by this time tomorrow, donald trump will have retaken the stand at his new york civil fraud case. how big a gamble it is this far into the trial? plus, about last night, something happened that is raising questions about donald trump blurring political and legal lines. a very good day to all of you from msnbc world headquarters here in new york. welcome, everyone, to alex witt reports. we're begin with breaking news. a tornado and some devastation in tennessee. at least six people are dead, including two children after severe storms tore across the south. those powerful tornadoes ignited fire, snapping power lines, and destroying homes. at least two dozen people have been injured, and power is slowly being restored to thousands of customers. the threat is not over as the same system is moving east. today, millions in the southeast and mid-atlantic face more severe weather. torrential rain, and heavy winds definitely expected. flooding is likely. some places will get snow, and others, tornadoes cannot be ruled out. let's go to msnbc melissa parra who's joining us in the hard-hit neighborhood of madison there in nashville. welcome. what does it look like there? >> yeah, i mean, you can see behind me, this is not spit lane, by the, way for anyone who's been following. you know that this is one of the hardest hit areas just outside of nashville. behind me, this is just a series of homes. this extends on the other side of the camera, by the, way as well. what you can see, i want to photographer to zoom in on that one house. this is something that we're seeing all day today. people on their second floor, and they don't have a rough above them. they are just sifting through whatever they can salvage. several rooftops on the street alone have been completely ripped off. we've heard some harrowing stories, including one woman who was buried underneath the debris from everything on the roof that had collapsed on top of her. we'll have her story later tonight. we just interviewed her and her fiancée. so many homeowners here talking about how lucky they feel because they're alive. unfortunately, alex, it was just down the street that three of the six fatalities were right here. it was just down the street, a mobile home park. and adults band was inside of a mobile home that rolled over outside, on top of another residents. that had a mother and two-year-old child inside. when you hear these stories, you see the images of the tornado itself. the striking and terrifying. this happened as it was dark, so there were several people who did not see this coming. you see the video, not just of debris, but you see the fires that were ignited, even some explosions. it's not just here where we are in madison tennessee, it was also clarksville. those were where we also saw some heavy, heavy damage as well as the other three fatalities of the six. i want to take you to a very emotional moment with the mayor of clarksville that happens not too long ago. take a listen. >> our priority is to take care of our people. we know that we have people who are suffering because of loss of life. and injuries. and loss of property, miss mary golden mentioned, we took a tour this morning of the affected neighborhoods, and there is devastation everywhere. but one thing i love about the city, when there is a need, we rally around that need. we have neighbor helping neighbor. i can tell you that there is one little girl, her name is ali. she was seven years old. when we pulled up, despite her house being affected, she's saying all they want for christmas for the crowd that was out there. >> so you can see the storm is long past, but the cleanup really just beginning as people are taking away whatever they can salvage here. we know the salvation army is here, the red cross is here. even outside of here, alex, tens of thousands remain without power. again, lots of people here just grateful to have their lives right now. >> yeah, it's awful. especially at night time. this tornado struck it, night it's absolutely terrifying. thank, you melissa, for that. donald, trump is set to retake the stand in new york as his defense team's final witness in the 250 million dollar civil fraud trial. this, time his legal team will be questioning him about allegations he fraudulently inflated his assets. even though his own attorney advised him against appearing. >> don't forget though. he is going out on monday with the judges gag order still in place, so he can't speak about certain things, he has to be so careful. that is so unconstitutional in my opinion. we have first amendment rights. we have rights as attorney. 60 member writes. those are all being violated. he still wants to take the stand, even though my advice is that, at this point, you should never take the stand with the gag order. he is so firmly against what is happening in this court. >> joining me now, justice reporter, riley. he is author of sedition hunters, how january 6th broke the justice system. harry litman, former u.s. attorney and host of the talking feds podcast. right out of the gate, harry, i want to ask you. the fact that donald trump is going to be on the stands, does that mean a gag order remains in place? if they're looking for him to tell the truth about something, shouldn't he be able to speak in whatever parlance he wants to? >> the short answer is yes. if it gets to that kind of troubled waters, you know, they will talk it over. that is the least of his worries there. let me put a marker, he says that he is testifying. he may well, but we'll see if he changes his mind. >> wait, he might not show up? >> well, he might not take the stand. there is little for him to gain. remember, there is a judge trial. the judge is going to decide against them. he will, as his son dead, give the sort of rosy infomercial for the public. that would be the reason he would testify. but, it means he will have a cross-examination. it won't be like last time when the a.g., on direct, led him just go on and on. they call cross-examination the greatest legal tool ever invented for the discovery of truth, they can ask, in the ready to, ask very pointed questions. mr. trump, you knew this was 30,000 feet. you knew it was ten. yes or no? boom, boom, boom. the judge will enforce that. so he doesn't stand much to gain on his direct testimony, and does stand to lose on the cross. we'll see what happens. >> so if he takes the stand, ryan, i know the expectation is he is, but if he does, we all remember the first time he was called to the stand by the prosecution. it got very intense. do you expect tomorrow's testimony to be any different? >> probably a foreshock at the softer questions from his own defense team, painting that rosy picture that you are talking about. i think that is what we could expect on the direct, but when it does get to that crosses when things are going to get a little bit hairy or. it doesn't make a lot of sense for him to, as his lawyer there even said, kind of want to get on the stands except for the reasons he wants to make this into a public spectacle, make this part of his ongoing campaign. he also needs to practice theoretically because he's got some new trials coming up ahead of him. although he has a lot at risk. it's an expensive practice to begin. using this civil trial as a practice ahead of these other ones. anyway, i would expect his lawyers would be more strongly treading take have been some did not take the stand, because we're headed into a big year for donald trump. it's less than three months that we have this trial on hearing in d.c.. this zhejiang election interference. there's a lot in front of him. >> one hunted percent. we know he was in court, ryan, on thursday. he was watching the testimony, the defense star accounting witness, eli bartos. who revealed that he was paid nearly $900,000. this is in part because of his action committee. this was for his expertise, but right, what are we learning about these payments? >> yeah, sorry, the payment for? >> the expert witness. almost 900 grand. part of it is done by his pack. paid for. >> that's extraordinary. it sort of shows how donald trump's world is interconnected. here he is the brand that he is. he is behind us. he controls all of these various entities. we've seen that, him controlling that other criminal investigation as well. he's been paying for all of these attorneys for key witnesses. it's only when witnesses are off the books, or when they're off the payroll, that sometimes they become more valuable in the jacks mitt investigation as well. it's a really tangled web of a lot of payments that are happening all over the place for donald trump here. it can't be the main man behind all of this. >> 100%. so harry, you have the accounting expert bringing up that build by working 650 hours on this case. does that seem a little extravagant? and could this affect his testimony in the eyes of judge engoron? >> yeah, so 100%, alex, it is admissible to go to his bias. this i would say 20 times what you would expect an expert of the sort to receive, and engoron is entitled to take that huge payday for him into account and value, in evaluating his testimony. >> okay, ryan, you mentioned this, he's also under a gag order and the d.c. election subversion case. this happened after an appeals court friday largely upheld a lower court ruling, but you, know narrowed it just a bit. what are the remaining restrictions on the former president? >> so, what he is not, what he is allowed to do is go after jack smith. that is the big headline i think after this. he can take, he can go after jack smith as much as he wants, but there are still these limitations on place. i think that the appeals court went through a really thorough review of the way that donald trump has weaponized this public attention before. all of the, you know, cascading consequences that has four individuals sorted get swept up into this, you know, we saw that in the trial to begin with. the civil trial has been used as an example for the special counsel's office of what donald trump has the power to do, how they're going to try to protect their own investigations. donald trump is still gagged from making these more direct attacks on staffers, on the court staff here in d.c. for example. as well as going more individually after some of the individual prosecutors involved. i, mean they are worried about the consequences that this could have, because of, course we've seen time and time again, when donald trump sets a sights on someone, that his supporters are willing to do a lot to go after them. >> so there was a big gala last night, for donald trump appeared and spoke. sitting at the table with him was his attorney, lena hava. in a red dress, you'll see her there. epstein, his legal counsel, but, harry does their frequent appearances of political events, does that blur the line between the law and politics? >> yes, in a way, but he was actually trying to tow the line in a way that you might find encouraging overall. in addition to what ryan said about open season on jack smith, they narrowed it and one other way. they said, look, we're worried about witnesses here. you cannot attack them in terms of their testimony. you can attack them sort of generally in the political sphere. you can go after mike pence, and you can go after bill barr, just not called him a liar, or disparage their testimony. so what he got up yesterday, and called trump, barr, a coward, i think that that was a advice of counsel. here's what you can do, here's what you can't do. it showed consciousness up the d.c. circuit order. to me, it was exactly what they were letting him get away with. anything he can get away with, he certainly will. we know that. >> true. harry litman, ryan reilly, guys, thank you so much. so, it's a shock poll you may not even believe this. is it for real? what does it mean for the 2024 presidential race? that'll be later this hour. first, why democrats are saying there is no there there. even some republicans agree. we're back in 60 seconds. s agree. we're back in 60 seconds we're back in 60 seconds >> the subway series? it's the perfect menu lineup. just give us a number, we got the rest. number three? the monster. six? the boss. fifteen? titan turkey. number one? the philly. oh, yeah, you probably don't want that one. look, i'm not in charge of naming the subs. -we're done. -what about these? looks right. nooo... nooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty absorbs spills like a sponge. and is 2x more absorbent so you can use less. bounty, the quicker picker upper. meet the jennifers. each planning their future through the chase mobile app. hellooo new apartment. one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours. so new reaction today to the resignation of the university of pennsylvania's president, liz mcgill. she stepped out on saturday. this after coming under intense pressure following her controversial testimony on capitol hill about antisemitism on college campuses. there is a report by msnbc's, george soliz. >> mcgill's appearance at a house hearing on antisemitism, where she had this exchange with congresswoman, to phonic. >> i am asking specifically, calling for the genocide of jews, does that constitute bullying and harassment? >> if it is directed instead -- it is harassment. if the speech becomes conduct, it could be harassment, yes. >> meaning committing the act of genocide? >> magill failure for calling for an end to genocide is drawing criticism from lawmakers. >> joining me, now robert garcia, he serves on the house oversight and committee, welcome back to the broadcast, congressman. what are your thoughts on the answers of former president mcgill, and the presidents of most harvard and my teacher in the hearing this week? should the others, these other, to be offering the resignations as well? is the new republican-led house investigation, the wanted to antisemitism on college campuses, is it warranted? or is it just republicans going after universities they deemed to be woke? >> first, i work on a college university campus for ten years before i was in congress. i was both an administrator, as well as an educator in the classroom. so it is very important to recognize that antisemitism is happening, it is actually growing on college campuses. about a group of students just a few weeks ago that are very concerned about their safety. what we have to recognize is that is true, and it's happening. of course, we have to call out antisemitism, islamophobia, any kind of hate whenever we see it. i found the answers at the university presidents, honestly, to not be acceptable answers of leaders in any institution. certainly of some of our best universities in the country. i think they should be unequivocal in calling outs, when somebody calls for genocide of jewish students, or of any group, i do not think that it should be hard, or difficult at all, to denounce that. to say that that kind of speech is hate speech, is wrong, is not contributing to the safety of students on campus. look, i think that's obviously we've had a president that has resigned already. with that the others do, they're having to deal with their own faculty and students on that question. it is not unacceptable, is not an acceptable answer, am i pinion. >> i think your position has bipartisan support. that's what we've heard thus far. that said, on friday, the u.s. vetoed a u.n. security council resolution for an immediate cease-fire in gaza. siding with israel's claim that ending the war before hamas is destroyed would only create more conflicts. yesterday, the administration approved 100 $6 million and tank shells to supply israel. how do you perceive the administration's handling of the israeli issue so far, and is the administration putting enough pressure on israel to limit civilian deaths? >> look, i think that the president and to our secretary of state have been very clear about what's important as far as putting pressure on the way that israel conducts its military operation. i think it's been very clear that that has been having an impact, especially in the last few weeks. i think the negotiated cease-fire that happens when they release the hostages was really important, and i hope that we can get back there. we need to remind ourselves that the cease-fire was brokered by hamas. israel does have a right to defend itself, it's very important that hamas broke not just the cease-fire part of october 7th, but also the one that was just in place. we should have seen more release those hostages. i, myself, weeks ago, i called for a lasting cease-fire in this war. i also recognize that israel has to defend itself. that has to include a release of hostages, and the ability for israel to target hamas. hamas should not be in control of the palestinian people. the palestinian people deserve to live in freedom, to have safety, to not bomb, to have humanitarian aid. i think that the administration is trying to ensure that we recognize some losses danger, while also focusing on humatarian aid, and protecting the people on the ground. >> let's set the ammunition sail from yesterday aside, because you know that there is an intense debate amongst decratic lawmakers over whether to attach strings to military aid for israel, over concerns about protecting civilians in gaza. some democrats are demand conditions on supplemental funding for israel, beyond what exists, as it appeals to u.s. law. where do you stand on this? given the grip to the party, might threaten further support for israel? >> first, i think that this is a really important debate, the foreign aid package that we're about to hopefully debate in congress. i think something that's important, i think we obviously haven't seen in this package will look like as it relates to what any type of conditions may or may not look like. there is debate about that. the more important question is that it's actually being done and foreigners package right now. right now, republicans are focused on inserting immigration and border policy into a foreign aid package that is going to greatly harm our billet-y to pass any kind of humanitarian support, foreign aid. it's not just about israel, it's also about ukraine. the big debate right now is why republicans are trying to force the struck kony an immigration policy around asylum seekers into this debate. that is a real issue, that congressional congress has come out strongly to oppose it. we cannot have this policy attached to the point a proposal, or there's danger that get through the house. >> this week, house speaker mike johnson plans to hold that vote formulas in an impeachment inquiry into the president. johnson says, hey, this is not a vote to actually impeach the president. it is to continue investigations. here is what your colleague, congresswoman deborah roe, has to say about this. >> there have been investigations, the republicans own witnesses. they have said that's there is no there there. so he is doing this to appeal to his extreme base again, and it's simply ignoring the evidence, and ignoring the pressing needs around the world's, and for the american people. >> of course that was step awesome. very sorry about that. how do you expect up to play out this week? >> look, this is an extreme political stunt. there is zero evidence that links the president to any business, doings or wrongdoings. so i think that the republicans are obsessed with one thing, and that is getting donald trump reelected. they will do whatever they can, no matter how it hurts, no matter how many important initiatives they derail from the country, to get donald trump reelected. this impeachment is all about that. we know that right now, the james conrad, i serpent oversight, has brought forward a witness, a deposition, hearings, all of bush's fallen flat on their faces. we've had wi