only did they fail to deliver what they were supposed to do under the understandings that were brokered with the united states, with egypt, with the united states, with egypt, with qatar, they not only failed to do that, they opened fire this morning on israel, sending rockets from gaza and the communities around the gaza strip. if that isn't a declaration of war, i don't know what is. the aid trucks outside gaza, which have already been inspected, have not been crossing since this morning. in dubai on the sidelines of the cop28 summit, the us secretary of state said he expected israel to abide by the commitments they gave him yesterday in jerusalem. i made clear that after the pause, it was imperative that israel put in place clear protections for civilians and for sustaining humanitarian assistance going forward. and as we've seen just today, israel's already moved out on parts of that, including sending out information, making it clear where people would be in safe areas and in gaza. antony blinken was urging the war cabinet to act with greater restraint than it showed in northern gaza. he's made three requests of the israelis. first that they expand this recent surge of humanitarian aid into gaza, to alleviate the suffering. second, he has asked them to find new ways to secure humanitarian pauses. and third, he wants a clear, unambiguous plan that will limit civilian casualties in the south. the white house has said publicly the second phase of this conflict needs to look different to the first. in response the idf dropped leaflets today around khan younis, on which was printed a qr code linking to an online map of the gaza strip. the entire territory has been broken down into hundreds of separate blocks, with numbers assigned to them which they will use, they say, to direct people to safe areas. our panel tonight — annabel denham, comment editor for the telegraph and joe moreno, former gop strategist and lawyer. welcome to you both, thank you for coming on the programme. annabel, let me start with you. hundred and 70, hamas are saying have been killed today, and we need to take that with some caution. does that look to you like the restraint that secretary blinken is urging? i don't think parameters. _ secretary blinken is urging? i don't think parameters. what _ secretary blinken is urging? i don't think parameters. what level- secretary blinken is urging? i don't think parameters. what level of. think parameters. what level of civilian life being lost is acceptable to any of us. israel finds itself in a dreadful dilemma with an impossible decision, and we knew that this humanitarian pause which was designed to get aid and water and fuel onto the strip, and to do that, important hostages were exchanged, but it was just that, it was a pause, never a ceasefire. israel meant that absolutely clear, and there was a concern that the longer the truce went on, the more people would view it as some kind of ceasefire, but israel has now resumed the attacks, and in doing so it is guaranteeing that no more hostages will be released at least for the foreseeable future, and there was always a risk that the longer it went on, the more it would play into hamas's hands, both militarily and in terms of a pr war between the two sides. there was always a risk that hamas would come out on top, and the reports from the health ministry saying how many lives have been lostjust today as part of that. it is not numbers that they can take in good faith, not numbers that you can assume are accurate, and unfortunately, we are very much in the thick of the war here, and we're still for clear information.— here, and we're still for clear information. , ., ., ., ., information. joe, we have gone from president biden _ information. joe, we have gone from president biden saying _ information. joe, we have gone from president biden saying that - information. joe, we have gone from president biden saying that he - information. joe, we have gone from president biden saying that he is - president biden saying that he is unambiguously behind israel to him then saying, don't make the remarks about 9/11, but what if they don't stick to the demands? you remarks about 9/11, but what if they don't stick to the demands?- don't stick to the demands? you hit it sot on. don't stick to the demands? you hit it spot on. immediately _ don't stick to the demands? you hit it spot on. immediately after - don't stick to the demands? you hit it spot on. immediately after the i it spot on. immediately after the october— it spot on. immediately after the october seven terrorist attacks, everyone — october seven terrorist attacks, everyone was saying that it was unambiguously the mission to eradicate hamas. now that we are getting _ eradicate hamas. now that we are getting closer to that, the reality is setting — getting closer to that, the reality is setting in, which is that warfare is setting in, which is that warfare is nasty— is setting in, which is that warfare is nasty and — is setting in, which is that warfare is nasty and bloody, and it is virtually— is nasty and bloody, and it is virtually impossible to avoid civilian _ virtually impossible to avoid civilian casualties, and as we know, hantes— civilian casualties, and as we know, hamas has— civilian casualties, and as we know, hamas has specifically situated itseif _ hamas has specifically situated itself in — hamas has specifically situated itself in hospitals and schools and mosques, — itself in hospitals and schools and mosques, where they store their military— mosques, where they store their military arsenals and plan military operations, and so they have set it up operations, and so they have set it up so _ operations, and so they have set it up so that— operations, and so they have set it up so that israel by definition will have _ up so that israel by definition will have civilian casualties in pursuing hamas. _ have civilian casualties in pursuing hamas. and — have civilian casualties in pursuing hamas, and so it has put israel in an incredibly difficult position, because — an incredibly difficult position, because if they are to follow through— because if they are to follow through with the plan, which is to remove _ through with the plan, which is to remove this terrorist organisation, they have — remove this terrorist organisation, they have to engage in something that is— they have to engage in something that is going to be gruesome, and i do think— that is going to be gruesome, and i do think the — that is going to be gruesome, and i do think the biden administration in making _ do think the biden administration in making these demands is basically tyin- making these demands is basically tying israel's hands, and so you have _ tying israel's hands, and so you have to — tying israel's hands, and so you have to realise that in order to let them _ have to realise that in order to let them do _ have to realise that in order to let them do what needs to be done, it will be _ them do what needs to be done, it will be a _ them do what needs to be done, it will be a difficult and bloody slog. but the _ will be a difficult and bloody slog. but the point to make is that there is a big issue for the white house. we have had a statement from a senior official in his brother who claimed that this has been america's war, and calling on the resistance to respond, so that could be seen as the wider call around the middle east, and the more this goes on, arab governments and allies in the region will start to question that relationship with the white house, won't they? fit relationship with the white house, won't the ? _, , relationship with the white house, won't they?— won't they? of course, that is the strate: , won't they? of course, that is the strategy. and _ won't they? of course, that is the strategy. and as _ won't they? of course, that is the strategy, and as far _ won't they? of course, that is the strategy, and as far as _ won't they? of course, that is the strategy, and as far as attacking l strategy, and as far as attacking americans, they have been 50 or 60 attacks— americans, they have been 50 or 60 attacks on— americans, they have been 50 or 60 attacks on american troops in the last month — attacks on american troops in the last month alone. thank goodness we haven't— last month alone. thank goodness we haven't had _ last month alone. thank goodness we haven't had any casualties yet, but is only— haven't had any casualties yet, but is only a _ haven't had any casualties yet, but is only a matter of time before that happens. _ is only a matter of time before that happens, and of course hammers's strategy— happens, and of course hammers's strategy has been to draw in the us and make _ strategy has been to draw in the us and make this more of a regional contest — and make this more of a regional contest. the fact is they started it on october— contest. the fact is they started it on october the 7th, so for them to now ciaim — on october the 7th, so for them to now claim to— on october the 7th, so for them to now claim to be the victim of some kind of— now claim to be the victim of some kind of us — now claim to be the victim of some kind of us alliance is nonsense, so again— kind of us alliance is nonsense, so again we _ kind of us alliance is nonsense, so again we have to focus on what is necessary— again we have to focus on what is necessary here which is to remove this terrorist organisation. anything short of that means that this sort— anything short of that means that this sort of activity that happened on october the 7th willjust continue. on october the 7th will 'ust connnuei on october the 7th will 'ust contini on october the 7th will 'ust conti_ on october the 7th will 'ust continue. ., , ., ., continue. the fears of the war spreading _ continue. the fears of the war spreading were _ continue. the fears of the war spreading were very _ continue. the fears of the war spreading were very real - continue. the fears of the war. spreading were very real during continue. the fears of the war- spreading were very real during the first phase of the conflict, annabel. those fears seem to not entirely go away, but it seemed to be a bit calmer during the seven day truce, that we have got more activity on the northern border, and the shooting ester in east jerusalem. how concerned should we be that this might spread further in the second phase of the context. after the october the 7th attack, we were extremely concerned about escalation, particularly to the north, and those fears of this profile proved unfounded, but what we have seen is many parts of the arab world turning its back on palestine, significant fracturing of that relationship, and of course iran saying that it has no intention at least in the short term and as far as we can take it as its word of getting involved in the conflict at this stage. so at the moment i think it is very much a case of what is happening between israel and hamas, and what we know is going to be a very long and drawn—out conflict. benjamin netanyahu has said that much. he has vowed to do what it takes to eradicate hamas. they have a very clear objective there, there is one that they want to fulfil. and of course if more is to open up on other fronts, of course if more is to open up on otherfronts, that will of course if more is to open up on other fronts, that will intensify the pressure on israel, and indeed the pressure on israel, and indeed the us. let's not forget as you have mentioned, the us has provided the country with $130 billion in security assistance, more than is provided to any other country in the world. �* provided to any other country in the world. . ., .,. ., ., ., world. and one factor we have not discussed. — world. and one factor we have not discussed, joe, _ world. and one factor we have not discussed, joe, very _ world. and one factor we have not discussed, joe, very quickly, - world. and one factor we have not discussed, joe, very quickly, is . world. and one factor we have not| discussed, joe, very quickly, is yes we know what the white house position is, there is $14 billion of military aid sitting on the table in congress. do you expect actually given some of the feeling within the president's own party that eventually conditions will be attached to that aid?- eventually conditions will be attached to that aid? yes, i do think that _ attached to that aid? yes, i do think that between _ attached to that aid? yes, i do think that between the - attached to that aid? yes, i do - think that between the humanitarian issues _ think that between the humanitarian issues we _ think that between the humanitarian issues we have discussed as well as the fact— issues we have discussed as well as the fact that there are finite amounts _ the fact that there are finite amounts ofaid, the fact that there are finite amounts of aid, finite amounts of weapons — amounts of aid, finite amounts of weapons arsenals and finite amounts of troops _ weapons arsenals and finite amounts of troops in _ weapons arsenals and finite amounts of troops in the region and elsewhere, so that we have to realise — elsewhere, so that we have to realise that there is going to be a limited _ realise that there is going to be a limited amount of time here. resources are finite, and people's patience _ resources are finite, and people's patience is— resources are finite, and people's patience is finite, and americans, we have _ patience is finite, and americans, we have a — patience is finite, and americans, we have a bad habit of losing interest— we have a bad habit of losing interest over time, of not sticking with things — interest over time, of not sticking with things sometimes, and so i do feel like _ with things sometimes, and so i do feel like time is not on our side hereo _ feel like time is not on our side here, and — feel like time is not on our side here, and we have to be absolutely ditigent _ here, and we have to be absolutely diligent in — here, and we have to be absolutely diligent in how we divvy out resources and how we make use of these _ resources and how we make use of these initiat— resources and how we make use of these initial months, because after this point— these initial months, because after this point itjust gets harder. we this point it 'ust gets harder. we should this point itjust gets harder. - should make the point that these negotiations are still ongoing, so we may see humanitarian pauses in the days ahead. coming up, george santos becomes only the sixth member ever expelled from the us house of representatives. the first three fought for the confederacy in the civil war, so he has a history maker. thoughts of our panel on that and the politics around it. and the second day of matt hancock's evidence at the covid inquiry, what did we learn about the decisions he took on care homes, and the side at track is here, welcome relief for elon musk no doubt, but what on earth is going on at x? stay with us, this is bbc news. let's quickly take a look at some of the other stories for viewers here in the uk. west midlands police say the violence seen before the aston villa game last night against warsaw was unprecedented. four police officers were hurt in with the away fans, and suffered a concussion. police say the polish club had failed to provide enough tickets for their fans. premier league side everton launched a formal appeal against the decision to dock them ten points for financial rule breaches. an independent commission handed down the punishment last month, and an appeal board will be appointed to hear the case which should conclude by the end of the season. temperatures could drop as low as —10 tonight, with warnings for snow and ice in place for eastern england and parts of scotland overnight. the cold snap has already brought snow to some parts of the country, causing disruption on the roads and some school closures. last night was the coldest night of the year since mid—march. and didn't it feel like it! you're live with bbc news. the us house of representatives has today voted to expel the ny congressman george santos. a two third majority vote in favour of his expulsion, he becomes only the sixth member in us history to be expelled from the house. two thirds voted in the affirmative, the resolution is adopted and the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the clerk will notify the governor of the state of new york of the action of the house. under clause five d of rule 20, the chair announces to the house that in the light of the expulsion of the gentleman from new york, mr santos, the whole number of the house is now 434. a 56—page report from the house ethics committee released earlier this month detailed "substantial evidence" that not only had mr santos told substantial lies in a resume he put before voters, but that he also stole from his donors, misusing thousands of dollars of campaign funding on a variety of his own personal expenses. he billed for a vegas hotel. there was a $4,000 clothing bill at hermes. he paid off his own personal credit card bills. he spent $3,000 on airbnb while off work. and there were smaller charges for services at onlyfans and sephora. all of which means he is now subject to 23 federal charges, including wire fraud and money laundering. mr santos has repeatedly resisted pressure to stand down from congress. the house hasn't expelled one of its own members in more than 20 years. only five expulsions in the entire history of the institution. so he is a history maker. let's speak to our correspondent, nomia iqbal, in washington. was it just was itjust the onlyfans, was that what caused it? i can tell you that is what has caught the headlines. his subscription to onlyfans. he actually denies that, and on fox news he said he had never heard of the website until three weeks earlier, and which i don't think anyone believed. but this is a man who, in his ten month tenure, has been dogged with claims that he simply doesn't know how to tell the truth, and some of those lies that he is accused of making have been slightly sort of silly in a sense that he has embellished a lot of things about his life, where he went to school, his education. he said that he was a voluble champion and that he was a voluble champion and that he was a voluble champion and that he had had to have knee replacement injury, none of that was true. he also claimed that a parent died in 9/11, he had two grandparents who died in the holocaust, and all this was discovered to be untrue. but i think what has really sunk it for him is those charges that you mentioned there, and also the house ethics committee report. i think quite simply for a lot of republicans he became simply too much, he became a bit of an albatross around their neck. having said that, there are some divisions among the republican party, and not all of them voted to kick him out today. did party, and not all of them voted to kick him out today.— party, and not all of them voted to kick him out today. did you see the messa t e kick him out today. did you see the message that _ kick him out today. did you see the message that max _ kick him out today. did you see the message that max miller, - kick him out today. did you see the message that max miller, the - message that max miller, the republican congressman, put out today? this is it. he is a staunch maga republican. he said earlier i discovered that the campaign had charged my personal credit card and the credit card of my mother for charges. we did not know about these, and we spent thousands of dollars recovering these funds. so he was ripping off his own colleagues! yes, house ethics report giving him cover and then finally booting him out. they believe this is someone who was bringing down their reputation. they are worried about if they keep them in the party what it looks like for them. when you have also got those republicans that lead to the more right of the party such as congressmanjim jordan, i grabbed him earlier when the vote came through, who are worried about the precedent that it sets as well, that you pick someone out and they have not been convicted of anything. but also, for a lot of them, remember this no reduces republican numbers in the house. they already have a slim majority and now it is down to five, so they are worried about that as well. but i think george santos was somewhat of an entertaining figure, i guess, for certainly lots of reporters here on the hill and certainly lots of reporters here on the hilland in certainly lots of reporters here on the hill and in politics, but i think it was the case that his own party ran out of patience with him. indeed so, thank you very much for that. formerfederal prosecutor indeed so, thank you very much for that. former federal prosecutor at joe moreno would have a field day with this. there is so much to get at. do you think he had become a liability for the republican party? they are down to a majority of three now, which is why they do not want to lose him, but in the end there was so much attention on him, just became too much, didn't it? if became too much, didn't it? if someone misused my mother's credit card i_ someone misused my mother's credit card i be _ someone misused my mother's credit card i be furious as well. as a republican, is a former new yorker, i'm republican, is a former new yorker, i'm horrified — republican, is a former new yorker, i'm horrified by what santos is accused — i'm horrified by what santos is accused of, but the lawyer in me says. _ accused of, but the lawyer in me says. it — accused of, but the lawyer in me says. it is — accused of, but the lawyer in me says, it isjust that he's been accused. _ says, it isjust that he's been accused, and so the house has now set a _ accused, and so the house has now set a precedent, unlike all of the prior— set a precedent, unlike all of the prior expulsions in which there was a conviction— prior expulsions in which there was a conviction of some sort of a crime — a conviction of some sort of a crime and _ a conviction of some sort of a crime. and so now it begs the question. _ crime. and so now it begs the question, what will it take for future — question, what will it take for future members who have not been convicted _ future members who have not been convicted of anything to be expelled? it is probably the right resuito _ expelled? it is probably the right result, and being in the house is a privilege _ result, and being in the house is a privilege and not a right, but i still question, the defence lawyer in me _ still question, the defence lawyer in me says, if we are now taking action— in me says, if we are now taking action against someone who is charged — action against someone who is charged but not yet convicted, where does it _ charged but not yet convicted, where does it end?— does it end? there were some critics toda , does it end? there were some critics today. annabel. _ does it end? there were some critics today, annabel, who _ does it end? there were some critics today, annabel, who were _ does it end? there were some critics today, annabel, who were saying, i today, annabel, who were saying, come on, what is the difference between george santos and donald trump? why are 18 republican members prepared to vote against george santos, but they are 100% full square behind donald trump? perhaps there is political— square behind donald trump? perhaps there is political self _ square behind donald trump? perhaps there is political self interest _ square behind donald trump? perhaps there is political self interest in - there is political self interest in there. donald trump might be the man they believe is able to takejoe biden on at the 2024 presidential election. i thinkjoe has tapped into an important point there, which is the question of whether parliaments or congress should be able to expel members, because it could end up being difficult members expeued could end up being difficult members expelled as well as those found to be breaking the law, and perhaps we need to have a better record structure, certainly here in the uk, in allowing the people not the politicians to be expelling members so long as the threshold is very high. at the back drop to all of course is that public trust in politicians both here and in the us is at an all—time low. donald trump, 91 felony charges against him, boris johnson, former uk pro—minister, who was found to be lying by the privilege committee to parliament more recently an snp mp who has come into all sorts of trouble for an £11,000 data roaming charge on his ipad when he was on holiday in morocco, and that money was initially spent on the public purse. there is barely a day that is now going by without there being some controversy in politics, here or in the us, and every single time one of the us, and every single time one of the scandal erupts, the public�*s confidence is being eroded that bit more. ., , ., , more. that might explain why there is such apathy _ more. that might explain why there is such apathy out _ more. that might explain why there is such apathy out there _ more. that might explain why there is such apathy out there for- is such apathy out there for politicians. let's talk about someone else who was in the dock today. one of the most controversial decisions that was taken by the british government during the covid pandemic was the discharging of elderly patients from hospital, untested, into care homes. more than 45,000 people in residential care died from or with covid, and many grieving families blame the government's policy of allowing patients to be discharged without a coronavirus test. that policy was not changed until the middle of april 2020. today, the former health secretary, matt hancock, made a staunch defence of that decision, claiming more people would have died had they been left in hospitals. every decision was a choice between difficult options, and nobody has yet brought to me a solution to this problem that i think, even with hindsight, would have resulted in more lives saved. mr hindsight, would have resulted in more lives saved.— hindsight, would have resulted in more lives saved. mr hancock was asked about _ more lives saved. mr hancock was asked about his _ more lives saved. mr hancock was asked about his own _ more lives saved. mr hancock was asked about his own personal- more lives saved. mr hancock was asked about his own personal fave year that forced his resignation in 2021. the sun had published pictures, you might recall, of him in the department of health kissing adviser gina coladangelo. he later left his wife to be with her. we askedif left his wife to be with her. we asked if that transgression made people likely to follow the rules. he admitted it was damaging to public confidence. it is he admitted it was damaging to public confidence. it is important that those who _ public confidence. it is important that those who make _ public confidence. it is important that those who make the - public confidence. it is important that those who make the rules . public confidence. it is important - that those who make the rules abide by them, and i resigned in order to take accountability for my failure to do that. �* ., , take accountability for my failure to do that. . ., , . ., take accountability for my failure to do that. . .,, . ., i. take accountability for my failure to do that. . ., , . ., i” ., to do that. annabel. what you think we learned from _ to do that. annabel. what you think we learned from matt _ to do that. annabel. what you think we learned from matt hancock- to do that. annabel. what you think we learned from matt hancock and l to do that. annabel. what you think. we learned from matt hancock and his two days of evidence? that we learned from matt hancock and his two days of evidence?— two days of evidence? that there wasn't very _ two days of evidence? that there wasn't very much _ two days of evidence? that there wasn't very much contrition, - two days of evidence? that there wasn't very much contrition, i - wasn't very much contrition, i suppose, but i'm not sure that we were expecting it. matt hancock is a man who was at the end of his time at health secretary and has gone on various reality television shows, perhaps in an effort at atonement, but also an opportunity for him then to set out his argument, the case for the defence of matt hancock, and for the defence of matt hancock, and for that reason i'm not sure all that much that was new emerged today, but i would certainly stand today, but i would certainly stand to discover that he doesn't view the decision to move hospital patients into care homes without them being tested for coronavirus as a mistake. and he is right, of course we don't have that, but if you look at how other countries responded, they didn't find themselves with 45,000 people dying in care homes from covid. he was criticised at the time for that decision, and rightly so. interesting of course that he is saying that those who make the rules ought to abide by them, and he famously did not abide by the very stringent controls he was imposing on the rest of us, but of course he wasn't the only one. look at dominic cummings, borisjohnson's chief cummings, boris johnson's chief adviser who cummings, borisjohnson's chief adviser who took that outing to barnard castle, and margaret ferrer the snp mp who took a train after knowing that she had tested positive for covid. borisjohnson, partygate. there are countless examples of politicians who were in positions of responsibility making very important life or death decisions who were bringing in rules and regulations, and some of them were not adhering to them themselves, and no wonder the public have been pretty appalled. the public have been pretty a- called. �* the public have been pretty a- called. . , ., the public have been pretty appalled-— the public have been pretty a- called. �* , ., ,, appalled. and 'ust to say, steve swinford has — appalled. and just to say, steve swinford has got _ appalled. and just to say, steve swinford has got a _ appalled. and just to say, steve swinford has got a story - appalled. and just to say, steve swinford has got a story at - appalled. and just to say, steve i swinford has got a story at tonight saying that borisjohnson is going to tell the covid inquiry that the government was initially far too complacent about the pandemic, and no doubt there will be more about that in the morning. i want to move on, because we are rattling through the stories. if you have ever wondered about the state of american politics, and that enormous chasm that separates blue from red, iwould invite from red, i would invite you to watch back the 90 minute debate between two of the big state governors, ron desantis of florida and gavin newsom of california. the two men have spent the better part of the last few years in mutually advantageous conflict — attacking each other in the media, appearing on each others turf, fundraising at the others expense. and so in a debate, hosted by fox new host sean hannity, who it seems to me is not entirely neutral in this debate, they went at it, for 90 mins on abortion, tax, education, immigration, crime, you name it. and gavin newsom offered this blunt assessment of ron desantis's bid to win the white house. there is one thing in closing that we have in common, is neither of us will be the nominee for our party in 2024. the thing that struck me watching this this morning is that this is the debate we are not going to get in 2024. ., ., . ., in 2024. the headline for much of the day on — in 2024. the headline for much of the day on the — in 2024. the headline for much of the day on the drudge _ in 2024. the headline for much of the day on the drudge report - in 2024. the headline for much of| the day on the drudge report was, this was— the day on the drudge report was, this was the real debate. there is a yearning _ this was the real debate. there is a yearning on — this was the real debate. there is a yearning on both sides of the political— yearning on both sides of the political aisle for fresh, and i'm sorry— political aisle for fresh, and i'm sorry to — political aisle for fresh, and i'm sorry to say, younger, talent here. and yet— sorry to say, younger, talent here. and yet the — sorry to say, younger, talent here. and yet the parties seem insistent on providing us with a biden trumpet rematch _ on providing us with a biden trumpet rematch. and so i think here with newsome — rematch. and so i think here with newsome and desantis, you have very contrasting _ newsome and desantis, you have very contrasting politicians who are popular — contrasting politicians who are popular in their respective states who could — popular in their respective states who could show very different models of government, and whether you like one of— of government, and whether you like one of the _ of government, and whether you like one of the other is almost beside the fact — one of the other is almost beside the fact. the reality is they can show— the fact. the reality is they can show a — the fact. the reality is they can show a real contrast in real time about— show a real contrast in real time about how— show a real contrast in real time about how they think government should _ about how they think government should run, so it would be great if we had _ should run, so it would be great if we had a — should run, so it would be great if we had a race similar to this one, but unfortunately all tendencies seem _ but unfortunately all tendencies seem to — but unfortunately all tendencies seem to say that we are going to get the same _ seem to say that we are going to get the same thing we had in 2020, with two politicians that are historically unpopular. obviously ron desantis _ historically unpopular. obviously ron desantis needs _ historically unpopular. obviously ron desantis needs this - historically unpopular. obviously| ron desantis needs this because historically unpopular. obviously . ron desantis needs this because he is not doing very well in the iowa and new hampshire polling. joe biden may be needed and has well. it strikes me thatjoe biden doesn't have that spread of surrogates that barack obama had, so you don't have all the disciples going out there to spread the gospel. the only man who seems to be going out and really selling whatjoe biden has done in this past three years is gavin newsom, right? i this past three years is gavin newsom, right?— this past three years is gavin newsom, right? ithink people remember— newsom, right? ithink people remember that _ newsom, right? ithink people remember that when - newsom, right? ithink people remember that when joe - newsom, right? ithink people| remember that when joe biden newsom, right? i think people - remember that when joe biden ran in remember that whenjoe biden ran in 2019 and _ remember that whenjoe biden ran in 2019 and 2020, he said many times that he _ 2019 and 2020, he said many times that he was— 2019 and 2020, he said many times that he was going to be a bridge to the next _ that he was going to be a bridge to the next generation, and he would be an interim _ the next generation, and he would be an interim president. people took him at _ an interim president. people took him at his— an interim president. people took him at his word at that point. now you have — him at his word at that point. now you have him running for re—election. he has a vice president that is— re—election. he has a vice president that is also— re—election. he has a vice president that is also extremely unpopular, and so _ that is also extremely unpopular, and so it— that is also extremely unpopular, and so it has left the democrat side with not— and so it has left the democrat side with not much option other than to follow— with not much option other than to follow along, despite the fact that he is not — follow along, despite the fact that he is not that well liked among the american _ he is not that well liked among the american people, and so i give newsome _ american people, and so i give newsome a lot of credit, he a good poiitician _ newsome a lot of credit, he a good politician who waded into hostile territory. — politician who waded into hostile territory, and it was really refreshing to see two politicians, they were — refreshing to see two politicians, they were debating but they didn't -et they were debating but they didn't get personal, there were no allegations about personal issues. and not— allegations about personal issues. and not ducking the debate. we are going to go for a quick break, and we are going to talk cop and elon musk on the other side. we will be right back. hello there. the big freeze is set to continue throughout the weekend ahead and well into next week as well. on friday, we did have some fresh snowfall around, but many of us had blue skies and sunshine. it was a day where temperatures didn't get above freezing all day in places. and we're going to see temperatures drop like a stone overnight. now, these showers heading into dumfries and galloway could be quite interesting, bringing up to three centimetres of snow, eventually working into cumbria. and we'll also have some snow showers for northern and eastern scotland, eastern england that could bring an odd centimetre or two. ice the main hazard, a really cold night. lowest temperatures probably getting down to about minus ten. on to saturday's forecast, any mist patches tending to clear away. a lot of dry weather with sunshine. showers this time focused across western areas. these are likely to come in as rain or sleet through the day on saturday. temperatures really struggling. there'll be some places that stay well below freezing once again. now, saturday night could bring some areas of localised disruption across england and wales. clumps of showers are going to start to push eastwards. now, some of them could well fall as snow, but i think mixed in with this, we may well have a spell of freezing rain, really dangerous stuff, this. it's liquid rain that's got a temperature below zero and it turns to ice on any surface it touch. so we could well see roads and pavements turn to ice rinks across parts of england and wales from this feature. further northwards, we've got clearer skies, drier weather. and another bitterly cold night, with temperatures again plunging, plumbing the depths and probably getting down to about minus ten, again, in the coldest areas. sunday, any wintriness will clear away from eastern areas. in the south, we'll be threatened with bits and pieces of rain, maybe a bit of sleet or hail, snow on the northern edge of this. away from that, though, we've got a few mist patches. otherwise, it's dry with sunshine. it stays very cold, and it could be another day where temperatures stay below freezing. or in other words, there will be some of you that have temperatures throughout the whole of the weekend below freezing. on monday, an area of low pressure is forecast to move to the south of the uk. now, this could well have some snow on its northern edge, but the exact amount of snow that we'll get in places depends entirely on the track of that area of low pressure and there's a bit of uncertainty. but away from that, a lot of sunshine, some showers affecting eastern coasts. and for most, it stays really cold again for now. bye for now.