote for both bills. anyone that is blocking the reconciliation bill is voting against the democratic agenda. so, look, it is a tough deal now. we're trying to get the reconciliation bill done. we need the senate to actually work with us to say, okay, we are pre-conferencing everything which means we have to agree between the house and senate and white house on a vote. we're not passing something senate to senate, they pass it back -- no, no, that takes too much time. we're going to pass one bill that everyone agrees on. once we pass that bill, we will vote also for the bipartisan bill and we will see both of them on the president's desk for a signature. >> how much distance is there between you and speaker pelosi on this? we've seen all these -- it's like the irresistible template headlines today from all the beltway press. democrats in disarray! they all write themselves. internal strife among democrats. when you had this meeting with speaker pelosi, you came out afterwards and spoke to reporters about the same things you talked about here and the broader ways you think about this. but are you and speaker pelosi pulling in the same direction, or is there distance that needs to be bridged between you to get to the kind of outcomes you're describing? >> you know, the speaker has been terrific in really pushing for the entirety of the president's agenda, and she also understands that if we have over half of the progressive caucus that won't vote for the bipartisan bill, she is a master vote counter. she is not going to bring a vote to the floor that she knows is going to fail. she's been trying to communicate that to the senate and the house and to say they are all ready to vote for the bipartisan bill, we just have to pass the reconciliation bill first. there hasn't been distance. she's been a great champion that we make sure we get women back to work, that we create jobs that everyone can participate in. that we give free community college to people, pre-k, paid leave. child care, all of these things, and of course that we fight climate change which is so crucial in this moment. the bipartisan bill doesn't have any of that, rachel. if we were to just vote on the bipartisan bill, we would leave behind all of these other priorities. 60% to 70% of the president's priorities would be left on the table with no urge to do anything. so, it's been -- really, she's been a very strong champion of pushing for all of these things. again, as i said, i wanted to make sure she understood that we simply don't have the votes, and she really does get that. >> congresswoman pramila jayapal, progressive caucus which is a large caucus, 95 democratic members in the house which means it has a lot of weight to throw around. we are seeing that process at work right now as this process works its way through congress. congresswoman, thank you very much for joining us. i hope the rest of your night involves no more cable news and loss of birthday things. >> thank you very much, rachel. nice to talk to you. >> thank you. much more ahead. stay with us. hey, i just got a text from my sister. you remember rick, her neighbor? sure, he's the 76-year-old guy who still runs marathons, right? sadly, not anymore. wow. so sudden. um, we're not about to have the "we need life insurance" conversation again, are we? no, we're having the "we're getting coverage so we don't have to worry about it" conversation. so you're calling about the $9.95 a month plan -from colonial penn? -i am. we put it off long enough. we are getting that $9.95 plan, today. (jonathan) is it time for you to call about the $9.95 plan? i'm jonathan from colonial penn life insurance company. sometimes we just need a reminder not to take today for granted. if you're age 50 to 85, you can get guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance starting at just $9.95 a month. there are no health questions so you can't be turned down for any health reason. the $9.95 plan is colonial penn's number one most popular whole life plan. options start at just $9.95 a month. that's less than 35 cents a day. your rate can never go up. it's locked in for life. call today for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, so call now. (soft music) ♪ hello, colonial penn? president biden addressed the u.n. general assembly today, his first address to the u.n. as president. he covered a lot of ground in his speech. one part of his address to the general assembly today really caught my attention because of something else going on in today's news. >> we're hardened in our critical infrastructure against cyber attacks, discussing ransomware work, clearing a road to all nations when it relates to cyberspace. we reserve the rights to signer space for attacks that threaten our infrastructure. >> hardening our critical infrastructure used in cyberattacks. you might remember that when this spring a critical hacking group based in russia shut down the largest fuel pipeline on the east coast with a ransomware attack. remember the colonial pipeline attack knocked that off line for better part of a week. we had fuel shortages in states. critical places like hospitals, things we can't live without, that's supposed to be america's bright line when it comes to cyberattacks. that's what president biden meant when he said we reserve the right to respond decisively when that line is crossed. well, now, we've just learn evidence a new ransomware attack. cyberattack on a very critical infrastructure that is our food supply. the company hit this time is an iowa-based farming cooperative called new cooperative. among other things they provide feed for 11 million farm animals in this country. their computer system was hit yesterday. now they are operating with pen and paper. some of the farm co-op's negotiations with these cyber criminals that are trying to ransom them have been posted on line. they are going out of the way to explain to the hackers that they are crossing this bright line. the amount the hackers don't really care or explain they don't care, it's very cinematic, like a movie in real life. here's the quote. we are critical infrastructure, we are in line with the food supply chain in the u.s. there is going to be a very public disruption to the grain, and chicken supply. this is pretty much out of our hands. we can't control what they do. the impact of this attack will likely be much worse than the pipeline attack. i'm just telling you so you're not surprised because you don't seem to understand who we are, what role our company plays in the food supply chain. it's the co-op speaking to the hackers. after all of that, the hackers reply, no one will give you decrypters for free. look for money. meaning, we don't consider you to be on the other side of that bright line. well, if the u.s. were to respond decisively here since this bright line has been very overtly crossed, what would that actually mean? i mean -- i'm not the world's techiest person. if there is a piece of technology that can't be fixed by restarting it, i'm sort of out of luck. luckily for us, yesterday a very distinguished computer scientist named dmitri alperovich, he published an op-ed in the "new york times" explaining what it might mean for america to really go on offense on these matters. he laid out a proposal for america targeting ransomware criminals and these hacking groups essentially the same way they targeted isis online. they attacked cyber groups online, giving information about the perpetrators, taking down their servers, and when they think they're operating on their own terms, they're actually operating on ours. so aggressive proposal from him. we contacted the former homeland security cyberchief chris krebs an now the u.s. should be handling things now. he said that what alperovich is proposing is, quote, release the hounds on these criminal groups. as far as we can tell, mr. krebs meant that in a good way. joining us now is dmitri alperovich. in charge the cyber security crowdstrike. thank you for joining us. appreciate you taking the time. >> thanks for having me. >> am i right to suggest that had you think america has the skills to be more aggressive, to act more offensive against these criminal groups in a way that would be more destructive to them and we have for now reserved the skills for international terrorist groups and have not applied it as aggressively as we could toward groups like this. >> there's no question we have the skills. we set up cybercommander well over a decade ago which has thousands of workers in maryland working on cyber attacks which is what we gave them billions of dollars to do. unfortunately, we currently use that capability primarily to go after nation states, go after terror groups. we have not used them to go to criminal groups like this ransom operator, and i think it's time to do that. we had this g7 summit with president putin and it's pretty clear now that president putin hasn't lifted a finger to try to stop these groups, most of which operate in russia, so it's long past time for us to take matters into our own hands and try to get these groups shut down online and make their lives very difficult with cyber operations. >> i feel like a lot of us who are sort of outside the cyber and cyber security world, run up pretty quickly against the idea of blowback. that when we talk about defensive capabilities, hardening yourselves as a target, andy then you talk about offensive, going after the perpetrators of these attacks. one of the things we hear from your sector is that the potential blowback, the potential effects of a certain action may be hard for us to conceptualize, hard for us to get our head around. if the u.s. government did do the kinds of things that you're proposing, treats these groups effectively how we've treated terrorist groups, what is the risk how they might retaliate, what the blowback might be? >> this concern about blowback is something that's been raised for 30 years now. any time the u.s. has talked about engaging in cyber operations, the response has been, no, we can't do that, we have all these vulnerabilities, it's going to come back and haunt us. our adversaries have not done it this way. russia, china, iran, north korea, they've all launched cyber attacks on us without any concern for blowback. when we look at the evidence of the last 20 years, cyber has not led to escalation so far, and when it comes to these groups that constrain themselves, does anybody believe that? when they're going after critical infrastructure, what they're going after these food cooperatives, when they're going after colonial pipeline, we basically tell them that they get to decide whether it's critical or not critical. and they get to decide whether they go after it or not. that gives way too much freedom to these cyber criminals. >> in terms of the biden administration's approach to this, the kinds of diplomatic approaches that you describe, including that meeting with president putin and president biden where they addressed this matter directly. the biden administration has been very focused on the idea that russia has essentially given groups like this a place to operate from. they've given them safe haven in a way that pakistan was offering the taliban to reorganize across borders. so the afghanistan war against the taliban was never going to be won because they always had safe haven in pakistan across the border. the biden administration has explained that problem is essentially similar with russia giving these groups a place to operate from. not so much a blind eye as an encouraging wink or nod from the russian government. is there a way to change the russian government's center around these groups or is it a lost cause? >> i still believe that we can. you're absolutely right, the russian golfs has no evidence that they're involved in these attacks. however, we know these criminal groups are operating within their borders. they're very well known to russian law enforcement, so if president putin wanted to do something, if he wanted to shut them down or arrest these individuals or even just send a message, hey, knock it off, you're crossing the line here, he absolutely has the ability to do so. these are not oligarchs, these are not people that are part of his entourage. he doesn't know them personally so these are individuals very easy to round up and give a clear message to. the question is does he have the will to do so, and right now we have not really pressured him significantly with threats of perhaps major sanctions against the oil and gas sector, sanctions that will really back the russian economy unless he gets these groups to stop. we have not done that, we asked nicely, and so far it clearly hasn't worked. >> dmitri alperovich, thank you very much for talking with us about this tonight. co-founder of crowdstrike. thank you for joining us tonight. especially for someone like me who is not tech minded on this stuff, your clarity is very appreciated. thank you. >> thank you. the doctor broke the law and we know he did because he told us so in public in the pages of the "washington post." he said, quote, since the texas abortion ban went into effect, most of our patients have been too far along in their pregnancies to qualify for abortion care. i tell them that we can offer services only if we cannot see the cardiac activity on an ultrasound, which usually occurs at about six weeks, before most people know they are pregnant. the tension is unbearable as they lie there, waiting to hear their fate. if we detect cardiac activity, we have to refer them out of state. one of the women i talked with since the law took effect is 42. she has four kids, three of them under the age of 12. i advised her that she could go to oklahoma. that's a nine-hour drive one way. i explained that we could help with the funding. she told me she couldn't go even if we flew her in a private jet. i told her she has a fundamental right to that care. after hearing from patients dr. braid said he made a brave choice. he said, on the morning of september 6 i provided an abortion to a woman who, though still in her first trimester was beyond the state's new limit. it was written by longtime san antonio physician dr. alan braid. dr. braid says he feels like he's in 1972 all over again. now that texas has the ban in texas. that's the way of enforcing the new ban in texas, have private citizens sue. the last part, the vigilante law in texas, that's part of the reason dr. braid knows he knowingly and openly violated the texas abortion ban a few weeks ago. he did it to try to stress-test the legality of it in court. he writes, quote, i fully understood there could be legal consequences but i want to make sure texas didn't get away with its bid to prevent this blatantly unconstitutional law from being tested. and, of course, tested it will be. after that public admission, dr. braid has now indeed been sued by a private vigilante who is exercising his new established right under this texas law to bring the doctor to court. the man suing dr. braid is not from texas. he is a conflicted felon. he says he's a disbarred lawyer. he's currently serving out his criminal sentence on house arrest. he has no obvious connection to the abortion at all. in fact, doesn't even say he's necessarily anti-abortion, but it's hard to acertain. this suit is kind of crazy, but this is the challenge to the constitutionality of the texas abortion ban. so it worked. joining me is joyce vance. thanks so much for making time. >> thanks for having me, rachel. >> so, we talked in recent weeks about how texas devised this law to work in certain ways, to shield it from federal court scrutiny. it's been mostly speculation until now whether that would do more than just shield the law from scrutiny, whether the law was actually work to punish abortion providers and people who help women in the state. how do you think this is going to play out? >> so this is a very interesting situation, and i think this statute which is designed to outsmart the justice system may be too cute by half, because in creating this private vigilante mechanism, it sort of becomes chaos. so we have here by his own admission this disgraced and disbarred former lawyer who is filing this lawsuit, and it opens a huge can of worms, but the biggest can of worms it opens for the state of texas is the possibility that now that the law is actually in effect that there will be a challenge to the law. lawyers call this an as applied constitutional challenge, and this may give opponents of the bill a much more certain path to having the court block the law and join the law in the pendency of the litigation. >> so the vigilante element of the law is no longer hypothetical. it exists, it is a concrete process that is observable, provable and, therefore, testable in court. is that effectively it? >> i think that's right, and this is vigilanteism perhaps even of a higher caliber than the texas legislature could have imagined. this is just rank vigilanteism. someone from out of state of texas with no connection whatsoever to the doctor or to the patient in this case, and the complaint that he files is really interesting, rachel, because texas law authorizes a minimum $10,000 bounty in this situation, but the plaintiff here, oscar stilley, says he would like $100,000 for his lawsuit, but he'll settle for 10,000. >> i will say going through his complaint today was an exercise in sort of tripping without taking drugs. there is a lot of weird elements to it. but if this is going to be the camel's nose that gets the tent opened, there we go. >> be careful what you ask for. >> yes, exactly. you're going to invite randos around the world to sue as the means with which you're going to enforce this law? welcome to the world of randos in their litigation. joyce, while i have you here, i really hope you do not mind that i do this, and you are totally welcome to shut me down and not engage with me on this at all. since our last commercial break, since we had you in the chair, a little piece of news has broken at "the daily beast" concerning the former president and his niece, mary trump. i am reading this, i know nothing about this other than what is in "the daily beast." i'm going to read the reporting and i'd like to get your response to it, but shut me down if this is an inappropriate thing for me to ask you. the headline here, as you see, is that president trump has filed a lawsuit. donald trump sues "new york times" and his niece over tax story. here's the entirety of their reporting at this point. former president donald trump has sued the times and his niece, mary trump, saying they had a plot to file this tax history. did not have his records for the tax story. the paper convinced mary trump to, quote, smuggle records out of her attorney's office and turn them over to the "times" despite having signed a confidentiality agreement. the suit demands damages in an amount to be determined at trial but believed to be no less than $100 million. each of those words capitalized. the $100 million from both mary trump and "the times," mary trump giving a comment to the daily beast about this said, quote, i think he is an f-ing loser, and he is going to throw anything against the walls that he can. it's desperation. the walls are closing in. he is throwing anything against the wall that will stick as is always the case with donald, he'll try and change the subject. that is the total of what has been reported about this thus far. i just want to ask for your initial take on whether this is a real thing or whether this is a joke. >> yeah, good luck with that as a legal theory. just based on what you've read, rachel, it's a tough theory to argue that mary trump couldn't do what she did in this case. it does sound very much like someone who's desperate to try to turn the tables and certainly the former president has a history of trying to abuse the legal system for his own benefit. so this looks like another chapter in that same book. >> joyce vance, able to turn on less than a dime to a totally different story that you're learning about live on tv. joyce, thank you very much for being here tonight. invaluable as always. thank you, my friend. >> thanks, rachel. >> all right, we'll be right back. stay with us. let's go walter! after you. walter, twelve o' clock. get em boy! [cows mooing] that is incredible. it's the multi-flex tailgate. it can be a step, it can even become a workspace. i meant the cat. what's so great about him? he doesn't have a workspace. the chevy silverado with the available multi-flex tailgate. find new adventures. find new roads. chevrolet. the chevy silverado with the available multi-flex tailgate. some wireless carriers box your whole family into the same plan, so you're probably paying for things you don't need! bananas! not verizon. sarah, you don't need to download games. your game is watching british people bake. esther just wants to live stream leg day. push! are we almost done? and jonathan, you don't need international roaming to watch french films. vous n'avez besoin que de vitesses de téléchargement rapides! verizon lets you mix and match unlimited plans so you only pay for what you need. sorry... because everyone deserves better. and with plans starting at just $35, better costs less than you think. the sleep number 360 smart bed is on sale now. it helps keep you effortlessly comfortable by sensing your movements and automatically responding to both of you. and, it's temperature balancing to help you stay comfortable all night. it even tracks your circadian rhythm, so you know when you're at your best. in other words, it's the most energy-building, wellness-boosting, parent-powering, proven quality night's sleep we've ever made. don't miss our weekend special. save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 24 months. ends monday. finally today, some substantive news for people who have had the johnson & johnson single shot coronavirus vaccine. today the company reported their first data on the prospect of booster shots for people who have had that single shot vaccine. j&j reported results of its study on a second j&j shot administered two months after the first one. they said that second shot increased protection against mild to severe covid to 94%. that's up from the 74% protection after just one shot. those are good numbers. johnson & johnson has submitted those good new numbers to the fda for potential approval of a johnson & johnson booster shot. we shall see what happens. that process is now underway. of course this past friday it was an fda advisory panel that recommended pfizer booster shots to people age 65 and up and people at high risk of severe covid. the fda itself looks like it's going to act on that pfizer recommendation from their advisory panel as soon as tomorrow. the cdc will also start meeting on the issue tomorrow. their advisory panel meets tomorrow and thursday to talk about the pfizer booster shot specifically. but again, this is all sort of in the hopper now. this time tomorrow we should have further clarity in terms of booster shot recommendations on pfizer. that should tell us where things are going in terms of moderna and we've got the first data in toward a booster shot recommendation on johnson & johnson. it's been a long time and coming, but we're at the point where this is going to go fast now starting tomorrow and over these next couple of days. watch this space. qunol sleep formula combines 5 key nutrients that can help you fall asleep faster, stay asleep longer, and wake up refreshed. the brand i trust is qunol. in business, setbacks change everything. so get comcast business internet and add securityedge. it helps keep your network safe by scanning for threats every 10 minutes. and unlike some cybersecurity options, this helps protect every connected device. yours, your employees' and even your customers'. so you can stay ahead. get started with a great offer and ask how you can add comcast business securityedge. plus for a limited time, ask how to get a $500 prepaid card when you upgrade. call today. all right. that is going to do it for us tonight. thanks for being with us. i'll see you again tomorrow night. "way too early" is up next. our security, our prosperity and our very freedoms are interconnected in my view as never before. and so, i believe we must work together as never before. >> president biden addresses the u.n. and calls on the world to work together. the question is, what do the french have to say about that? plus, more migrants surge to the southern border, testing the white house strategy on immigration. the question is what is the white house strategy on immigration? and the u.s. military's newest service, space force unveils its dress

Related Keywords

President , World War I , It , Woodrow Wilson , Cost , Wilting , Two , 1912 , 1914 , War In Europe , Slogan , Costs , Re Election , 2014 , U S , Part , Thanks , Point , Lines , Bragging Rights , Sentiment , 1916 , World , Dozens , Countries , Swath , 1915 , 1917 , All Over The World , Germans , Alliances , Ships , Hemisphere , Atlantic , Fact , Election , Spring , U S Congress , Six , Something , Country , Decision , Wrangling , Parting Gift , Isolationist , Pose , People , One , Objections , Up Today , Expenditure , Home , Way , Logic , War , War On Cost Grounds , Expense , Law , Anything , Thing , Limit , U S Law , Critics , Russian Government , Legislation , Reason , Piece , Amount , Affirmatively Regroup , Process , Debt Ceiling , History , Who Didn T , Germany , Isolationists , Tries , Debt Ceiling Gimmick , Wars , A Hundred , All , Government Spending Money , Barrier , Doesn T Function , It Doesn T , Nobody , Debt , Country Economy Will Fling , Spending Rapaciously , Minds , 100 , Debt Ceiling Dozens , Times , Benefit , Nothing , Presidents , Parties , Disaster , National , House , Lagoon , Backyard , Apartment , International Scale , Swingset , Kids , Piranha , Yes , Balance , Theoretically , The Piranhas , Trap , Downside , Yard , Credit , Credit Rating , Expenses , Default , Trillions , Donald Trump , President Of The United States , 2017 , Four , Senate , Majority , Republicans , Trifecta , 2016 , Things , Kinds , Problem , Some , Motion , Bill , Democrats , Spending Bill , Houses , White House , Power , Minority , The Lights On , Shutting Down , September 2017 , Margins , Piranha Pit , Bills , Matter , Charge , Party , Purpose , September 2021 , 2021 , Joe Biden , Control , Terms , Elections , Mirror Image , 2020 , Majorities , Government Shutdown , Vote , Order , Ghosts , Real Problems , Wound , Prices , Austria Hungarian Empire , Debt Ceiling Vote , Senators , Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Vote , Ten , Trump , Piranha Pool , Leap , Nancy Pelosi , Lights , Bus , Done , Party Line Vote , Suspense , Zero , Neener , Passing That Ceiling Legislation Doesn T , Murder Suicide Plan , Upside , Agenda , Most , Term , Debt Ceiling Thing , Attention , Conservative Democrats In The House , Handful , Side , Attempt , Priority , Meeting , Shot , Progressive Caucus , Scene , Leader , 90 , Camilla Jayapal , Reporters , Word , Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal , Coverage , Development , Members , Ones , 95 , 200 , Progressives , Piranhas , Pool , Plan , Voting , Crises , Entirety , Stand Today , Many , Big , Muscles , Much , First Term , 5 Trillion , 3 5 Trillion , The Big One , Response , Questions , Saw , Votes , Packages , Reconciliation , Caucus , Half , Bluffing , Strategy , Numbers , Bulk , Chair , Prospects , Birthday , Ways , Cable Tv , Tons , Words , High Stakes , Middle , Negotiations , Meetings , Rachel , Child Care , Health Care , Climate Change , Leave , Housing , Immigration , On , Infrastructure , Build , Jobs , Three , Pieces , Women , Workforce , Position , Reconciliation Bill First , Reconciliation Bill , Lot , Infrastructure Bill , Warren , Senator Sanders , Commitment , Act , Tables , Saying , Speaker , Leverage , Desk , Children , Investments , Team , Deal , Anyone , Everything , Both , Everyone , Distance , Signature , Beltway Press , Template , Disarray , Strife , Kind , Needs , Outcomes , Direction , Master Vote Counter , Won T , There Hasn T , Floor , Champion , Work , Pre K , Community College , Course , Bipartisan Bill Doesn T , Priorities , 60 , 70 , Table , Urge , Weight , Rest , Night , Stay , Cable News , Loss , Rick , Sister , Marathons , Text , 76 , Conversation , Life Insurance , Um , Colonial Penn , 95 , 9 95 , Health Questions , Reminder , 50 , 85 , Life , Health Reason , Options , Rate , 35 , Information , Beneficiary Planner , Soft Music , Address , U N , U N General Assembly , News , Ground , Assembly , Speech , Attacks , Road , Nations , Ransomware Work , Cyberattacks , Rights , Signer Space , Line , Ransomware Attack , Pipeline Attack , Group , Fuel Pipeline , Russia , East Coast , States , Places , Fuel Shortages , Hospitals , Evidence , Company , Food Supply , Cyberattack , Cooperative , Farming Cooperative , Iowa , 11 Million , Hackers , Criminals , Paper , Ransom , Computer System , Hit Yesterday , Pen , The Farm , Care , Movie , Quote , Chicken Supply , Food Supply Chain , Disruption , Grain , No One , Hands , Attack , Reply , Speaking , Impact , Co Op , Role , Money , Meaning , Technology , Techiest Person , Yesterday A Very Distinguished Computer Scientist , Luck , New York Times , Dmitri Alperovich , Matters , Offense , Op Ed , Hacking Groups , Proposal , America Targeting Ransomware , Isis , Groups , Servers , Perpetrators , Alperovich , Homeland Security , Cyberchief Chris Krebs , Mr , Hounds , Skills , Security Crowdstrike , Terrorist Groups , Offensive , Question , Cybercommander , Workers , Maryland , Terror Groups , Nation States , Ransom Operator , Dollars , Capability , President Putin , G7 Summit , Hasn T , Finger , Idea , Cyber Operations , Cyber Security World , Lives , Blowback , Capabilities , Target , Sector , Effects , Head , Action , To Conceptualize , Risk , Concern , Adversaries , Vulnerabilities , 30 , Escalation , China , North Korea , Iran , 20 , Pipeline , Food Cooperatives , Anybody , Cyber Criminals , Freedom , Administration , Approaches , Approach , Place , Afghanistan War , Borders , Pakistan , Safe Haven , Taliban , Border , Government , Cause , Center , Eye , Nod , Wink , Law Enforcement , Golfs , Individuals , Message , Ability , Entourage , Threats , Sanctions , Economy , Will , Gas , Oil , Co Founder , Someone , Clarity , Stuff , Doctor , Public , Pages , Effect , Patients , Texas Abortion Ban , Washington Post , Activity , Ultrasound , Abortion Care , Services , Tension , Pregnancies , Fate , State Of Texas , Age , Oklahoma , 12 , 42 , Nine , Right , Funding , Jet , Hearing , She Couldn T Go , Abortion , Dr , Braid , Woman , Trimester , Choice , Who , 6 , September 6 , Alan Braid , San Antonio , Ban , 1972 , Vigilante Law , Citizens , Court , Sure Texas Didn T , Legality , Stress Test , Consequences , Bid , Vigilante , Admission , Lawyer , Connection , Felon , Sentence , Oman , House Arrest , Challenge , Suit , Constitutionality , Crazy , Acertain , Vance , Scrutiny , Speculation , Federal Court , Situation , Statute , Justice System , Abortion Providers , Help , Chaos , Mechanism , Lawsuit , Worms , Can Of Worms , Can , Possibility , Litigation , Element , Lawyers , Court Block , Ependency , Path , Opponents , Testable In Court , Vigilanteism , Caliber , Texas Legislature , Complaint , Case , Patient , Texas Law , Oscar Stilley , Bounty , 00000 , 0000 , 100000 , 10000 , Tent , Nose , Randos , Elements , Exercise , Camel , Tripping Without Taking Drugs , Means , Joyce , Break , The Daily Beast , Reporting , Mary Trump , Niece , Tax Story , Headline , Sues , Mary Trump To , Tax History , Records , Plot , Smuggle Records Out , Confidentiality Agreement , Attorney , Trial , Damages , Each , 00 Million , 100 Million , The Times , Beast , Comment , Ing Loser , Walls , Wall , Desperation , Subject , Total , Joke , Closing , Theory , Sound , System , Chapter , Book , Story , Tv , Dime , Friend , Em Boy , Walter , Let S Go , Twelve O Clock , Cows Mooing , Twelve , Tailgate , Workspace , Adventures , Step , Cat , Chevy Silverado , Chevrolet , Find New Roads , Game , Family , Carriers , Bananas , Push , Verizon , Games , Sarah , British , Esther , Plans , Roaming , Watch French Films , Vous N Avez Besoin Que De Vitesses TÉlÉchargement , 5 , Sleep Number , Bed , Temperature Balancing , Sale , Movements , Best , Circadian Rhythm , 360 , Sleep , Don T , Energy Building , Weekend Special , Interest , Smart Bed , Parent , Miss , Special Edition , Plus , Ends Monday , 24 , 1000 , 000 , 0 , Johnson , Single , Coronavirus Vaccine , Booster Shots , Data , Protection , Results , Prospect , Vaccine , Second , Study , Second J , Booster Shot , Potential Approval , Covid , Fda , 74 , 94 , Advisory Panel , Pfizer , Severe Covid , 65 , Recommendation , Booster , Issue , Cdc , Booster Shot Recommendations , Booster Shot Recommendation , Sort , Hopper , Moderna , Nutrients , Space , Qunol Sleep Formula , Brand , Qunol , Business Internet , Setbacks , Add Securityedge , Business , Offer , Cybersecurity Options , Safe , Network , Customers , Employees , Device , Yours , 10 , Prepaid Card , Call Today , Business Securityedge , Comcast , 00 , 500 , Security , Prosperity , Freedoms , View , Calls , Migrants , French , U S Military , Service , Dress , Strategy On Immigration , Space Force ,