tv Deadline White House MSNBC January 25, 2021 1:00pm-3:00pm PST
why we provide for money to extend unemployment benefits. why i think it's so important we provide money to provide for the ability of people not to be thrown out of their apartments during this pandemic, because they can't afford their rent. and to make the case why i think the priorities -- we think the priorities are -- i apologize -- within this legislation. i don't expect we'll know whether we have an agreement or to what extent the entire package will be able to pass or not pass until we get right down to the very end of this process, which will be probably in a couple weeks. the point is this is just the process beginning. >> reporter: thank you, mr. president, annie linsky with "the washington post." i wanted to ask you about one of the major themes of your campaign and how you sort of intend to measure and enact it.
that is the idea of unity. if you could talk a bit about what you see as unity being. there are some people defining it as being bipartisan. others are what some people define by some poll might believe, or perhaps it's 50 plus one, or 50 plus two, or 75%. given it's such a key part of your message and your promise, can you talk more about what is unity as you define it? >> i think it makes up several of the points you made. one can unity requires you to eliminate the vitriol, make anything that you disagree about the other person's personality or lack of integrity, or they're not decent legislators and the like. we have to get rid of that.
i think that's already beginning to change, but god knows where things go. number one. unity is also trying to reflect what the majority of the american people, democrat, republican, independent, think is within the fulcrum of what needs to be done to make their lives and the lives of americans better. for example, if you look at the data -- and i'm not claiming the polling data to be exact -- but if you look at the data, you have i think -- i hope i'm saying it correct, you may correct me if i get the number -- i think it's 57%, 58% of the people think that we have to do something about the covid vaccine. we have to do something about making sure that people who are hurting badly can't eat, don't have food, are in a position to about be thrown out of their partment, having the opportunity to get a job, that we all think
we should be acting. we should be doing more. unity, if you pass a piece of legislation that breaks down on party lines, but gets passed, it doesn't mean there wasn't unity. it just means it wasn't bipartisan. i would prefer things to be bipartisan, because i'm trying to generate -- take vitriol out of this. i'm confident from meyer discussions. there's a number of republicans who know we have to do something about food insecurity for people in this pandemic. i'm confident they know we have to do something about figuring out how to get children back in school. there's easy ways to deal with this. one if you're antiunion, you can say it's all because of teachers. if you want to make the casecom what do you have to do to make
it safe to get in schools? we'll have arguments. for example, i propose that, because it was bipartisan i think it would increase the prospects of pass edge, the additional $1400. well, there's legitimate reasons for people to say do you have the lines drawn the exact right way? should it go to anybody making over x number of dollars or y? i picked it, because i thought it was rational, reasonable, and it had overwhelming bipartisan support in the house when it passed. this is all a moving target. you're asking about unity, 51 votes, bipartisan, et cetera. the other people is that the one thing that gives me hope that we're not only going to sort of stay away from the add hominum
attacks, that the way to avoid a deeper, deeper, deeper recession moving in the direction of losing or competitive capacity, is to spend money now. from across the board, every major institution has said if we don't invest now, we'll lose so much altitude, it's going to be harder to reestablish it. we can afford to do it now. i think the response has been we could afford not to invest now. we can't afford to fail to invest now. i think there's a growing realization on that on the part of all but some very, very hard-edged partisanpartisans, m both sides, but i think there's
growing consensus remains to be seen. we have to work our way through, because as i've said 100 times, there is no ability in a democracy for it to function without the ability to reach consensus. otherwise it just becomes executive fiat or battleground issues that essentially get us nowhere. my colleague may know, the vice president, but i think there were very few debates on the senate floor the whole of last year. >> that's correct. >> on almost every issue. well, that benefits no one. it doesn't inform. it doesn't allow the public to make judgments about who they think is right or wrong. i'm optimistic -- it may take times, but if we treat each other with respect, and we're going to argue like hell -- i'm confident of that. believe me, i know that.
i've been there. but i think we can do it in a way that i think we can get things doing for the american people. last question. >> josh, they don't trust you with the mic. >> i wouldn't, either. [ laughter ] >> reporter: is it more important to get passed in a short time frame, or would you be willing to wait longer for more bipartisan support. one of the pillars is the vaccine funding. when do you think any american who wants to get the shot will be able to get the shot. >> i rheal try to answer the three parts as i heard them. one, time is of the essence. i must tell you, i'm reluctant to cherry pick and take one or two items out of here and have
to go through it again. these all sort of go hand in glove. number two, we are optimistic that we will have enough vaccine in very short order. as you know, we came in office without knowledge of how much vaccine was being held in abeyance or available. now that we've been here, around a week or so, we now have that, and we've gotten commitments from some of the producers that they will in fact produce more vaccine in a relatively short period of time, and then continue that down the road. so i'm quite confident that we will be in a position within the next three weeks or so to be vaccinating people at the range of a million a day, or in excess of that. i promised that we would get at least 100 million vaccinations -- that's not people, because sometimes you need more than one shot -- but
100 million shots in people's arms of the vaccine. i think with the grace of god and the goodwill of the neighbor and the crick not rising, as the old saying goes, maybe we can get that to 1.5 million a day, but we have to meet that goal of a million a day. everything points that we're going to have, a, enough vaccine, b, enough syringes and all the paraphernalia needed to store, keep, inject, move into your arm the vaccine, three, a number of vaccinators, people administration the vaccine, which is not an easy task for those who have the facilities -- like the nursing homes and hospitals, they have the people to do it, but not the capacity
to do everyone. we're leaning hard into areas where we produce more vaccinators. we feel confident we can do that. thirdly, it's really important that we have the fora, the place, the facility, where people can show up, stand in line, and get their vaccine without having to stand in line for eight hours, being able to pick up the phone, call the pharmacy, get your name on the list, et cetera. all of those mechanical things, they sound simple, but they're all consequential when we're trying to get out a minimum of 100 million vaccinations in 100 days, and move beyond that where we get to the point to reach herd immunity in a country of over 300 million people. does that answer your question? >> reporter: my question was roughly when do you think anyone who wants one would be able to get it.
would it about be in the summer? >> i think we'll be able to do it in the spring, but it will be a logistical challenge that exceeds anything we have ever tried in this country, but i feel confident that by summer we'll be well on our way to heading toward herd immunity, and increasing the access for people who aren't on the first on the list going all the way down to children and how we deal with that. i feel good about where we're going. i think we can get it done. >> thank you. >> reporter: mr. president, one more on the vaccine -- >> wait, wait, wait. he always asks me tough questions and always has an edge, but i like him anyway. go ahead and ask the question. >> reporter: thank you, mr. president. you just said that three weeks or so we'll be at the point where there are a million vaccines were day -- >> no, i think we'll get there
before that. i misspoke. i hope to increase as we go along, so we get to the million five a day. that's my hope. >> reporter: the follow-up would be now that you are president and you're saying there's nothing we can do to change the trajectory of the pandemic in the next several months, what happened to two months ago when you were talking declaratively about, i'm going to shut down the virus. >> i am going to shut down the virus, but i never said i would do it in two months. i said, it took a long time to get here, it will take a long time to beat it. we have millions out there who have the virus. correct me if i'm wrong, i think this is one of the first days the number has come down of deaths, and the number of hospitalizations, et cetera. it's going to take time. it's going to take a heck of a lot of time. we still have, as dr. fauci
constantly points out, it's one thing when we have mass -- how can i say it politely? -- mass disregard of the warnings about not wearing masks and wearings masks and social distancing and failure to social distance. people getting together on holidays in ways that weren't recommended, et cetera. the first things that happens is we see the number of infections go up. then you see the hospitalizations go up, then the deaths go up. we're in this for a while. we're now at 410,000 deaths? there's going to be more. the prediction as i said from the beginning of getting mere after being sworn in, the prediction is we'll see somewhere between a total of 600,000 and 660,000 deaths before we begin to turn the corner in a major way. again, remember the vaccine
december most of the people taking the vaccine, a significant number require two shots and they're an average of three weeks apart and it takes time to be sure you get to the 95% assurance rate. so it's beginning to move, but i'm confident we will beat this. we will beat this, but we're still going to be talking about this in the summer. we're still going to be dealing with this issue in the early fall. last point i'll make. i know you're tired of hearing me say it, and that is it that if we wear masks between now and the end of april, the experts tell us we can save 50,000 lives. 50,000 people who otherwise would die. thank you so very much.
president joe biden just wrapping up his first formal q&a with the press since taking office, facing questions about his vaccination plans, how the covid crisis is impacting schools, negotiations on the long-awaited pandemic relief measures, and russian actions against dissident alexie navalny for the first time from an american president in four years, we heard a full-throated condemnation of russia's conduct against navalny, as well as russian bounties on the heads of u.s. soldiers, as well as the massive hack that impacted multiple federal agencies. president biden announcing another executive order today, an effort to boost american manufacturing. along with us is wos reporter for "los angeles times", and our medical contributor dr. van
gupta, as well as our friend claire mccaskill. first of all, claire, i don't know what this white house press office has in mind for the president, but he should do more of these. he fields the questions comfortably, and the last question was from a fox news reporter, it was a good one, and he answered it well. i want to talk about the time he took for his priority for eliminating the vitriol and going straight to the crises about that we have that affect all americans. let me hang out for a minute around the contrast. the contrast is unfrickin' believable. let me count the ways that this appearance was different than
when the previous president stood at that podium. first of all, he was full of hope and optimism. second of all, he spent a lot of time talking about how we shouldn't call people names. he never mentioned his own greatness. he never mentioned his opponent. he never mentioned his election. he never mentioned the size of his crowd or how wonderful he is. he simply answered the questions. then, as you mentioned nicolle, the staff says, that's it, we're done. he refuse it is to leave the podium so he can take a question from fox. try that on for size. he wanted to take a question from fox. he wanted to show america, i want to answer they questions, i want to be an transparent as i can. if he keeps doing this as well as he did today, he's going to have more political capital to spend, and i think that's their
calculation. >> you know, eli, it's also striking on the substance to see an american president just come straight out, like a warm knife will you butter and cut at russia's conduct, around their treatment of a known dis dent that is rallying thousands to his cause in russia. the condemnation of their conduct around the massive hack that happened on donald trump's watch, and around the never responding to by donald trump, despite jonathan swan and others asking him directly, the intelligence accounting about bounties being placed on the heads of american soldiers. >> certainly, nicolle, there was a lot more clarity from the president when it comes to matters of russian mall feasance, russian aggression. it's almost too easy to do the compare-and-contrast going to
the last four years and what we've seen in the first couple days and at today's short news conference there. two other things to add to claire's point, we saw the president at the end here put on a mask in the middle of pandemic. that would have been an amazing photo op had trump ever really done it. here it just happened, people expect it, yet that was such a big contrast in temples of what we're seeing from the oval office on the coronavirus, and i think also the questions that he got about the coronavirus relief package, you heard a president who comes to washington, who understands how the town works, especially how the legislative branch works, and he basically tried to take his foot off the gas. instead of bullying everybody, saying i put out an ambitious plan, but there's room for negotiating. he's giving republicans and democrats space to work things out.
it was interesting to me, he also said he didn't want to pick the relief package apart and pass things piecemeal. that's what some folks have wonder about, something i asked jen jen psaki about on friday. potentially going into people's pockets and pass those to get to get an early win the president did not sound like that's something he's eager to do. he may be holding his cards close to his chest, but he's trying to give lawmakers to respect their process in a way we haven't seen for four years when it came to the president dealing with congress. >> dr. gupta, could you take us through what you those hi answers around vaccine availability, vaccine distribution and vaccine
production meant for all of us, for the bub? >> good afternoon, nicolle. i think what it means, we have to buckle in for the next two months. there will not be general population availability, at scale, we think until probably april, early may. herd immunity we don't think will set in until the middle of july. i thought president biden gave the message we've been craving the last 12 months. what i'll say is i'm hoping he cuts through to the 50 governors or at least the 47 governors in our union who still have indoor dining with restrictions in place. it's not ordained we still have to lose 200,000 more people. that's where the forecast is suggesting we're headed, about you it's not preordained. i hope president biden has 50 governor follows the science. some are, but 467 governors still have indoor dining with restrictions. we're telling teachers they have
to go back into the classroom without giving priority vaccinations to teachers and staffs. we could save lives. we have monoclonal antibodies and other had when they had early-stage coronavirus disease. people don't have access to them, sometimes because they don't know hoe to access. if you've been diagnosed in the last ten days with mild to mod rule temperatures and at high risk for a bad outcome, go to covid.infusioncenter.org. we don't have to lose that many lives. we can lower that number. i want to ask what it means we don't have enough vaccine distributors. i heard the president say that. i go into my walgreens in towns
and they have flu shots available for anyone that walks in. there's someone who has the ability to take a needle and put it in my arm if what's in that vial is a flu shot. why can't the same people put the covid in their arm? >> those people are being co-opted. walgreens, cvs, pharmacists across the country, there's just not enough of them. everybody who was giving a vaccine when i was there was a healthcare providers of some kind. people inject themselves with insulin. they could be become certified to become a vaccinator. we need healthcare providers supervising the process, so president biden is spot on, we need more vaccinators. we need states, because states ultimately control this, to loosen their definition, train people. it's not hard. i didn't give a vaccine for
years prior to yesterday. it's not hard to learn it, and with you need people to supervise it. we need to think about ig about who can help staff this mass vaccination effort. we're needing a lot more americans vaccinated quickly. doctor, should every governor -- should they be calling up the national guard to do door-to-door vaccinations if people want them? >> as a reservist in the air force, i will say the military has a lot of medical capability. so, yes, they can set up triage tents, set up more of these pop-up kline. if you had the right type of staffings model they could go door to door. we need all 50, and we need to leverage the federal military assets we have on hand. billions of taxpayer money go to sustain this asset. why aren't we using them?
we need every available resource. >> claire, i want to come back to you on the topic of what was not said. this is a white house that is practices extreme message discipline. they want to talk about their agenda. they want to talk about unity. they want to use the president to push the legislative agenda. they do not want to go near the insurrection on capitol hill on january 7th, or the impeachment of donald j. trump. >> no, and they won't. they want to stay focused on getting their team confirmed, and getting what is necessary through the senate and the house for covid. i will tell you, what is really complicating this rate now, anding this something we could spend a whole hour on, nicolle, which is the games that mitch mcconnell is playing right now, refusing the democratic senators
to take their roles as chairs of their committees. here's the irony. let me break it down simply. he's saying unless you promise never to touch the filibuster, we're going to deny you the 60 votes you need to exert your majority. in other words, we're going to use the filibuster to keep you from even having the chairmanships that the voters in georgia decided they wanted you to have. it's unbelievable. that makes this really complicated right now for the biden white house. they need this legislation to be moving. they need to be counting votes. right now we still have republicans technically chairing all the committees that the democrats should be in charge of and deciding the schedule of those hearings. this is messy right now, and mitch mcconnell -- i mean, i don't want to violate what the president lectured us on, but come on, mcconnell, you lost the
majority. quit behaving as if you won the majority. it's not fair. the democrats don't have the votes to do away with the filibuster. stop your posturing, allow the democrats to take over. they won. . >> claire, why is he exerting any control over anything? what is he doing? >> technically -- this is complicated, but technically there are different motions in front of the senate. the motion to organize the senate, which sets the number of members on each committee, which allows the democrats to take over as chairman of the committee, that is not a privileged motion. in other words, they have to get 60 votes on that organizing re lose. mitch mcconnell is refusing any republican votes to allow the senate to organize, unless they put in that resolution they will never touch the filibuster.
it really is weird, because they don't have the votes to do away with the filibuster right now, and mitch mcconnell -- the democrats never demanded that of mitch mcconnell when he took over. in fact mcconnell did the opposite. he went nuclear and allowed supreme court justices to be confirmed by a bare majority. if the shoes were on the other foot, mitch mccontingent would say i'm not doing this, but he's trying to force schumer to use the nuclear option right now. then he will, you notice, cry foul. it is really procedural jujitsu, and denying the majority power to the party that won the election. he should be ashamed. >> he's not capable of shame, but eli, i think it raises the question of biden's decision
tree from a the washington he's inherited from trump. on the one handle, it does not seem the devotes to unity and his commitment -- what he made clear today is not unity for unity's sake, he wants legislation with bipartisan support. the anxiety trigger, is that would be an open hand that's basically stomped on by mitch mcconnell's signal republicans, the house, which is basically a wasteland ofseditionists. on the other hand, the general public does not care about process. they care about the results. if joe biden is navigating his legislative approach, his handling of consequence with an eye on what he can deliver, maybe he is taking the more prudent path.
what do you think? >> there's a lot to get on the there, nicolle, bud you're right. if the public gets a lot of things you've congress, they're not going to worry about, did they use the filibuster? that's a washington conversation, and i think this president and the new administration definitely underthat. frankly, i think the last president understood that. the rules are there, but frankly you have to have a message and deliver it. are you just repedestrianing, you know, the obama administration's mistakes in believing that republicans are ever going to meet you halfway, and starting in the middle, when you should be starting on the progressive left. planting a flag think. joe biden has put out a massive relief plan, a rescue plan he calls it, that includes a lot of democratic priorities, not just vaccine money. it includes the $15 minimum wage, a lot of things
progressivesless him fight for, but he's also a establish tarianist. he's trying to give them space, but he did say he doesn't want to split it up. i heard from what he was saying earlier that at some point he's going to move on this. what that looks like, we don't really know yet, but i think he's going to give them a couple weeks, see where they are, and if republicans haven't come to the table, it's his move and chuck schumer's move. who said policymaking and legislating would be boring. i think it's a riveting moment with the capitol still literal a crime scene and the president with a hardwired commitment to
bipartisanship. doctor, i'm going to take you up on your offer to come in and we'll have a conversation about treatments that are available. the rates 6 infection and sadly the death rates are setting records every day. we'll have that later this week. claire is sticking around. the senate is set to receive the article of impeachment later tonight. eyes will be on the republicans. one to watch is a quasi-moderate, who said he's stepping down today. a report over the weekend says there's debate in washington over whether to charge all of the violence insurrectionists on capitol hill. we'll look at the dangers of letting some go unpunished. all those stories and moyer after "deadline: white house" takes is a quick break. don't go anywhere. dline: white takes is a quick break don't go anywhere.
the trial is going to happen. it is certainly and clearly constitutional, and if the former president is convicted, there will be a vote to disqualify him from future office. there is only one question at stake, only one question that senators of both parties will have to answer before god and their own conscience -- is former president trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the united states? that was senate majority
leader chuck schumer last hourh. the senate will turn into a jury on the trial set to begin february 9th "the washington post" reports that trump has entertained the idea of creating a third party called the patriot party, and instructed his aides to prepare election challenges to lawmakers who crossed him in the final weeks of office. multiple people in trump's orbit, who spoke anonymously, it's in this atmosphere one prominent establishment republican is calling it quits. rob portman says he will not run for election next year. let's bring in garrett haake,
who is on capitol hill, our friend michael steele. claire is still with us. michael steele, portman as confounded me, as someone who worked beside him, i was shocked and sad he could never find his spine, display a conscience, or having known him as a fellow staffer, i'm sure he felt horror. >> i have known him for a long time. i know how difficult this particular travel has been for him. he's notice faced with this trumpian reality that i think a lot more republicans like him are going to come to face with.
that is, my conscience, my values, my principles, do i just set them aside to avoid a tough primary? or do i look my constituents in the eye and look the country in the eye, and do the right thing, what my conscience dictates. not having spoken to the senator yet, i think that's where he's leaning. he's leaning into that, and bully for him. but it speaks to a broader issue, i think, nicolle about the direction of the country, the conversation trump is floating about creating his own maga party. can i add to it? please do. feel right at home doing it, my friend, don't take your time, we'll help you do it as quickly as possible. and all those folks who want to go to maga-land, there's the train, walk, bus, flies, you
don't even have to do covid protocols. >> we'll pay your way. >> that's a cleansing. >> trump has the gut on the grievances of the country, but he doesn't have the head for an enduring political strategy. the better political strategy, and i hesitate to say this out loud, is to stake your claim on the republican party. he actually make hawley, cruz, kevin mccarthy and those folks have to follow him. if they're going to lie in the bet, they'll have to be part of the patriot party. >> absolutely. please, there's the door. i think that's a big par of the narrative you will see unfold over the ensuing weeks and months, exactly how does it play itself out? i want that battle. let's have that fight.
i want to stand toe to toe to josh hawley and have him justify his fist bump to the crowd inciting insurrection. i endorsed the current president for the united states for a democracy. let's not get into the weeds of crazy around trump. let's have the discussion about what republicanism is and should be in this century. if i can't go to the -- if i could go to the last conversation that you and the senator with you having. look, you are getting "punk'," understand you're getting "punk'd," and come back at him. call his bluff. they have no leverage over you. you have the majority and they know it, but they're going to
punk you into a situation where you give up something you don't have to give up. for what? for what? ceding power to mcconnell? he has none. you have the majority. use it, for heaven's sake. sheesh, this is not rocket science. >> you know, i will just chime in on this and say there is nothing of value to take from this republican party except this -- fight like republicans, you know? they don't have the facts on their side, but they do. right? >> yes. yes. >> go ahead, claire. >> claire, what are your thoughts? >> well, you know, here is the practical problem. the practical problem is that chuck schumer doesn't have 50 votes to change the rules on filibuster. he doesn't have the 50 votes. mcconnell knows it. so this is going to create an
impasse until -- what i think needs to happen -- this is just my two bits. i think chuck needs to use the nuclear option to change the rules to allow the organizing motion to be privileged, therefore it doesn't need 60 votes, like reconciliation or a few other things. if mitch mcconnell is not even going to allow them to oarize the senate, then they have to wrap him on the knuckles hard. why they may not have the votes to blow up the filibuster, i think they would have the votes to have the democrats take over the chairmanships that they earned. in my opinion, the sooner they get at it, the better. >> and a woman should lead them. garrett haake, let me pull you in on this. i want your thoughts on the latest reporting on this very conversation, but also tell us a bit about what always tonight when the article of impeachment
is transmitted? >> reporter: well, senator mccaskill is 3r0eb8 exactly right. 9 democrats could have a vote to change the rules so they can organize the senate with just 50 votes, but the reality is the senate is basically doing the same work if this rules debate was over anyway. they're moving through biden's nominees fairly quickly. they'll get a secretary confirmed tonight, probably another secretary confirmed tomorrow. if there's a way to salvage it, that doesn't get temperatures among senators especially high. so we'll see how that plays out, but i think the ultimate solution may be exactly what senator mccaskill suggests here. i think, for viewers, this is the thing to always understand about mitch mcconnell. he's a student 6 power. if you have the votes to beat me, come and do it. >> right. >> reporter: if you don't, too bad for you.
that's the way you'll continue to see that play out. on the impeachment side, you know, we have seen today essentially a media blitz by the impeachment managers. i think we've had one on every hour on msnbc. they're doing interviews across the country here, trying to marshal public pnc and support to keep pushing this impeachment forward, that will be a core challenge for the impeachment managers over the next two weeks. every day we get further from the trump administration is another day they have to essentially remind the republican senators, who will be the swing jurors, of holding the last guy accountable here. those are the dynamics we'll be watching. >> garrett i feel like you always bring me back down to earth even when i have a shard of hope that somebody under the
banner of republicans will do the right thing. there was 60% of public support from hearing from people like john bolton, and these republicans were immune to that big sharp swing. the number of people who wanted to hear from witnesses far exceeded the number of people who wanted trump removed from office. this feels different. trump is out of office. and the story is getting worse by the hour. the blockbuster reporting in the "new york times" that a coup was plotted at the justice department is horrifying. in normal times that would be the wall-to-wall coverage, but we're an hour away from theable of impeachment. >> reporter: heard heard the events of january 6th will be the key component. that's the thing after which they want to go after former
president trump, but everything else we are learns, including that learning, will speak to intent, will speak to motive. it wasn't something that donald trump woke up on the morning of january 6th and decided to do. this effort went back weeks and week. don't think of them as individual counts to be proven. think of the instances as things the managers will use to try to prove intent. the other key difference here between this trial and the last is, again, it goes back to mcconnell. mck07b8d was in lockstep in the last impeachment trial. their goals, their motives, incentives were the same. he knows it's not his job to defend donald trump and to make this easy for him. that will mean a different process, different policies,
potentially, so that schism will be really important in how this trial will play hout differently than the last one. it's just amazing, you take intent, trump was attacking mike pence at a rally in georgia. trump -- there's a direct line now that is available in video exhibits. if you look at the way the managers use video, and interviews in the last trial, your video, everything that took place was trump's incitement and the insurrectionist comments and activity. we're excited to watch it all with you. thank you so much. up next for us, holding them accountable. how to ensure that we're investigating and prosecuting domestic terrorists to the full est extent of the law. that's coming up. tent of the la. that's coming up
27 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients to support immune health. >> man: what's my safelite story? and nutrients to my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me... with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ "the washington post" is reporting in federal officials are arguing internally that, of the estimated 800 insurrectionists -- the post calls it, quote, a politically loaded proposition, but one alert to the practical concern that hundreds of such cases could swamp the local courthouse, while other fbi agents have pushed back for
accountability, with, quote, the full extent of the law. joining ours conversation is frank fuglusi. and, wait for it, author of the new book "the fbi way." . frank, i want to understand this waivering on charges, but i want to understand the limitations of the law. i saw something you said friday night with bill maher, and i want to push on this. what are the deficiencies in laws which seem to be an appropriate way to charge some of these individuals? >> so here's the barometer line. there's no distinguishes in domestic terrorism laws, but there are none. i'm going to be on this soapbox for quite some time. we don't have a law against domestic terrorism. that's why you're seeing them arrested for things like
trespass, assault, theft of a laptop or theft of a podium. none of those charges reflect the gravity of what happened. we have a nice neat set of laws for international terrorism. if you change the religion of those going into the building on january 6th, to make these islam, and all of a sudden we had a law that would sentence them 20 years to life. that needs to change and needs to change quickly. frank, what does that debate look like? are you concerned that, you know, a lot of the laws we have for prosecuting foreign terrorists, and as you said, those associated with a certain faith, came after 9/11, supported by members of both parties, for better or for worse. you know have got some members of the republican senate who were on the side of trump and have not really been forceful in
calling for a change in laws. i haven't seen them if they've been calling for harsher charges, what happens to that debate if it isn't joined by both parties? >> so here's the thing. there have been domestic terror bills proposed, bipartisan fashion through the years, including one by adam schiff, one by martha mcsally. they routinely get shot down. the particular one i'm refer to was shot down by senator ron johnson. they jump immediately from passing a law with strict consequences to we don't want people spying on americans. this will result in spying on americans. i say that's wrong. i say we can do this right. i'm not saying we need more investigative techniques in spying on americans. let's just start with a law that says if you meet the definition of do metz ig terrorism, which, by the way, we have on the
books, then we're going to enhance the sentence or wee going to have a lot to point to. we define domestic terrorism in the law, we don't have a law against it. >> with that understood and stipulated, what are the charges available to law enforcement for the insurrectionists. >> many of what what we're seeing ear even assault on a law enforcement officer, but when you rob a bank, we don't arrest you for trespass in the bank. we arrest you for bank robbery. why? you committed a crime against the government. someone tried to steal our democracy on january 6th. we're just arresting them for trespass and for other things. this needs to change. it needs fob bipartisan. >> frank, you've written a new
book. you've been one of the most important voices on this program for the last four years. we will make a plan to do that later this week. congratulation on the book's relesion. the next hour of "deadline: white house" starts after a quick break. don't go anywhere. we really are just getting started. anywhere. we really are just getting started.
calls for a trial. if we're going to have unity in our country, i think it's important to recognize the need for accountability, for truth and justice. hi again, everyone. it's 5:00 in the east. there it is the one-time standard bearer of the gop drawing a line in the stand, saying out loud that every rational person has understood for weeks now -- without accountability, without truth or justice, there's no chance for unity. mitt romney laying down an important marker there for the rest of his party. romney may have had revelations like the two blockbuster accounts that broke over the weekend in mind, in terms of united states what we
know about trump's role in inciting the insurrection may be heading. "new york times" breaking the news of a coup plot at the highest levels of the justice department. the justice department's top leaders listened in stunned
silence this month. one of their peers, we were told, had devised a plan with president trump to oust jeffrey rosen to wield the depend's power to force georgia state lawmakers to overturn its presidential election results. jeffrey clark his des vising ways to cast doubt on the election results and bolster trump's continuing legal battles. it was a plan that ultimately did not come to pass, but would have sent shockwaves through the department. sources characterize it this way -- nearly touching off a crisis at the country's premier law enforcement institution. the other report out this weekend, "wall street journal" finding donald trump's attempt to find the department of justice invalidate joe biden's victory wen even further. after the texas tbs case was dismissed on december 11th mr. trump began pushing the justice department to file its own
lawsuits again the states directly in the supreme court. frustrated his wishes weren't being implemented, trump at one point planned to bypass the attorney general and telephone the acting solicitor general directly. one of trump's outside lawyers sent over a draft legal brief he wished the department to file with the supreme court. now the justice department's inspector general, michael or oy wits, has announced he will investigate any former or current doj official engaged in an
improper event to have doj seek to alter the outcome of the election. the mounting evidence as the article of impeachment is officially delivered in the next hour, is where we start with some of our favorite reporters and friends. carol is back. also joining us is egene robinson, and daniel goldman.
majority counsel during the last impeachment. daniel goldman, i'm going to start with you. one of the things that became undeniblg, even for republicans, is that the facts are no longer in dispute. the case you made had even republicans who didn't vote to convict. in fact, that was their excuse, from not wanting to hear from firsthand witnesses, verse 1.0 of the case that was put forward by the house investigators. this again is an instance where none of the facts are in dispute. can you speak to the x factor, much the emerging body of evidence mostly coming out there journalism about trump's state of mind, his intent? >> that's going to be a critical part of this trial. even if the facts of what
occurred at the capitol are not in dispute, the president's knowledge of the plans in advance to storm the capitol and his actions that occurred the day of, and his unwillingness, some of the reports indicate, to curtail or stop the mob and to sent in the national guard, those -- that will go directly to his state of mind. that's the real x factor you point out here -- what did the president know and when did he know it? what did he know of the plans all over, about his supporters going to the rally, and then planning to go to the capitol to try to interrupt the certification of the electoral college? what did he know of that? >> well, let me just press you. we've all become dangerous
armchair lawyers here, so push back if i had this wrong. it seems that the shortcomings was mr. mueller never pursued an interview with donald trump, and could never prove, charge or even wait to charge obstruction, because they couldn't speak to trump's intent. all they have is the well-investigated conduct. it seems you have in the statements now directed from the ten republicans in the house, who voted to impeach donald trump, clear accounts of people on the record, speaking to trump's conduct while the riot and insurrection was happening. you have reporting from the "new york times" and "the washington post," that calls were never heeded by donald trump, that it was mike pence who somehow went around the chain of command that i'm sure will be investigated too, what does that evidence look like in terms of proving state of mind and trump's intent? >> well, it's hard without
witnesses. in a perfect world, we would have a months-long investigation calling in the white house digital media -- [ inaudible ] -- exactly what they knew and what the president knew. i don't think that's going to happen here. having witnesses in the senate trial would prolong the trial significantly. i think everyone wants to move on, on both sides of the aisle. so as much as we would like that, and it would be the proper way to do an investigation, we're not going to get that. what are we going to get? we are going to get a lot of evidence and information, including through reporting, about what donald trump did the day of, to demonstrate what his state of mind was. the argument will be, well, if he really wanted and expected it to be a peaceful protest, then
he would have, of course, tried to stop the mob from invaing the capitol when he saw it unfolding on tv. he would have sent the national guard in. but governor hogan said he waited for two hours for this. we'll get emphasis on the day up with the argument if he thought it was going to be a peaceful protest and he wasn't trying to incite the mob, then he would want to stop it. in addition, nicolle, as we're starting to say from some of the reporting, we'll see a much broader picture, that this was donald trump's effort to overthrow an election. he tried to do it in every which way, and the last final -- last gasp attempt, so to speak, was to incite his supporters to literally stop congress from certifying the electoral college through intimidation and violence.
there will be some atmospherics around it, too. you'll see it's hard to see the videos, for them to revisit what they went through that day, then to say it's okay, we'll give him a pass. >> carol, this is produced and sort of put together, compiled by our friends at just security. they're going back to sort of show folks what was happening on parler, what trump had put in motion. he was calling for the election results to be delegitimized before election day. we'll talk about this on the other side. >> mike pence, i hope you're going to stand up for the good of our constitution and for the good of our country, and if you're not, i'm going to be very disappointed in you, i will tell you right now. i'm not hearing good stories.
>> the speech is other, it was awesome. some of you may have seen it online, he went over the voter fraud. i'm very concerned about mike pence. i have no idea what he's going to do. i did not love the way the president talked about that. i don't know. we'll see. anyways, we're walking over to the capitol right now, and maybe we'll break down the doors. [ chanting ] >> may i speak to pelosi? yeah, we're coming mike pen, we're coming for you too. carol linnik, it's worth anyone interested in sort of the evidence as it's coming out what happened that day to watch the whole thing, but absolutely haunting, yet not shocking that trump's attacks on mike pence -- those are hours before the insurrection. we should repeat again, he went
after mike pence at a rally before the special election in georgia, and made similar comments, i might like him a little less, very clearly bullying, threatening mike pence. we know from the insurrectionists himself -- the ratests thought he was a racist. the insurrectionists thought he sent them there. you heard the chants to hang mike pence. >> it wasn't just chanting "let's hang mike pence." they literally had a small calving with a noose outside. speaking of chilling, when mike pence was quickly taken -- escorted rapidly by his 1kre9 service detail to a highaway office when protesters/rioters broke through the first glass and door and breached the capitol, he was in a northwest corner of the building overlooking this area with the noose. i think it's so important to
emphasize a point that dan made, this idea of a pattern. keep in mind the pence sort of scold that trump gives publicly, trump doesn't filter. president trump tells you exactly what he wants. he may be a little nuanced, but he tells you what he wants. he was telling pence publicly, privately what he wanted, but there's a larger pattern of desperation. remember from november 3rd until january 6th, the only thing donald trump was doing minus some other calls that are unrelated, the only thing that he was doing was trying to undermine this election and get it tossed. he tried through the court, he lost 92 times. he tried through pressuring different state officials and litters to come to the white house and reject and void those
votes. he tried most recently around the time of january 2nd to removed the acting attorney general who was not in agreement just as his previous attorney general bill barr, who walked out the door throwing up hi hands saying i'm not dealing with this anymore. donald trump tried to remove the next acting attorney general who would not go down this road with him. he always finds an enabler, but he reaching pretty far down when he reefs jeffry clark. he reaches pretty far down when he calls an investigator in the georgia state election board to harang her about her vote count. he kept doing this. finally his coup d 'grau was the
appear yanks at the ellipsi. >> i wonder, carol, i have a few emotional reactions. as you said, bill barr left. to me it's in the vein of how bad was donald trump? he was so bad that bill barr didn't want to remain. bill barr walked out with some legacy intact. it was a bridge too far, but he left his deputy in the department out to dry. there was an insurrection inside the justice department, and i wondering what the state of mind is of the folks that were sort of abandoned by barr in the final days, a coup plotted again thence acting attorney general rosen. it's always some unsuspecting bespectacled guy, and what was
the damage down by that act at doj? >> you never want an attorney general who can get the president to listen to you to leave, but i do believe that bill barr's goal there was, i'm not going to have a shouting match with the president through christmas and january about a fraudulent election when none my u.s. attorneys see any fraud. the fraud that might have existed is so de minimis, i'm not going to get into that, i'm going to take my leave. but i also believe that he believed these were the place holders, that maybe they couldn't stand up to donald trump, but they would at least be loyal to his view on the issue of fraud and how bogus it all was. i also have to say, so many people loyal to the president in helping him achieve his
particular agenda, even in the face of pretty brutal criticism from other republicans that they're close to, for them to both stand up and say, one, i'm out of here, and second, i'm going to resign, it's pretty amazing. it tells you how sort of bonkers things got when the president reached, i would guess, the seventh desperate attempt. >> to carol's point, wee just beginning to learn just how bad it really was. whenever great reporters like carol and yourself learn, when it's bad, it's worse. i want to show you something that chuck schumer said in an interview he just reported that will air tonight. we'll talk about it on the other side. >> we still can look back, and you have to.
plain and simple, trump was -- you know, his act on the 6th was the most despicable then that any president has ever done. he is the worst president ever. you cannot just, let's move on. you've got to look back. >> eugene garrett haake reported that the house managers are lined up doing interviews. there's a public aspect to this impeachment. it's a different point in time, a different result that a conviction would have. what do you make of efforts to marshal and focus in on trump's incitement and the importance for that being a behavior that a president is held accountable. >> well, if there's not going to be accountability for this, what in the world do you ever hold a president accountable for? you called it in the
introduction. you called it a coup, and that's exactly what it was. it was an attempted coup over a period of a couple months. the president tried through any means necessary to overthrow the result of a free and fair election he lost. he tried to do it time and time again, in different ways and this doesn't work, so tried that, and he had his "star wars" bar scene of lawyers with lawsuit after lawsuit that got thrown out, you know, and laughed out of court basically. i mean, this is astounding. this is -- you can laugh at it almost, because in part it was comic, but this is as serious as it gets. we're talking about the continuation of our democracy. we're talking about a president
who tried to interrupt and to essentially wreck our democracy and cling to power in the most egregious and illegal and anti-democratic way you can imagine. he summoned the mob to washington that day. he told them on his twitter field, it's going to be wild. he whipped them into a frenzy, and then sent them off to the capitol. you don't have to, you know, draw -- it's not a leap of imagination to see what was going to happen, and as dennis said during the insurrection itself, he seemed to not particularly care much about trying to stop it. look, if there's not accountability for this, then what kind of democracy do we have? this just has to happen. this trial has to happen. republicans are going to have to
listen to this evidence. there's going to be more and more evidence, and then they're going to have to vote their conscience. we'll see if they have a conscience. it will be revealed. that's one thing, eugene. this is not a political question. it's bad behavior, are there consequences. it becomes a human -- carol linnik, eugene robinson, dan goldman, i wanted to talk to all of you. thank you for starting this off today. still ahead, the article much impeachment is making its way to the senate. tonight when we return, how all this mounting evidence le help democrats strengthen their case. plus rudy giuliani, he's being sued for $1.3 billion over the false claims he made and
it's moving day. and while her friends are doing the heavy lifting, jess is busy moving her xfinity internet and tv services. it only takes about a minute. wait, a minute? but what have you been doing for the last two hours? delegating? oh, good one. move your xfinity services without breaking a sweat. now that's simple, easy, awesome. xfinity makes moving easy. go online to transfer your services in about a minute. get started today.
ex-president. pat leahy will preside over the trial, but key aspects are still being worked out. all while democrats continue to pressure republicans to break from trump. jim hines, i wonder if you could responsible to something -- that one of the challenges, that reporting is coming out now, is there may not be an adequate set of charges, that there aren't vigorous domestic terrorism charges. is that something you think congress should take a look at? >> it's worth taking a look at, nicolle, but i'm not sure that's right. in other words, every single person who was in the capitol that day was interfering with the proper operation of the federal government.
that's a pretty serious federal crime, not to mention trespassing, not to mention ignoring officers. the other side of the argument that your guest was making, of course, is that when when you start talking about additional laws arrange domestic terrorism, you get into things like motive, frame of mind. you bump right up against the government's of course constitutional prohibition on punishing speech. so, look, i was there. i was there, and anybody who was inside that capitol is prosecutorable under currently existing laws. depends on what prosecutors decide to do as far as penalty, to really suffer for their egregious actions. >> are you eager to understand their sort of goings-on at the appropriate times so that it doesn't jeopardize any of the cases they're making, around seeing if they can prove
conspiracy, and conspiracy to commit sedition? >> i certainly hope, nicolle, that if there were groups -- you know, i was there, and i sort of -- the night before i saw these folks, there was a very wide and diverse array of people there that day. any of whom, as we already discussed, trespassing inside the capitol were breaking the law, but i think it's quite possible you had levels of organization, you see these people in tactical gear moving as a unit. if they preplanned that, by all means -- again, people died. people's lives -- so the prosecutors can prove there was a conspiracy. that is a seditious conspiracy, that is a very, very serious crime and the book ought to be thrown at them hard. >> the republican -- i don't even know if you can call it a defense, of the president's
role, turning to impeachment now -- this is a paraphrasing of marco rubio on fox news sunday with chris wallace, it's stupid. they don't really have a substantive reason why trump shouldn't be impeached. let me play some of that for you. i want to ask you about disinformation and the dissemination of these messages. >> well, first of all, i think the trial is stupid. i think it's counterproductive. we already have a flaming fire in this country and it's like pouring a bunch of gas look enon that fire. >> do you believe hi committed a impeachable offense? >> to begin with, it's moot. he's a former president. so it's almost -- i hesitate to say this, it's more pathetic than the defense of the last
impeachment, which mounted to yes, the case was proven, but let's let the election determine what happens. i wonder what your -- >> well, political opinion matters entirely. you know, with all due respect, i heard what you said about hoping this would be a vote of conscience, people acting as jurors. marco rubio is saying what he's saying, because he wants to be president and she worries about being primaried as a republican senator. all the republican senators have looked at the ten members of the house who voted in favor of the article of impeachment, and as courageous and full of integrity as they were, they are being promised a primary. with a few exception, you don't begin to have that political courage in the ranks of the republican senators. what they're going to do -- you can't defend what the president did, particularly in the connection of fraudulently overturn the election?
georgia, trying to do this bizarre coup. you can't defend the actions, so instead you're going to say, he's out of there, it's divisive, they'll come up with process reasons to take the heat off of something that they not only don't want to deal with, but something they participated in. remember, most of these senators were complicit in promoting the lie -- the lie that the election had been stolen. it's a terribly uncomfortable moment. they just want it to go away. they're going to use process and faulty constitutional arguments rather than addressing the article itself. >> before i let you go, i have to ask you, if your capacity on the intelligence committee, what difference it will make to now have an american president who in no fuzzy language with no hesitation calls out russia's actions with withholding navalny, with the bouties on the heads of american soldiers.
what do you think could change? do you think that russia is figuring out how to adjust to a new american president? >> well, everyone changes. i've said this for four years now. when the president of the united states defends the russians, whether it's on the 2016 presidential hack or any of the or misbehavior that putin engaged in, and putin knows the president of the united states will actually defend hem, the message to russia, of course, is do whatever you want, and of course they have. they have continued to kill dissidents. they attacked us with a remarkable cybersecurity hack. just having the president call out the russians is important. what's even more important, of course, is actions. i am going to be standing by and watching closely with the new biden administration to see what they actually do to respond to the cybersecurity hack. at the end of the day, words are
or sending corporate their expense reports. i'll let you in on a little secret. they don't. by empowering employees to manage their own tasks, paycom frees you to focus on the business of business. to learn more, visit paycom.com we made usaa insurance for members like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. ♪ usaa ♪ area homeowners we're made for. learn how your neighbors are accessing $100,000s with a reverse mortgage loan from the bay area's #1 reverse mortgage lender. lemme tell you something. i wouldn't be here if i thought
reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior. or worse, that it was some way to take your home. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. discover if a reverse mortgage loan is right for you. use it to eliminate monthly mortgage payments pay of credit card bills, medical costs and more. with a reverse mortgage you can pay whatever you can when it works for you, or you can wait and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. find out more, call aag for your free information kit i'm proud to be a part of aag. i trust 'em. i think you can too. call now! ther the company counting
our vote with control over our vote is owned by two venezuelans who are allies of chavez, are present allies of maduro. they were founded as a company to fix elections. they have a terrible record and they are extremely hackable. >> switched 6,000 votes from trump to biden. >> you only thing i can think of is that somehow or another george sore ross is involved in this. in -- i'll tell you what just happened. that was rudie del lies. if you were if you were confused by is the conspiracy theories, don't worry, it's your brain functioning promptly. to be clear, again what you heard were lies. it turns out there might be consequences these days to telling lies over and over again on tv and on twitter. he eaks elects equipment and software company that giuliani
was smearing there is now suing him for defamation. "new york times" writes -- the 107-page lawsuit filed in the federal district court of washington, accuses giuliani of carrying out a virus made up of demonstrably false allegations in farther to enrich himself there legal fees and his podcast. joining me is sam tine. if you don't me this was going to end with rudy giuliani being sued for $1.3 billion, i wouldn't have been shocked, but it is kind of stunning. >> it was all within the realm of possibility this might happened, but i'm still gobsmacked, like wow. >> it's not normal that you see the lawyer for the president get a $1.3 billion suit against him.
it's weird, it's new, but you know, rudy was spending the last couple weeks after the election and some weeks before that, pushing wild conspiracy theories, demonstrable lies. at some point it was bound to happen that one of the subs of his attacks was going to say, no, you're going to have to pay for your lies. now, is this going to be litigated to dominion's liking? i don't know. i'm not a lawyer. i'm not sure how the suit would work in this case. would they have to prove that rudie knew he was lining? can he do that? we don't know. but dominion has been able to reextract a could you contractions from key individuals. >> yeah, look, you and i would enlist a lawyer to take us through those questions, but to your point, the news
organizations, when they got this her from dominion, they corrected their stories. here's what rudy said. he went crazier. he repeated the line. here's the line he told january 6th. here's another piece of sound that dominion may be presenting to a jury. >> last night one of the experts that has examined these crooked dominion machines has absolutely what he believes is conclusive proof that, in the last 10%, 15% of the vote counted, the votes were deliberately changed. >> so that's not true, but this was rudy's response to the lawsuit, and, again, notable because of what you're describing. fox nurse and others -- fox news
and others have simply reversed. he said it will allow me to investigate their history, finances and practices fully and completely. the amount being asked for is, quite obviously, intended to frighten people of faint heart. i'm not going to read the rest of it. it gets crazier from there. the point is, rudy is wrong, and bill barr knew rudy was wrong. the next ag knew rudy was wrong, which is why he stood up. judges knew rudy was wrong. what do you think happens to rudy? >> so this whole thing brings to mind the phrase fake it until you make it. that's usually used to describe people trying to break through. in this case, my thinking is rudy has been telling they fabulous tells, these lies about dominion, and he keeps going
further down the rabbit hole. at some point he assumes his friends in power will bail him out. the problem is his friends in power are no longer in power, so what becomes of this? who knows? he, unlike everybody em, seems to be doubling down on lying. it takes money to get into court. it takes legal fees to fight a corporation like dominion. at some point he will be drained of his resources and/or will get into real legal trouble. so he's faking it. he may not make it. sam stein, we will pick this up later this week, with a lawyer in tow. the lies are on tape, on his twitter feet. we'll stay on this. thanks for spending time with us. >> thanks. we are waiting for the house
health officials confirmed the first case of it is brazil variant, known to be more transmissible, but so far no more deadly. moderna says it's working on a booster shot, quote, out of an abundance of caution to guard against the south african strain. early data shows it may be reduced by this particular
strain. meanwhile, prime minister johnson's warning last week, is adding to -- the cdc has said that strain could become the dominant source of infection here in the u.s. by march. in a country with now more than 25 million coronavirus cases and still an averages of more than 3,000 tests of sing the day. joins our conversation is laury garrett, people i think feel relieved that there is a message coming from the white house that they're on top of it, that tony fauci has been released with the science news, the virus news is getting scarier by the day. can you make sense of those two things? >> well, we clearly have adults in the room, so that's bringing everybody a sense of hope, and the adults that are in the room,
referring to washington and the white house, are saying, look, we're going to roll this vaccine out. we're going to solve these problems. however, let 'be very clear. we're not talking about increasing the volume of vaccines reaches the states particularly much. we are already at 940,000 doses a day going out the door, and the president's target is a million. that's not a huge difference. that worn get you to anything close to the ease of some semblance of herd immunity before the fall, if not late winter 2021. so we have to increase the pace. now, we were counting on some new vaccines and solid efficacy of the two existing vaccines, about you what we are seeing now is some real disappointments. merck today announced both of its potential covid vaccines
have failed in the latest round of studies, and they are dropping their efforts entirely. astrazeneca is coming before the european medicines agency, which is the european version of the fda, this week, and supposely will reveal the very bad news that less than 10% protection is afforded by that vaccine for senior citizens. that's not going to be a viable product for us. >> oh, my god. >> the fda has said we're not going to approve anything with less than 50 percent efficacy. johnson & johnson and novavax are the two remaining front-runners in the pipeline. novavax probably won't have enough clinical trial data to go before the fast until march, but johnson & johnson may very well come through with some startling data sometime in the next two to three weeks, and we're all epps sort of on tinter hooks for that
one, because they have claimed that they could go with a single dose, which would, of course, obviate a tremendous level of hassle and difficulty that we're experiencing in trying to roll out our two-dose regimen for either the moderna or pfizer products. probably by now, nicolle, you and all the viewers are getting confused, who is making what? the bottom line here is, if our concern were the viruses that were presented to us three months ago, what was circulating in america three months ago, we have two good vaccines. if we can get them to everybody, we'll be fine, but we're in a race against new forms of the virus that are emerging everywhere we looked. we've seen a couple emerge in ohio. one has emerged in california. we clearly have the brazil strain and south african and
british variants to worry about. as you noted up front, prime minister boris johnson is tell the world that the british variant is 30% deadlier that so-called covid. so we have a lot to contend with. and it's really a race. it's a race against the emergence of the variant strains. can we get america vaccinated before these new potentially much more transmissible and possibly deadlier forms of the virus hit our country widespread? >> laurie, i want to see if you can explain something to me about the new variants, the new mutations. do moderna and pfizer, do they keep testing when the strain changes to make sure that the vaccine works against the new strains? >> they do, nicole, and they're using lab tests. but i think we all have to take
a deep breath and realize that the way under operation warp speed, the actual trials were designed to get vaccines through really fast. there isn't actually any mandate that the drugmakers demonstrate that their vaccine prevents one person from giving virus to another person. so in other words, you and i could both get vaccinated. let's say you got pfizer and i got moderna. and we could sit down in a room together and feel like maybe we don't need to wear our masks, you know, we don't need to find where is it and cover our faces because you have your vaccine and i have mine. but we don't actually have proof that that's true. even for routine forms of covid. now you throw in the new variants and we're being reassured that the vaccines work but reassured based on lab studies, not on human clinical
trials. >> it's a frightening juncture here. and you're right, hope's on the way, but these feel like some of the scariest times we've had to contend with. laurie garrett, thank you so much for spending some time with us to talk about it. when we return, as we do every day, remembering lives well lived.
are you frustrated with your weight and health? it's time for aerotrainer, a more effective total body fitness solution. (announcer) aerotrainer's ergodynamic design and four patented air chambers create maximum muscle activation for better results in less time, all while maintaining safe, correct form and allows for over 20 exercises. do the aerotrainer super crunch. the pre-stretch works your abs even harder, engaging the entire core. then it's the back extension, super rock, and lower back traction stretch
to take the pressure off your spine and stretch muscles. planks are the ultimate total body exercise. build your upper body with pushups. work your lower body with the aerosquat. the aerotrainer is tested to support over 500 pounds. it inflates and deflates in less than 30 seconds using the electric pump. head to aerotrainer.com now. now it's your turn to lose weight, look great, and be healthy. get off the floor and get on the aerotrainer. go to aerotrainer.com, that's a-e-r-o-trainer.com. ♪♪ in the early weeks of the pandemic bonnie mcleod noticed something about her beloved indiana community.
nobody had any masks. they were still relatively scarce at the time. so bonnie made a decision. she sat down at her sewing machine and she got to work. her husband told wfia bonnie made some 3,000 masks right there in the front room of her home. she'd leave them outside in a box or on a table for people to come up and take, free of charge of course. although donations were welcome. after a while she trained up her granddaughter and bonnie's small act of public service bloomed into a fun neighborhood spectacle. the masks so popular that a neighbor joked their cul-de-sac actually developed traffic. that's the way it was for a while. at least until bonnie got sick. it's cruel. she spent months trying to protect everyone in her community from a deadly disease, only to become one of its 421,000 victims. bonnie died a week ago at the young, young age of 60.
please honor her this afternoon. think of her family and wear your mask. we'll be right back. >> man: what's my safelite story? i spend a lot of time in my truck. it's my livelihood. ♪ rock music ♪ >> man: so i'm not taking any chances when something happens to it. so when my windshield cracked... my friend recommended safelite autoglass. they came right to me, with expert service where i needed it. ♪ rock music ♪ >> man: that's service i can trust... no matter what i'm hauling. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪
thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. we are grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. hi, ari. >> hi, nicolle. thank you so much. i am ari melber and welcome to a special edition of "the beat." as the house impeachment against donald trump for inciting insurrection will be presented to the senate tonight, in this hour. it will be a rare and solemn process where the building you see right now, the u.s. capitol, will be stretched across two different roles. the symbolic seat of our democracy and the crime scene at issue in a trial that could ban donald trump from public office for life. tonight's developments come amidst new evidence against trump showing how he whipped his fans into a frenzy as they screamed about storming and taking