>> TONIGHT ON GREATER BOSTON.

PART OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT WAS WRITTEN TO KEEP INSURRECTIONISTS OFF THE BALLOT.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR VOTERS?

PLUS, WHAT LAWMAKERS ARE PLANNING TO DO?

THEN, IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THE INSURRECTION ACT DOES NOT LET -- DESPITE HIS INVOLVEMENT IN THE JANUARY 6 ATTACK, WHAT HAPPENS IF AND WHEN THEY DO?

I ENJOYED BY A POLITICAL -- GRAHAM JOINED BY A POLITICO -- HELP ME OUT.

WHAT DOES IT SAY?

>> IT SAYS NO PERSON SHALL BE A SENATOR OR ELECTOR OR HOLD ANY OFFICE TO HAVE TAKEN NANO -- AN OATH.

YOU RAISED THE QUESTION PERFECTLY, WHAT IS IT ABOUT THAT LANGUAGE?

WHO GETS TO DECIDE WHETHER SOMEONE HAS OR HAS NOT ENGAGED IN INSURRECTION?

>> AS SUGGESTED, THE FIRST THING ANYONE WILL LOOK AT IS, WAS THERE AN INSURRECTION?

THE WEIRD THING IS MS. MISS" INTERESTED IN THE PACKAGED QUESTIONS ABOUT WHO WOULD APPLIES TO, WHETHER IT CAME UP WITH THE SUPREME OR ON THIS ISSUE, THINGS THAT THE SUPREME COURT NEEDS TO RECOGNIZE.

ALL OF THOSE ARE WHAT THE JUSTICES SEEM MORE INTERESTED IN DEBATING OR DISCUSSING.

>> MITCH MCCONNELL SAID.

>> IT WAS A VIOLENT INSURRECTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRYING TO PREVENT THE PEACEFUL TRANSFER OF POWER FROM ONE ADMINISTRATION TO THE NEXT.

>> MITCH MCCONNELL SAID IT IS AN INSURRECTION AND INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, DONALD TRUMP HAD AN OPINION SO WE COULD HEAR WHAT HE HAD TO SAY.

>> THEY KEPT SAYING WHAT I SAID AFTER THE INSURRECTION.

>> APPARENTLY, THE ONE THING WE ARE NOT GOING TO ARGUE IS WHETHER HE WAS IN INSURRECTION.

WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF CONFUSION?

>> THE TRIAL COURT FOUND IT WAS AN INSURRECTION AND THEY RELIED HEAVILY ON HEARINGS, BUT THERE IS NO FORMAL PROCESS SO MITCH MCCONNELL CAN SAY ONE THING.

THE QUESTION IS, WHAT SORT OF FORMAL PROCESS BUT IF ONE STATES IS ONE THING, IF ONE HAS ANOTHER, THE JUSTICES SEEMED OVERALL DIFFERENT.

>> IS THERE A POSSIBILITY OR IS THE SUPREME COURT TRYING TO GET OUT OF ANSWERING THE QUESTION?

>> THERE WAS A TRIAL, A SINGLE JUDGE HEARING EVIDENCE.

A LOT OF EVIDENCE DID NOT REALLY COME IN THE COURTROOM, IT CAME IN THE HOUSE HEARINGS.

A LOT OF EVIDENCE IS ON THE RECORD.

THERE WAS SOME FACT-FINDING MENTOS NOT -- THIS IS THE TRIAL ON WHETHER THE CANDIDATE WAS A RESIDENT, THIS IS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THE JUSTICES ARE SQUABBLING WITH.

SHOULD THEY DEFER TO WHAT COLORADO DOES.

IS THERE SOME ROLE FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS?

>> THERE IS A STRONG HISTORICAL ARGUMENT THAT THEY SHOULD BE DECIDED BY THE STATE.

THE CONCERN EXPRESSED THAT CONFUSION WOULD RAIN COULD HAVE TAKEN A DIFFERENT TACK.

IT APPEARS PRESIDENT TRUMP+ >> >> WHEN ABRAHAM LINCOLN RAN FOR PRESIDENT, HE DID NOT APPEAR ON THE BALLOT IN MOST STATES.

I’M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE.

THE 14TH AMENDMENT IMPOSES ONE QUALIFICATION.

IT’S NOT THE ONLY QUALIFICATION.

IT SAYS YOU NEED TO BE A NATIVE BORN AMERICAN.

WHO HAS THE POWER TO SAY SHE IS NOT ALLOWED.

>> VOTERS IN COLORADO WOULD SAY EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

AGAIN, EACH QUALIFICATION, ALL OF THOSE THINGS, DO WE NEED THE SAME MECHANISM OR A DIFFERENT MECHANISM DEPENDING ON HOW OPEN AND SHUT IT IS?

ONE OF THE THINGS THE COURT FELT THAT WAS THE DIFFERENT BETWEEN OPEN AND SHUT.

IN GENERAL, IT’S PRETTY CLEAR.

THE QUESTION ON WHETHER YOU DID OR DID NOT ENGAGE WAS OPEN ENDED.

LET HER KNOW HOW YOU FELT ABOUT THAT.

>> WE PROBABLY SHOULD HESITATE TO LOOK AT THIS IN A COMPLETELY ON THE LEVEL KIND OF WAY.

IT MAY NOT BE STRICTLY LEGALITIES BUT OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT THE COURT’S LEGITIMACY, IF THEY WERE TO TAKE A CANDIDATE OFF THE BALLOT FOR WHOM TENS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WANT TO VOTE FOR.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO THINK WHAT IS GOING ON IS A GRAND BARGAIN WITH THE SUPREME COURT WHERE THEY ARE LIKELY TO ROLL HE CAN REMAIN ON THE BALLOT BUT THEY ARE FACING A CASE THAT HAS TO DO WITH WHETHER HIS CRIMINAL TRIAL ON CHARGES CAN GO FORWARD.

ONE OUTCOME IS YOU MIGHT SEE A BROAD CONSENSUS TO LET HIM REMAIN ON THE BALLOT BUT ALSO LET HIS TRIAL GO FORWARD AND THAT WOULD BE SEEN AS A WAY TO AVOID APPEARING TO PUT THEIR FINGER ON THE SCALE.

>> THE IMMUNITY TRIAL HAS A PARTICULAR SET OF CLAIMS.

AT THE LEVEL OF ASSASSINATING A POLITICAL OPPONENT.

>> COULD HEAR ORDER SEAL TEAM SIX?

THAT IS AN OFFICIAL ACT.

>> HE WOULD BE IMPEACHED AND CONVICTED.

>> THERE WOULD BE NO LIABILITY?

>> WOULD HE BE SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION?

>> DONALD TRUMP’S ANSWER WAS NO.

CAN WE IMAGINE A SUPREME COURT SAYING PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY EXTENDS THAT FAR?

>> I COULD IMAGINE.

WE HAVE SOME JUSTICES THAT ARE VERY STRONG AND NEED TO HAVE VERY AGILE, CANDIDLY CAN I IMAGINE TAKING IT THAT FAR?

THAN IN PAST OCCASIONS, INVOLVING TRUMP AND OTHER INTERACTIONS WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, THEY PULLED BACK FROM THE BRINK WITH SOME THINGS BEING OK. CLARK’S WHAT WAS THE POINT?

THE POSITION IS LUDICROUS.

>> WHETHER YOU ARE ALLOWED TO RUN.

THE ONLY TOP I EVER MET JUSTICE SCALIA WHICH WAS MOST OF THE TIME IT WAS VERY EASY.

I BELIEVE IN THE PLAIN MEANING OF THE TEXT.

IT TELLS ME WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THEN WE CAN DISAGREE, BUT THAT WAS HIS STATEMENT.

IT STRIKES ME THAT THE 14TH AMENDMENT IS VERY CLEAR.

THE MEANING WAS CLEAR.

IT SEEMS TO BE IRONIC THAT THE JUDGES SURE MOST COMMITTED TO THE PLAIN MEANING SEEM TO BE THE MOST ENTHUSIASTIC.

>> I THINK THEY HAVE SOME TEXTUAL ARGUMENTS.

THE LIST OF OFFICERS INCLUDE SENATOR, REPRESENTATIVE MET SEIZED ON THAT AS A TEXTUAL HOOK.

WHEN JUSTICE SCALIA TOLD YOU THAT, HE WAS NOT TELLING YOU THE TRUTH.

IT WAS NOT THE CASE.

HE TOOK SOME EXTREME LIBERTIES WHEN HE RULED THE SECOND AMENDMENT, ABSTRACTS FROM THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION.

WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS STOP INSURRECTIONISTS FROM HOLDING OFFICE.

IT SEEMS TO APPLY DIRECTLY AND I THINK IT’S UNFORTUNATE.

THE TICKETS LIKELY WE WILL ALLOW THE COURT.

ULTIMATELY WE HAVE SO MANY PARTIES THAT HAVE BEEN WARNING US FOR YEARS THAT WE HAVE AN INSURRECTIONIST, A LIAR AND SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE IN BASIC PRINCIPLES SEEKING TO HOLD THE HIGHEST OFFICE IN THE LAND.

>> STUART HEALTH CARE SAID IT IS KEEPING ITS CONCERNS OPEN FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.

STATE LAWMAKERS ARE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO INTERVENE AND PREVENT FUTURE CRISES.

KATIE JOINS ME NOW WITH MORE.

HOW LIKELY IS IT THAT THEY ARE GOING TO INTERVENE.

>> WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN SOME LEVEL OF RESPONSES WHEN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH INCLUDING SAINT ELIZABETH.

WHETHER OR NOT IT TRANSLATES IS AN OPEN QUESTION.

THAT WANT TO THROW MONEY AT THE PROBLEM WHICH IS A FINANCIAL PROBLEM.

THE COULD BE POLICY FIXES, WHETHER IT’S GIVING MORE TEETH TO REGULATORS OR TAKING A LOOK AT THE HOSPITAL OVERSIGHT PROCESS, FINDING SOME WAYS.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING LAWMAKERS STARTED ABOUT.

THERE HAVE BEEN THREE HOSPITALS.

ONE THING THAT SPARKED CONVERSATION WITH LAST FALL.

THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT GOT LAWMAKERS LOOKING AT ISSUES AROUND SERVICES.

THERE HAVE BEEN BILLS FOOT FORWARD.

THERE WAS A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD BASICALLY BLOCK FOR THREE YEARS.

THOSE ARE ALL DIFFERENT IDEAS THAT TALK ABOUT HOSPITAL CLOSURES THAT MIGHT BECOME BROADER SOLUTION.

>> IT’S HARD TO SAY.

THEY ARE BEING REVIEWED.

>> IT’S ONE EXAMPLE OF PRIVATE EQUITY BUT IT’S NOT THE ONLY ONE.

THERE IS LOTS OF RESEARCH DEMONSTRATING THAT THEY HAVE LOTS OF EFFECTS.

THEY TEND TO USE DRUGS MORE.

HOSPITALS TEND TO CUT BACK.

IS THERE ANY PUSH TO SAY, IS THIS THE ASSET WE WANT?

>> THERE HAVE BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT LOOKING AT THE PRIVATE EQUITY BUT IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE SEEN OFFICIALS RAISE IN THE HALL KIND OF HOSPITAL ECOSYSTEM, THE FINANCES, STRUGGLE OF MEDICAL CENTERS HAS VEXED POLICY FOR YEARS.

ONE THING MS.

THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE OF MASSACHUSETTS ARE PLAYING AN OUTSIZED ROLE.

FINDING MORE SUSTAINABLE FINANCIAL MODELS.

I AM CURIOUS.

THAT’S WHERE WE ARE WATCHING FOR THAT IN THE FUTURE.

>> THERE HAS BEEN SOME CRITICISM.

CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT THAT IS?

THEY ARE SINGLING OUT.

INTERESTING LOVE, THE STATE HOUSE HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH LEADERSHIP DATING BACK TO WHEN THEY CLOSED QUINCY HOSPITAL.

IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THE DYNAMIC EFFECTS POLICY.

>> HOW IS THE LEADERSHIP -- WHAT IS THEIR ARGUMENT?

>> THEY HAVE BEEN POINTING TO THAT THIS IS A HOSPITAL ECOSYSTEM PROBLEM, THEY HAVE STAFFING SHORTAGES BECAUSE THEY CAN PAY MORE.

IT AFFECTS PATIENT CARE QUALITY, IT’S THE CYCLE OR A HEAVY POLICY .

I DON’T KNOW THEY’RE HOPING FOR A BAILOUT.

IF THEY ARE CREATED THE REINVESTMENT FUND.

THEY KEY.

>> GET YOUR SHOVELS READY.

IT’S EXPECTED TO BRING SEVERAL INCHES OF SNOW.

SCHOOL IS CANCELED FOR TOMORROW IN BOSTON.

DAVE EPSTEIN SEEMS TO DISAGREE.

HOW MUCH FUN WE GOING TO HAVE?

>> THIS HAS BEEN A NAILBITER OF THE FORECAST.

THE OVERNIGHT DATA FOR THE EUROPEAN MODEL STARTED TO INDICATE A SOUTHERN SHIFT.

MANY MODELS WERE FORECASTING 10 INCHES OF SNOW.

WE’RE GOING TO SEE LIGHT TO MODERATE SNOWFALL.

OVER THE LAST SEVERAL HOURS, IT LOOKS LIKE THE OTHER MODELS WERE STARTING TO SAY I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT.

LOOKING AT A COUPLE OF INCHES FURTHER SOUTH.

IF THE SHIFT CONTINUES TONIGHT, IT WOULD BE LESS IMPACTFUL.

IT’S GOING TO MOVE IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE MORNING COMMUTE.

IF YOU NEED TO GO TO WORK, THERE WON’T BE ANY PROBLEMS.

IT IS A BURST OF SNOW.

IF WE HAVE MORE OF A SOUTHERN PUSH, THEY WILL PUSH SOUTH.

IF IT SHIFTS NORTH, WE WILL GET HEAVIER SNOW BUT FOR NOW IT DOES NOT LOOK TO ME LIKE A MAJOR NOR’EASTER.

>> GIVE US A SENSE TO HOW THESE MODELS DIFFER AND WHY?

>> THE INTERNAL PHYSICS OF THE MODELS ARE DIFFERENT.

HOW THEY EVALUATE THE ATMOSPHERE IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.

IT DOES NOT MATTER BUT HOW THEY HANDLE THINGS, BUT IT IS REALLY DISAPPOINTING THAT THE AMERICAN MODEL IS CONTINUOUSLY BEHIND THE EUROPEAN MODEL.

WHY DON’T YOU EXCEPT THAT.

IT CERTAINLY BETTER BUT SOMETIMES THEY DO OUTPERFORM SO YOU CAN’T JUST FORECAST BASED ON ONE MODEL, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE SUITE.

YOU HAVE TO GO ALONG WITH IT.

>> WE’VE ALREADY SEEN CLOSURES ACROSS THE STATE, WOULD YOU SUGGEST WE WAIT NEXT TIME?

>> I ALWAYS THINK IT’S A GOOD IDEA.

I HAVE THIS CONVERSATION THIS EVENING WITH ONE OF THEM, AND WHAT HAPPENS IS, THEIR COLLEAGUE START IMPACTING TEACHERS WILL NEED TO STAY HOME SOUTHERN EXTRA START -- SO THE NEXT DISTRICT MAY HAVE TO ALL.

IT’S ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA TO WAIT AND IT WAS A LACK OF ASSUREDNESS, AND I PUT OUT SOME INFORMATION AND PEOPLE JUST CALLED SCHOOL.

IT SHOULD BE SNOWING TOMORROW.

ROADS PROBABLY WILL BE DIFFICULT, SO THOSE SCHOOLS WILL HAVE SNOW IN THE AFTERNOON.

IT COULD BE EVEN LESS.

>> DAVE, WE HAVE NOT HAD REAL SNOW IN A LONG TIME.

>> 717 DAYS SINCE THE LAST FOUR INCH SNOWFALL.

WE ARE REVERTING TO THE MEAN.

WE HAD OUR SNOW WASTE DECADE -- SNOWIEST ON RECORD.

THEN, THINGS BEGAN TO SHUT DOWN.

WE ARE REVERTING TO THE MEAN.

WHILE WE GOING TO REESTABLISH THINGS WITH A LOWER THRESHOLD FOR SNOW?

IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

THE PAST FEW YEARS, I THINK FOLKS FAIL TO REMEMBER WE HAD SOME BIG WINTERS NOT THAT LONG AGO.

>> WHEN WILL WE KNOW FOR SURE?

WE’RE GOING TO GET NEW INFORMATION THIS EVENING, IT STARTS COMING IN AT ABOUT 9:00.

WHEN FORECASTERS COME UP IN THE MORNING, I FEEL CONFIDENT, I THINK THE QUESTION NOW IS, HOW LITTLE IS THE STORM.

HOW IMPACTFUL IS IT ON THE LOW-END?

>> WELCOME.

THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

>> THAT’S IT FOR TONIGHT.

THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT.

♪