conduct should be. i read that and was like, yeah. well said. >> absolutely. there are briefs saying that, you know, other frankly conservative former jurors and legislators saying, you know what? you don't have to answer difficult questions whether this might be a close case, because this is not a close case. >> there's nothing the court loves more than reaching out and answering things they don't have to. thank you very much. appreciate it. that is all in on this tuesday night. good evening, alex. >> april 25th. mark your calendar. >> thanks. >> thanks. of 18? do you live in arizona have you join your local criminal hunting posse because it is actually required by law men in arizona join a local criminal hunting posse i'm quoting from the territory of laws 1864 to 1871

every male above 18 years of age who refuses to join the citizens law enforcement committees by neglecting or refusing to aid or assist by taking or arresting any person shall be fined in any sum not less than 50,000 or more than $100,000. so join that posse or fork over maybe as much as $1,000. here's another law from that same compendium on the sale of liquor to indigenous people. any person who has been guilty of selling or giving spiritus liquor shall be signed $25 totally racist, totally outdated but that is arizona law 1864 here's another one on animal every person who shall brand or

deface the brand of a horse, sheep, goat, hog, or pig that is not his or her property shall be punished with a term of imprisonment for not more than five f years. if you were wondering a shoat is like a preteen pig, and do not deface its brand or you might find yourself in the arizona clink for up to five years. those were the laws of the land in arizona in the mid to late e 1800s. at the time arizona was not yet a state. it would not become one for another five decades. but it was an important american territory. inam 1862 the confederacy and t union fought for control of arizona, and the union won at the a height of the civil war wn states and territories like arizona looked something like this. dirt roads with horse drawn

buggies and only white men had the right to vote. in 1864 slavery was not yet abolished, and the question of whether the united states would remain united and free was being answered in a war that wouldn't end until 1865 and would result in the deaths of more than 600,000 americans, two-thirds of whom died from infectious diseases, not artillery fire. and that's because in the 1860s doctors were still figuring out what germs were. it was not yet common practice formo doctors to wash their han before w surgery or when delivering a baby. 1864 was before how reproduction worked on a cellular level with the eggs and the sperm. and it was under those conditions whereas basic reproduction was still a mystery, wherere basic protocol were not yet in place and all men had to be part of something

called the posse comtitis. it was under those c conditionsn 1864 legislators in the arizona territoryth passed adnear total ban on abortion, punishing anyone who performed an abortion with up to five years in prison. today arizona's supreme court upheld that 160-year-old law. the court determined that thank tuesday the supreme court's dobbs decision that civil war era abortion ban is still in effect. the decision overturned arizona's already restrictive 15-weekst abortion ban from 202 and replaced it with that law from the antebellum period. after dobbs abortion advocates laterti said the supreme court ruling had set the country back 50 years to the days before roe was decided in 1973. but in reality states like arizona have been setback more

thantb 160 years to the days before women could vote and before america outlawed slavery. in the wake of the arizona court's ruling, the state's top democratic elected officials swiftly condemned this decision. >> it is a dark day in arizona. the near total civil war era ban that continues to hangover our heads only serves to create more chaos for women and doctors in ourwo state. >> let me be completely clear, as long as i am attorney general of the state of arizona, no woman n or doctor will be prosecuted under this draconian law. >> this is going to criminalize. it's going to have a devastating effect on the health and freedom of womennd in arizona.

>> so now the question is what happenswh next. the implementation of this law will be delayed as the decision is appealed, but depending on the outcome of that appeal, regular women face a harsh new reality in the south because it's not just the women of arizona here, it is women seeking abortion access in places like texas, women who were already traveling to arizona to getdy that abortion care. and now an entire region of this country could be going dark. 160 years after the civil war, we are witnessing a resurgent confederacy of anti-abortion states. in arizona choice advocates are already working toca ensure tha voters get a chance to decide this november on c a ballot initiative that would enshrine the right tot an abortion in t state constitution. those advocates have already collected 500,000 signatures,

which is 120,000 more than they need to get abortion on the ballot, and now that vote will be more pritical than ever. republicans have just put the future of abortion access on the line in a critical swing state in an election year. joining me now is democratic senator mark kelly from arizona. senator, thank you for joining me tonight. you know the sort of complicated dynamics around what happens next probably better than most. we know attorney general kris maize said she's not going to prosecute women or doctors who perform an abortion. she was granted that right by the governor of the state. are you optimistic about sort of women's prospects if they're seeking abortion care given that stipulation, or does it not matter? >> let me start, alex, by saying this is a unmitigated disaster for women in the state of arizona. they deserve to be able to make this choice themselves not from

a politician in washington or the state supreme court and that ended today this is because of donald trump who he appointed to the supreme court and ending roo v. wade, a law on the books for decades. this is reallyok bad day in arizona. to answer your question, yeah, i heard what the attorney general that's certainly a positive thing. but in 14 days abortion clinics and women health clinics are going to close, doctors are going to flee the state, and that puts women at risk. >> do you have any amount of optimism -- you talk about the 14-day window here for the appealshe process. this for anybody watching what's happening in thech state of arizona. this is sohe appalling and so o of step with the a modern era tt one wonders how an appeals court could let it stand, but then

again the state supreme court made the decision, so i wonder about your level of optimism in terms of the judicial process? >> yeah, not a lot. the supreme court has ruled. they've had some questions for theey lower court. we're going to fight this all the way up to election day, you know, certainly here in the next 14 days. this is a 160-year-old law. this was 50 years before arizona was even a state. and keep in mind this legislation or this law that's 160 years old could send doctors to jail for just trying to, you know, help women and give them the health care they need. so i want to be very clear about this.ve this would not be the situation in arizona if donald trump didn't essentially call for roe v. wade to be overturned. he talked about that yesterday. we're going to have to find a path forward here. it's the conservative judiciary

of the supreme court. certainly there are state republicans on the supreme court responsible or people appointed by republicans responsible for this decision, four men and one woman. what does this do to the political dynamics in an election year given the way abortion whenever it is litigated at the ballot box rebounds to people in favor of choice, what does this do for the broader dynamics going into november? >> well, i think the first thing we've got to be concerned about is the health care for women in the state. it's been hard already since roe was overturned. i've spoken to, you know, doctors who provide women health care who haveid left the state already. they've moved to nevada. they've moved onto other states. soto the options for women that going to get worse with what's happened today. we doh have an opportunity her in november to codify the right for womenod to make this choicen

their own, to get the politics out oft it. hope that passes. i expect it will. i'm going toes be fighting for , and we're going to look for other avenuesto to try to fix ts between now and election day. >> you know, senators are frequently expected to be boosters for their own states, and i wonder what you say to tho residents of your state and those that are looking at your state today about what has happened. this is the most draconian, regressive reproductive health bill -- health r law in the country by a long shot. >> well, i'll start with that elections matter. thet election in 2016 certainl had an impact on women's health care in arizona and other states across the country we've seen that with the election of the former president. we're going to make sure that joeak biden wins arizona and ge re-elected, and we can -- from

somebody that served in the navy for 25 i years, we can right th ship. so elections do matter. there are paths -- ways to fix this. you know, not a good day for arizona, but we also had a good announcement yesterday with the chips and science act grant money for the semiconductor industry, but mitoday, you know it was the opposite ofdu that.pp it was a very disappointing day. >> senator mark kelly of arizona, thank you again for your time, sir. really appreciate it. >> thank you. i want to turn now to white house press secretary karine jean pierre. i know the president had a statement on this. he said this ruling is a result of the extreme agenda of elected officials who are committed to ripping away women's freed. when republicans try to rip away women's freedoms, karine, it doesn't usually go well for them. why are they so committed to

this issue? >> look, it'sto a question for them to a answer, but i want to lay outsw what the senator said senator mark kelly who was on right before me. he laid out what this means for women now in arizona. what we saw today it is wrong, it is shameful, it is dangerous what women now in arizona are going to w have to go through. there are 21 extreme state bans across the country, across the country. and it is because of what extreme republicans, elected officials have been able to do. this started with the dobbs decision. this started with the overturning of roe v. wade. this, what we're seeing today in arizona and states across the countryes is the republicans pl on abortion. and ephere's the thing, alex, ty can't run away with it, they can't turn away from it or hide fromid it. this is theirs. the reason that we are in the situation we are in right now is because the former president put judges along with the help of senate republicans, put judges on the supreme court to make

this happen, to overturn roe v. wade, what was a constitutional right for almost 50 years. now we have these bans across thees country that makes it ver difficult for women to get health care.ic they get turnedn away from lifesaving procedures. they get turned away from emergency rooms. they are banning ivf. that're trying to criminalize doctors. this is their doing. and so they own this now. and what the president is trying to do and you heard this in his statement and you heard him say this over and over again. you heard it from the vice president as well and the administration is they want to protect women's rights, a women's right to make a choice on their own bodies. we're going to continue to fighi and say, hey, you know what, we're going to continue to legislate this issue, make sure roe v. wade becomes law of the land. you said something during your

interview with the senator, which is every time -- every time abortion is on the ballot, ohio, michigan, kansas, kentucky, california, vermont, every time it's on the ballot, majority b of americans vote to protect our reproductive freedoms, vote to protect a woman's right to choose. that's whatma we have seen. we are standing on -- on the side of a majority of americans, and we are in lock step with them, and republicans they don't seem to care. they don't seem to care what a majority ofar americans care jo about, making sure our that our freedoms are protected. >> ifr do wonder is there apart from urging americans to vote and exercising their democratic rights and, you know, criticizing republicans for their decision toiz as the whit house says rip away women's freedoms, is there anything this administration can do to protect federal employees, military service members in arizona? is there any sort of, you know, oasis, if you will, for

reproductive freedom that can be established by the federal government ines a moment like this? >> so, look, the president on day one that when dobbs was decideddo and obviously roe was overturned, he signed two executive orders to do what we can to protect women as they're trying to get just procedures or justce health care, make decisis on their own body. but really the best way to move forward is to get legislation done. now, we're going to continue to stand with our partners, state partners to do everything that we can. they're the ones on the front lines to make sure that women are getting access.ge and so obviously we're going to standd with them. but the way to truly deal with this, weru got to get legislati done. we have to. and as i stated every time -- i can't speak to 2024. i can't talk about an upcoming election as a federal employee, so i don't want to get into -- get into predictions here. but i can talk about what we've

seen in thee. past. and as i mentioned, i listed out a bunch of states that have had anav abortion ballot initiative on -- in that election -- in that election year. and what we've seen is a majority of americans stand for protecting anreproductive right. and so that's what we have seen. and so it is shameful now in arizona the decision made going back to 1964 -- >> 18. >> i'm sorry, 1864. and you did such a great job laying out what was going on during that time. and that's where we are right now in arizona. so this is a really horrific ea day, a sad day for the women of arizona, but this is what we're seeing in many states across the country. and sohe we have to stand with women across the country. we have to stand for our freedoms, and that's what we're going to, see from this ee administration. >> yeah, it's worth noting that republican lawmakers in arizona

are currently blocking a bill that would protect contraception in the state. >> and they said in the dobbs decision, we heard them they sa that's what they're going to go after next, contraception. it wasn't just going to stop at overturning roe, and they kept their process. >> karine, really quickly. the president did something today i know the white house wants to talk about, which is how we actually takeou care of r families as a country, as individuals. do you want to talk aun little t about the moves this administration is making on front? >> when youki think about the economy, thek president had an event tont lift that up. really this biden-harris administration has done transformational investment in paid leave, in health care. he siped the american rescue

plan, which was the first piece of legislation he signed into gn law, the chips and sign act. all of that is investment in americans, paid leave.s, americans do not have to make the difficult decisions they do have tot make which is do they take care of their parents who raised them or do they take care of their child. the president understands that, he's made thosede investments. and what this will lead to as well is making tax cuts for workers, people who truly, trull need a bit of breathing room, a bit of that dignity the president talks about. what you see from republicans as you were asking this question, republicans is a complete contrast. they putom forward a budget tha cuts medicare, social security, health care, paid leave, all the things that workers, every day people need, they want to do dramatic cuts to those really important programs that americans need.an and they do it -- they do it

because they want to give a tax cut tobe billionaires and corporations. that's not how we see how we should move forward. the president has always been clear he wants to build an economy built from the bottom up and bottom out. >> in the run up to the civil war or if not we're not going to pass it. white house press secretary, karine jean pierre, thank you for your time tonight. coming up donald trump's attempts to delay got shot down by ala judge in what may be a nd land speed record. first, it was just yesterday the presumptive nominee republican was saying abortion was best left to the states, and today onehe of those states uphd an abortion law that redated the american civil war. we're going to discuss the plan to tackle abortion when jamel buoy joins me. that's next. jamel

buoy joins me. that's next. i recommend pronamel repair. with new pronamel repair mouthwash you can enhance that repair beyond brushing. they work great together.

what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

today arizona's highest court, four men and two women, all appointed by republicans decided given the option of a 15-week abortion ban passed 200 years ago and a near total abortion passed 16 oyears ago, that ruling came on the heels of an alabama supreme court that sent conservatives scrambling when it ruled embryos are children, which in turn upended ivf treatment across that state. yesterday donald trump attempted to neutralize what is becoming a major campaign issue for him by saying he would leave abortion up to the states, but today we saw yet again what happens when

abortion is left up to the states, particularly conservative states with conservative judiciaries. the outcomes are extreme, and for most republicans they are politically disastrous. joining me now is jamel buoy, "the new york times" opinion columnist. yesterday they were saying trump's middle line was a good piece of strategy. today we see what happens in arizona, and i wonder if you still think leaving up to the states is good strategy for him to pursue. >> i think it's the only strategy for him to pursue because a national ban is just so toxic with most voters, but it's also clear leaving it up to the states is really leaving it up to the whims of in this case jerry manddered legislators, and a majority of voters may well

support abortion rights, but the states are jerry manddered against the popular win it's impossible to get that preference passed into law. i think voters and most people are aware of that, they can see that happening. but as far as trump is concerned, there's not really anyplace for him to go other than, oh, we have to leave it to the states. >> it also seems like it's kind of the harvest of a multi-decade project on the part of the far right, which is to inject conservative christian principles into the supreme court judiciary. you see these supreme court judges in arizona, alabama, florida, who have been radicalized and on very small benches or areas like texas like judge kazmierczak but get to have these decisions that are statewide import if not national import. this is part of the long project to, you know, reverse liberal

judis prudence. >> in the judiciary we're going to propose our preferred social order, prfred moral order on the rest of the country, and that's going to require winning elections, but never ran on this promise to do this. it's kind of a bait and switch. i think the thing conservatives and republicans are running into is that it's one thing to win elections, it's one thing to be able to appoint these judges, but you still actually do need some degree of popular buy-in to your project, and that buy-in doesn't exist. i don't think republicans know how to deal with it whatsoever and are risking a situation, right, it looks like all of the gains they've made are reversed by the force of the backlash

against them. >> i do wonder as a piece of political theater because you know trump doesn't really have any space to play but to suggest this be returned to states. do you think -- i mean do you think that convinces the people it needs to convince because he certainly has the levers to end abortion nationally without passing a federal abortion ban. they could just go back to the comstock act of the late 1800s and enforce that and no medication abortion can be pail mailed in the post. do you think it's suddenly a nod to a different way about abortion? do you think this is going to convince people trump does not want to end reproductive freedom nationally? >> i think if trump gets another term in office he is going to try to end abortion nationally through any means he has. that's sort of what the coalition behind him wants, and there's no evidence he's going to push back against that. i think as far as trying to

persuade the public, you know, i'm not going to ban abortion, it's one thing, right, for us to recognize this in term of politics. but for the public to sort of believe trump is not going to do it, there's one thing going in his favor, and that is people generally don't believe donald trump has any personal particular problem with abortion. people believe donald trump is probably a guy who paid for abortion, and that's how people perceive him. that perception really helps in trying to distance himself from ron desantis or mike pence or whoever. the thing that's working against him is that every day we get new stories of the horrors that happen when women cannot get access to reproductive health care, when they cannot get access to abortion care, and those stories resonate with people across the country. many people have their own stories, and trump can't escape

that. also democrats are clearly going to work very hard to remind voters and tell voters again and again with trump's help that trump is responsible for this state of affairs. he appointed the judges that overturned roe v. wade. he has been a loyal supporter, foot soldier for this cause of banning abortion. >> yeah. all roads end at dobbs, and we know who is responsible for the justices that made the dobbs decision. jamelle, bouie, thank you for joining me tonight. coming up 99% of the dollars coming in from jared's investment fund, that should not alarm anyone. we'll talk about the real world implications of that arrangement. but first it took a new york judge all about 12 minutes to throw out trump's legal challenge. what happened in that manhattan criminal trial is coming up

next. t manhattan criminal trial is coming up next

i don't want you to move.

i'm gonna miss you so much. you realize we'll have internet waiting for us at the new place, right? oh, we know. we just like making a scene. transferring your services has never been easier. get connected on the day of your move with the xfinity app. can i sleep over at your new place? can katie sleep over tonight? sure, honey! this generation is so dramatic! move with xfinity. he has been denied again. two efforts by former president trump to delay his upcoming hush money trial in new york have been shot down within the last 24 hours. on monday team trump asked for a delay so the trial venue could be moved out of manhattan. that appeal was denied in just

two hours. and today trump asked for a stay in order to challenge a partial gag order imposed last week by judge juan merchan. an appeals court judge took 12 minutes to reject that one. joining me now is kristi greenberg, the former deputy chief of the criminal division of the southern district of new york. kristi, thank you for joining me. this may be kind of like an obvious observation, but how has this trial -- how has this trial just stayed on track? what has judge merchan done that could be i don't know useful to other judges in handling their other cases, or what sets this apart so far as it's really full steam ahead? >> it's actually a discreet set of facts, and every motion that comes up, every attempt donald trump's team tries to throw a motion his way, he rules on them very, very quickly.

he disposes of them quickly. he doesn't just sit on his hands like we saw in florida. like in new york he's moving things along. when you have a frivolous motion, it should be that much easier to dispose of. >> it's not just mer. chan, too. the appeals court judge dismisses this thing in 12 minimates. there seems to be a uniform judicial stance trump's attempts here are bogus, and it's widely accepted they are bogus. >> right. and this should take 12 minutes, right? this is, oh,ee has a first amendment right to attack the family members of the court and of the district attorney. that's such a laughable argument, you should be laughed out of court if you're going to get up and make that argument. >> having said that, there are some legitimate areas of tension between the prosecution and defense. one of them is around a subpoena that the defense, trump's team would like to serve to mark pomeranz. the d.a.'s office they want to

squash the subpoena basically. pomerantz is a person of interest here. can you talk to me how and why he might be useful to the trump side of things? >> a few days ago trump's team served a subpoena without notifying alvin bragg's team or asking for authorization from the court, which is what a defendant had to do in a criminal case to serve a subpoena on a third party and served it a few days ago and is asking for a number of things, and ultimately mark pomerantz when he was running this before alvin bragg came, he was the special district attorney running this investigation, presumably he has a lot of information, a lot of e-mails, a lot of memos that he wrote in this view of the prosecution, and all of that was turned over to the d.a. when he resigned, you know, quite some time ago. and as the d.a. points out in their papers, look, we've talked to him, we've said do you have anything on your personal

devices, do you have anything we don't already have, and in their oppositional subpoena they lay out, look here are the things to get to him, here are his affer maegzs, and i think this subpoena is not going anywhere for the trump team. >> i i get the d.a.'s office thinks it's exhausted any potential evidence it has. but pomeranz stands for the figure who don't believe the investigation is as credible as d.a. bragg would like to believe. there's a long -- there's documented tension between him and d.a. bragg's office over, you know, this case in particular. it feels like trump is trying to use him as a weapon to get under d.a. bragg's skin a little bit here or -- >> yes. though there were motions in

leminae, none of that is coming before the jury. the judge has already ruled a month ago all that evidence is not permissible evidence that gets before the jury. and mark pomeranz issue with alvin bragg is he wasn't being aggressive enough. and alvin bragg after that book came out charged the case. and so i think the pressure points, yeah, there were interpersonal issues, probably. it seems like just in reading mark pomeranz book, he's got a lot of digs along the way, but none of that is relevant evidence for the trial. that i agree with you is what they are looking for, freedling. >> you talk about the jury. jury questionnaires went out today. there are no questions about, you know, whether, you know, who people voted for in the 2020 election, but there are questions about news media

consumption. yes, msnbc is on the questionnaire, and whether or not they consider themselves supporters of or consider themselves members of the qanon movement or antifa. how unusual are these questions in the grand scheme of things, and do you feel it's sufficient evidence to find out what channel someone watches and gives an accurate window into their political leanings? >> those questions are pretty standard in any criminal trial. any trial i had we asked those kind of questions. these are interesting because it's due to also follow truth social. have you read mark pomeranz's book. given how much is out there about these facts already it does make it somewhat unique and different from all these other criminal cases, but i think the judge was right to say who you voted for, what particular party you're affiliated with, whether you donated, those are questions

you could be a clear republican and still listen to the evidence, put aside any views of who you think the president should be, and be fair and impartial. that is a possibility, and he's allowing for that in his questionnaire. >> indeed, there's evidence of people who are die hard trump supporters or left their maga hats in their car to return a verdict that did not benefit donald trump. so we know the past could be present. >> and we saw that in the e. jean carroll case. one of the jurors had identified as somebody who identified as having more right-wing media consumption, and that was unanimous jury verdict in e. jean carroll's favor. so it is possible. >> it is possible, and we're going to find out what happens in just a few days. kristi greenberg, thank you for joining us tonight. coming up what does jared kushner have to do with burger king? a lot as it turns out. that's next. king a lot as it turns out. that's next. anymore?

he has something called osteoarthritis pain. it's joint pain that hurts him all the time. come on, scout. now, there's librela. the first and only once-monthly injection to control your dog's oa pain. veterinary professionals administering librela who are pregnant, trying to conceive, or breast feeding, should take extreme care to avoid self-injection, which could cause allergic reactions like anaphylaxis. this is the best day of my life!

we planned well for retirement, but i wish we had more cash. you think those two have any idea? that they can sell their life insurance policy for cash? so they're basically sitting on a goldmine? i don't think they have a clue. that's crazy! well, not everyone knows coventry's helped thousands of people sell their policies for cash. even term policies. i can't believe they're just sitting up there! sitting on all this cash. if you own a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more, you can sell all or part of it to coventry. even a term policy. for cash, or a combination of cash and coverage, with no future

premiums. someone needs to tell them, that they're sitting on a goldmine, and you have no idea! hey, guys! you're sitting on a goldmine! come on, guys! do you hear that? i don't hear anything anymore. find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com. burger king in brazil has a few things burger king in the u.s. does not like a new milkshake. putin made with special imitation cheese. and jared kushner. you heard me right. today "the new york times" reported jared kushner's investment fund is now a major investor in burger king in brazil. now, this deal does not just

complicate kushner's relationship with the country of brazil because kushner's fund didn't actually invest in burger kings directly. what it actually did is team up with a subsidiary of the government controlled sovereign wealth fund of the united arab emirates to buy brazilian burger king stock. kushner's investment group, affinity partners, has been entangled with foreign interests since its inception when it received a $2 billion investment from the saudi arabian sovereign wealth fund. thanks to "the new york times" we've gotten example after example how trump's investment group isn't problematic on the fund-raising side but raising questions when its ethically investing. for instance, one might take issue how kushner is working to complete a government-backed deal in serbia where according to the draft agreement agreed by "the new york times," kushner's fund would get a 99-year lease at no charge so it could build a

luxury hotel and apartment complex on the site of a former nato bombing. or one might take leasing a government owned island in albania to build this luxury hotel. even if you think ah, how much does the u.s. government really interact with a place like albania, anyway? even if you think that problematic entanglement is not enough for a second administration? what about this one? kushner's fund also invest would a car leasing company in israel, and kushner's partner at that car leasing firm is a part owner of the israeli navy's only domestic builder of warships. because the u.s. provides israel with billions of dollars in military aid each year, this means if donald trump retakes office, he would be in a position to directly help or hurt his son-in-law's business partner. it is all not a great look. we are going to talk about what kushner's foreign ties mean for

trump and american foreign policy with ben rhodes after the break. h ben rhodes after the break.

what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and you're probably not easily persuaded to switch

mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? you can get two unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. all on the most reliable 5g mobile network—nationwide. wireless that works for you. for a limited time, ask how to save up to $830 off an eligible 5g phone when you switch to comcast business mobile. don't wait! call, click or visit an xfinity store today.

right after donald trump left office, the office of the director of national intelligence released a report finding that saudi crown prince mbs personally murdered the brutal murder of "the washington post" journalist jamal khashoggi. the saudi arabian sovereign wealth fund then controlled by mbs then went against its panel of risk advisers and invested an eye popping $2 billion into jared kushner's investment firm, an investment that "the new york times" reports today makes up a large percent of the 99% in foreign funding kushner received to launch his group, affinity partners. joining me now to discuss all this is ben rhodes, former deputy national security advisor under president obama and co-host of "pod save the world." ben, thank you for being here with me.

as you look at it from a foreign policy perspective, how does kushner's entanglement with someone like mbs compromise potentially i don't know the foreign policy platform of his father-in-law who's running to be the next president of the united states? well, in a word entirely, alex. i mean, look, this is not subtle corruption we're looking at. this is a guy, jared kushner who no expertise, no qualification whatsoever to be in the white house. while he was there, he made it his account to work in the gulf arab states. he basically helped lead the cover-up for mbs, get him in from the cold after the murder of jamal khashoggi. and look, the saudis didn't make a $2 billion investment because they trusted in jared kushner's investment expertise? does anyone in the world believe that $2 billion is base on an assessment that jared kushner is who you want to give your money

to make a return? no. they're make an investment into what he thinks he can do for them if there's a second trump term. basically what we can take from that investment is in a second trump term u.s. foreign policy in the middle east and around the world will be made entirely with the interest of mohamed bin solomon in mind. >> he's also taking money from the qataris who have a different role to play in the conflict than say israeli investors, some of whom are in business in turn the manufacturer of war machines or at least the few war machines that are actually made in israel. do you think that complicates this in a way that neutralizes the issue? how do you see that, there fact he is week wale invested or they are equally invested in the qataris or israelis? >> no, it just means it's all for sale, alex. that's what it means. it's an auction essentially. this is how other countries

work, more corrupt smaller countries literally where the president's son-in-law is down the hall. that's not a new phenomenon in the u.s. essentially what you have is whoever is the highest bidder gets whatever they want. except in this case it's the global super power the united states of america. so i think what you can take from what saudi arabia and qatar and other countries are doing is that they believe based on their own experience in first term and their expectationwise the second that american foreign policy is essentially for sale and whoever comes in with the highest price gets what they want. >> what's so clear in "the times" reporting these relationships kushner cashed out in post-presidency were forged in the trump administration. as a former official yourself can you talk to me how out of the ordinary that kind of relationship building is outside the white house? >> you could tell at the time, alex, what he was doing. he made it a point to work on these accounts, right?

and look, what's very clear here is that jared kushner, he chose certain issues to work on when he was in the white house. he chose to work on issues in the middle east. and he chose to work with the gulf arab states knowing that the payout would be on the back end. and part of what's so grotesque here we should name, alex, there's literally an impeachment inquiry going on now in search of a rationale that doesn't exist that hunter biden somehow used his connection to his father to profit when joe biden was vice president, and they can't find any evidence for it. and here we have the president's son-in-law who worked in the white house unlike hunter biden who's collected $2 billion on the back end of his service, and now he's got his father-in-law running for president of the united states, right? this is not only unusual, this is unprecedent. this is putting a price tag on american foreign policy. this is level of corruption we've just never seen, and it's hiding in plain sight. i mean this is not subtle.

99% of his investors come from out of the united states. that is just saying i've setup an entire investment fund designed to get me and my family rich based on the fact that people are going to be purchased froouns in a second trump term while jared kushner surfaced in the first trump term when he rendered interference from mohammed bin salman after he murdered somebody in turkey. >> we're going to leave it there to be continued. jared kushner not saying he's not going back into government service. ben rhodes, thank you again for your time. that is our show for tonight. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. the decision by the arizona supreme court today is unconscionable and an affront to freedom. make no mistake by effectively striking down a law