but the debt deal just pass a crucial test. not one republican should vote for this deal. it s a bad deal. how much confidence do you have in the speaker right now? none. zero. speaker lying about the way he s characterizing this bill? yes, he s lying. but members of the house freedom caucus like congressman roy and bishop are struggling to come up with a strategy that block the deal tonight. and there s also a divide over whether to try to oust mccarthy as speaker. now, as for the republican leader, he says he s not concerned about losing his post and can t seem to understand what all the fuss is about. i m not sure what in the bill people are concerned about. it is the largest savings of 2.1 trillion we have ever had. now, a quick refresher of what is in this deal struck by president biden and the speaker over this memorial day weekend. it would replenish our near empty treasury with borrowed cash by suspending the debt ceiling for two years. it also include
the way he s characterizing this bill? yes, he is lying. members of the house caucus like congressman roy and bishop are still struggling to come with a strategy to actually block the deal tonight. and there is also a divide over whether to oust mccarthy as speaker. as for the republican leader he says he s not concerned about losing his post and can t seem to understand what all the fuss is about. i m not sure what in the bill people are concerned about. it is the largest savings of 2. 1 trillion that we ve ever had. a quick refresher share of what is in this deal over this memorial day weekend. it would replenish our near empty treasury with borrowed cash by suspending the debt ceiling for two years. it also includes caps on federal spending, more work requirements for food stamps and cuts to irs funding among other things. neither party got everything they wanted, something the senate republican leader noted on the floor earlier as all of this gop infighting plays
their but also keeping russia on its toes. they don t know where they might strike next. it seems as though it is. vladimir putin said this was terrorist activity. as you point out that ukrainians, top officials there are saying we did not have direct, keyword, involvement in what happened in moscow. what more do we know about how these drones were used? we don t know what specific drones were used. we do know that in the past ukraine has used old soviet air drones. this goes back to the 70s. capable as drones to your point, they don t deny, they are denying direct responsibility, they are not denying any responsibility here. that s key because, listen, we ve talked a lot about the ukraine war. russia throughout the war has attacked ukrainian civilian sites in kyiv including
assume that ukraine would have facilitated this in some way, but there s a lot we don t know. so we shouldn t jump to assumptions. let s talk more about that. as jim emphasized, you know, ukraine is basically denying direct involvement, but how credible is that? clearly very careful word selection there. how credible sit especially even our previous reporting that u.s. intelligence picked up chatter of ukrainian officials blaming each other for the kremlin drone attack? yeah. well, first thing is that remember last week we saw these attacks inside russian territory in belgorod. these were all russians who are against vladimir putin and who gathered some military equipment, made an incursion just to prove a point that they could do so. they probably could not have done that without some kind of tacit ukrainian support, but at the same time, it wasn t ukrainians doing it. it wasn t ukraine conducting the attacks. as far as the drones go, we don t know where they re fired
we don t know where they were going. it could ve been military targets. we also don t know where they were fired from or where who did it. we also have to assume that ukraine would have to facilitate this in some way but there s a lot we don t know so we shouldn t jump to assumptions. let s talk more about that. as jim emphasized ukraine is basically denying direct involvement but how credible is that? clearly very careful word selection there. how credible is it, especially in our previous reporting that u.s. intelligence picked up chatter of ukrainian officials blame each other for the kremlin john attack? first thing is that remember last week we saw these attacks inside russian territory in belgorod. these were all russians who are against vladimir putin and gathered to military quitman. maiden incursion just to prove a point that they could do so. they probably could not have done that without some kind of tacit ukrainian support. but at the same time it wasn t ukrainians doin