tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC February 8, 2021 5:00pm-6:00pm PST
problem of the asian americans and not just for them but for all the of us so have that visibility. a coalition to say that and recognize that this is all of our problem. >> yeah. indeed. we have to share across the communities and all work together because we are all in this together. congressman kim and connie, thank you both very much for bringing that forward. tonight on "all in" -- >> is donald trump guilty of inciting a violent mob against the united states? >> on the eve of his second impeachment, republicaning looking to give a pass to donald trump is out of excuses. >> the gravest violation of the oath of office by any president in the history of the country. >> famed free speech attorney
abrams on the new arguments. how the legal community is undercutting the former president with george conway and how the republican party is radicalizing against democracy. and as we break 2 million daily vaccinations for the first time, new alarms about how quickly the more transmitible uk strain is spreading in america. >> it could be dominant by the end of march. that's the sobering news. >> "all in" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. we are one day away from the start of the historic first-ever second impeachment of donald trump which left five people dead. we are in unprecedented territory. we have never impeached a president twice. never tried one of office. there's the long tables moved in for impeachment managers and defense teams to socially
distance. o course, we have a pandemic. there's a pretrial memo arguing the trial is unconstitutional and a politically motivated attack on trump. house democrats filing a see you in court type of response. here's what we know so far about the days look like ahead. tomorrow we expect four hours of debate about the question of the constitutionality of the trial. there will then be a procedural vote which will begin on wednesday at noon and consist of up to 16 hours of oral arguments wednesday, thursday and friday. trump's lawyers requested a pause for the sabbath. we expect them to continue next week with questions from senators, possibly a debate over witnesses and possibly a verdict. we'll be covering all that as it happens. details on the arguments.
it is wort taking a step back. we are really in the third act of a three-act drama. one that started when donald trump first ran for president in 2016. he won the electoral college, the presidency while losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes. and in that election he was the beneficiary of not one but two criminal conspiracies to tilt the playing field in his favor. first directed by trump himself according to court documents and michael cohen, the conspiracy to pay hush money to a porn star to hide his affair from the public right before the election. second conspiracy, russian interference in the election in his favor, the degree to which he was immeshed to is unclear and beyond dispute welcomed and solicited. soon after the 2016 election democrats and republicans, the house and the senate, and the justice department, set about investigating that russian
interference in part to get to the bottom of what happened but it all underlined the fundamental point of issue which is that donald trump is just not a person who believes in free and fair elections. to his core donald trump is a cheater and believes in cheating and one thing to cheat at golf and marriage but it is another thing altogether to cheat at democracy because cheating at democracy means destroying democracy. donald trump is a person who manifestly cheats and wants to cheetd. that was the core of the story of the russian interference, he and his campaign, his son, welcomed and exploited the result of the 2016 election which again were very narrow, 70,000 votes across 3 states you have a different outcome. they were forever colored by the fact that trump cheated, he defied the basic ground rules of free and fair elections. fast forward to act two, the first impeachment of donald trump.
had to go through that one because it was clear that trump was trying to cheat again in the next election. he was caught red handed essentially attempting to re-run the successful play of 2016 using the states to withhold foreign aid for ukraine and tilt the playing field against his opponent. likely opponent, joe biden. now, the argument republicans made at the time was, well, it's only nine months until the election. if you don't like donald trump vote him out then. >> i would say let the voters decide. >> the voters are voting. it is up to the voters to decide. >> it is better to let the people decide. >> the answer is an election. not an impeachment. >> oh yes! election. the voters, let the voters decide. what do the voters want? democrats like schiff lead
impeachment manager argued that wouldn't work because we can't trust it's a fair and free election with this man in office. >> >> he's guilty as sin but why not let the voters clean up this mess? and here to answer that question we must look at the history of this presidency and to the character of this president for lack of character and ask can we be confident that he will not continue to try to cheat in that very election? can we be confident that americans and not foreign powers will get to decide and that the president will shun any further foreign interference in our democratic affairs? and the short, plain, sad,en contestable answer is, no, you can't. you can't trust this president to do the right thing. not for one minute. not for one election. not for the sake of our country.
you just can't. >> he will not change. and you know it. >> and then we know what happened next. we did get that election. the republicans acquitted donald trump. voters took the republicans' advice. they voted donald trump out. fair and square. joe biden beat donald trump a sizable electoral college majority and a big margin, 7 million votes. and so then what does trump do? he refuses to accept the results. he seditiously plots to overturn, pursues every possible avenue in attempting to overturn the will of the people culminating in a deadly attack on the capitol designed to stop the transfer of power at which opponent it was clear to democrats another impeachment is unavoidable because this was an unacceptable frontal assault on democracy and what do republicans say then? it is too late now.
term's almost over. last year it was will it the voters decide and the voters decided and he tried to overturn the voters with help and became, well, don't impeach him. we just had an election. it is too late now. the issue's always been the same. this man does not believe in democracy and increasingly the party that follows him does not either. trump is opposed to them. he takes actions in opposition s them. he is a threat to the republic hiding behind process arguments is coward disand abdication of kudy. if the republicans want to defend the president's conduct and try to defend it but they won't. they largely can't because it's indefensible. and it has been all along. want to bring in conservative attorney george conway, staunch trump critic. good to have you on, george.
i saw a lot of process arguments on the sunday shows from republicans. it is very clear to me that the easiest and most cowardly thing for them to do is just not to try to get into the merits of this and say, well, we are can't try him now. the reason he is not in office when he is tried is mitch mcconnell delayed it but the argument doesn't seem like a good one in terms of the law and the constitution. >> it absolutely isn't. i think as chuck cooper, very important conservative lawyer in washington, d.c. pointed out in an op-ed just the other day, the text of the constitution does not support the argument they want to latch on to because it does not say that former officeholders cannot be impeached and removed. we conservatives like history, there's a history of people being impeached and tried after leaving officer. in fact, in 1787 when the framers laid out nicely in the
house brief in 1787 just before the framers began the constitutional convention, there was a famous impeachment in the united kingdom of warren hastings, a governor general of india, and he was charged with corruption after he had left office and returned to london and the framers were fully aware of that precedent and many states allowed specifically allowed impeachments of former officeholders and innocent in 1876 an impeachment of a secretary of war who resigned two hours before he was impeached. he ran over to the white house and presented his resignation to president grant and the senate tried him anyway. the house impeachment, the senate tried him anyway and voted to continue with the trial and all the precedent is against
donald trump here. and the only reason why 45 u.s. republican u.s. senators have decided to latch on to this argue. that the text opposes is they're afraid. they don't want to face up to what they have to deal with, what the duties require them to deal with here, which is, a president of the united states that did the worst thing that any president ever has done or could do which is to try to end constitutional democracy in the united states of america. >> yeah. that point, right, we have now seen these different process arguments but those are all reverse engineered around the desire to not earn gauge with the conduct and that's the through line throughout which is why you get everyone twisting themselves in these knots. >> right. the senate should know better because the senate, the reason why we are here today as opening
points out is because the senate specifically all the republicans except for romney failed to do their duty last time around at the last trial that ended a year ago last week. they failed veto hear witnesses about an outrageous effort by the president of the united states to extort, use the presidential power over security assistance to ukraine to try to extort an announcement of crew yan of a fake invest of joekd and his son and as you point out it's cheating and the reason we are here today is they blew that off because they just decided, oh, it doesn't matter. doesn't matter. it doesn't matter. it does matter because he is who he is. he did what he did because that's who he is. he was corrupt and doesn't believe in democracy. he only believes in what's in
his on best interest and that is exactly -- that was -- that metastasized in november and last two months after that erranding in january 6th with people dying on capitol hill with an insurrection that he fomented to stop the counts of votes against him. >> what's particularly galling is he when you say metastasized, recruited senators into the effort. when you see ted cruz saying let the people decide back a year ago, right, having an election, the people decided and ted cruz didn't like or josh hawley and voted to overturn the people. >> absolutely. >> the whole argument of the first peechlt is who are we to substitute our judgment for the people and when the people voted they tried to substitute the judgment. >> trump didn't just start doing that on november 4th or midnight november 4th. he was trying to undermine the election for months previous to
that because he knew he was losing and basically one point let's postpone the election even though the text of the koons constitution says you can't do that. he was continually attacking the mechanisms of democracy saying if i lose it is going to be because the election is stolen. this was premeditated and when you look at he has a flimsy first amendment defense. it isn't about speech. i'm sure floyd abrams will tell you later. it is about his entire course of conduct trying to destroy democracy and not protected by the first amendment and impeachment isn't covered by the first amendment. >> i have to read this section which is so batty from the trump lawyers and a rush job in their defense but they say in referring to the house manager's
brief with what happened on that day, they say in a brazen attempt to further glorify violence, they restate over 50 media reports detailing the incidents and shocking hours. what does that mean? >> the reason it's sensational is we saw it on tv and 100 senators saw it on tv and 435 members of the house saw it on tv. it was sensational and it happened. there's no dispute it happened. >> where's the conservative legal or moral universe on this? you referenced chuck cooper, a well-known and established conservative lawyer, has a "the wall street journal" op-ed and this seemed like a speaking to fellow members of the tribe as it were. i just think that the weight of evidence in law here isn't on the president's side on this and the conduct itself is bad and
just curious if you polled the people in your world of sort of big deal conservative practitioners and jurists like what they think about this. >> yeah. i think that chuck cooper's op-ed is emblematic of where everybody is. he was an assistant attorney general in the ragan administration. she shepherded, he was jeff session's adviser in the sessions confirmation hearing, john bolton's lawyer, a member of the federalist society for decades. he clearly gets it. that this was the most lawless thing any president has done and the fact that the former president doesn't have a good legal argument. there's professor calabrese signing at least two op-eds saying that the president trump
should be convicted, not just impeached, but convicted. i have seen statements joined by reagan solicitor general and others that issued a statement and you hear virtually nothing on the other side and i think that speaks volumes. the fundamental thing is that the conservative lawyers do believe in the rule of law and though many probably stayed too quiet in four years but seen more than enough and the conservative judges who are among the 60 courts that ruled against donald trump were against -- tried to protect the rule of law, as well. >> george conway, thank you so much for making time tonight. appreciate it. >> thank you jix next, does trump's free speech argument have any standing? what abrams says after this. esi.
kraft. for the win win. it's time for the ultimate sleep number event on the sleep number 360 smart bed. you can both adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. can it help me fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. but, can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. will it help me come out swinging? you got this. so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise... prove. don't miss our weekend special, save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 60 months on all smart beds. ends monday.
everyone is at risk for enamel loss. when you drink or eat something that's acidic it sucks the minerals out of the tooth's surface. pronamel is formulated to help deliver minerals to the tooth's surface to help reharden and strengthen your enamel. when you switch to xfinity mobile, you're choosing to get connected to the most reliable network nationwide, now with 5g included. discover how to save up to $300 a year with shared data starting at $15 a month, or get the lowest price for one line of unlimited. come into your local xfinity store to make the most of your mobile experience. you can shop the latest phones, bring your own device, or trade in for extra savings. stop in or book an appointment to shop safely with peace of mind at your local xfinity store.
on the eve of the second impeachment trial, donald trump's lawyers the idea that they are offering exercise the first amendment right under the constitution to express his belief that the lex results were suspect. it is an exceedingly weak defense. you don't need lawyers to tell you that but 144 constitutional lawyers did just sign a letter saying, quote, any first amendment defense raised by
president trump's attorneys were legally frivolous. one of the lawyer who is signed that letter is floyd abrams, arguably the pre-eminent first amendment lawyer in the country. and citizens united, remember a first amendment case in the landmark campaign finance case, author, and great to have you on. why did you feel motivated to write this letter? >> i don't usually say the first amendment does not apply. this was a situation in which i and all the other professors and scholars thought it was prif frivolous to maintain that the amendment protected donald
trump. >> the letter reads that the first amendment doesn't apply to impeachment proceedings and cannot provide a defense for president trump. why does it not apply in an impeachment proceeding? >> it doesn't apply because there are lots of things that a president or any of us can do that are protected by the first amendment and could lead to impeachment. suppose the president ran around burning an american flag saying i have no intention to protect the people of the united states, he took an oath to preserve and protect and defend the constitution. if he starts saying i won't do it, saying i'm not loyal to pick that example, of course, he could be impeached. >> you say that his speech and conduct around january 6th constitute unprotected incitement and i think the first point about the first amendment not applying makes sense. my favorite example is inviting
china to invade. i think we would be better if china just invaded and occupied that. >> you should do that. >> right. which again if someone wrote that, if someone wrote that and the state tried to sanction them you as their lawyer would rightly say that's outrageous. but a president saying it's another thing but the incitement that seems dicier ground first amendment wise. the speech constitute unprotected incitement. what do you mean by that? >> when the president started out for sometime falsely saying that the election had been stolen tells people to go to washington, and tells them it will be wild when they get there, gives a speech to them leading them to go to the capitol, telling them to go to the capitol, telling them they
have to be strong and not weak, telling them they'll lose the country, the country will be lost to them unless they win this, when you add all the different things up he said and the context in which he said it, he was inciting them, not only to go but to do something. and the only thing that they could do in that circumstance that would fit what he was saying was the sort of violence that we saw. >> it's -- i feel like incitement is a difficult -- it could be a difficult category and the first amendment protections are really important in this in terms of this but it is striking to me that you think it fits the bill. the pattern of behavior, the speech and what happened culminating fitting a small target i would imagine you see. >> absolutely, absolutely.
144 people, we all love the first amendment and write articles saying it ought to be expanded and taken more seriously but a situation in which the totality of what donald trump did, the totality of what he said amounted to a cry for them to take action, not just have views and not just attend, not just go to the capitol, but to be strong and to do this and to do that and you will lose your country unless you what? i think the what is very logically the violence that we saw. >> lloyd abrams, a real legendary advocate for the first amendment and thank you very much. >> thank you. good to see you. >> i want to turn to congresswoman sheila jackson of lee of texas, had to be rushed to an undisclosed location and joins me now.
congresswoman, can you hear me? >> yes. can you see me? >> i can see you. you ire someone who i think was an early -- you identified the president's chief antagonism quite early on and i wonder what you make of this us arriving at this point now four-plus years into it. >> chris, because of my tenure and the background that i have, i have seen now four impeachment proceedings including one of a judge. and it was evident as the election proceeded in 2016 that this campaign and this president and this person, donnal j. trump, had an irreverence, not a reverence for democracy, law and order, respect, dignity and carried that through the campaign right into the united states presidency.
that was evidenced by his reckless engagement with russia, inciting the russian ambassador if you will to the white house by leaking classified information, by getting into fights with people of different racial backgrounds, insulting black caucus members and other members of congress, just irreverent and not lincolnist, not a respecter of democracy and continued as evidenced by the actions with ukraine and the blatant discussion with the president of ukraine what you can do for me. that led, of course, to his prediction. he predicted he might not allow a peaceful transfer of power. asked several times in the campaign and he was glib and never precise, never admitted that he adhered to the law and order of this nation and he was right and he proceeded for
months after november to talk about the election was stolen. he clearly became an insurrectionist president. >> i'm curious how you see the trial now. the managers will be doing it. i get a feeling democratic senators feel like they have a narrow majority, a country in crisis, a full plate jean and want to move through it quickly. how do you feel? >> fist of all, i view the house managers at patriots. they have the experience so many of us have. trial lawyers, knowing the constitution, some are from the judiciary committee and relevant and important committees. they're simply trying to do their duty on behalf of the american people and see it in this way and this question. what kind of nation do we want to live in? i think that is the question that the jurists who themselves could be considered victims as i
might be considered one in the chamber. i had a particular experience. we were in essence locked down where we could not escape for a period of time. we actually heard the tormenters, the terrorists, the insurrectionists banging up against that central door where they came from the united states senate. we saw four armed police officers, plains clothes with drawn guns as there was a loud bang and heard the shooting sadly of the young woman on another end of the house. did not penetrate but that we heard that. we are either victims or witnesses by way of video and i ask myself the question and the jurists should ask themselves what nation do we choose to live in and show to the world and what nation to show to show the children. the second question, how seriously do we take the oath to swear to defend this nation against all enemies, foreign and
domestic. did he watch and enjoy? we pleaded with him to please have the individuals draw down. we proceeded with him as did the mayor of the great city of washington, d.c. to place in advance the national guard. members of congress were on the cell phones calling different states, one was maryland, please send the national guard. the response was, as soon as i get the word. the commander in chief had to give the word. so my position would be on this. there is a constitutional argument that's bogus. we have guns, individuals no longer in office and we have both impeached them and convicted for crimes. in this case, high crimes and the misdemeanors and the argue
evidenced by the president that he intended to bring down democracy and he was there to bring it down. what do we say to the world? my question, what kind of nation do we live in or we want the world to know we live in if we do not hold him accountable? he has a right to defense. i think it's excellent that he has defense counsel to present the defense. that is democracy. we as patriots are bringing forward our case as anyone would do, as i would do, up to the jurors right now to hand over a sentence of guilty or not guilty and they have to choose both their heart, this concept of conscience, this perspective of presidents of some 44, 45 presidents including president trump. just ask a question, has any other president no matter whether they've been impeached
or not. >> thank you so much. thank you for your time tonight. >> thank you for having me. ahead, how far will republican gos to retan power? the paert's radicalization against democracy will probably only get worse, after this. create maximum muscle activation for better results in less time. it allows for over 20 exercises. do the aerotrainer super crunch, push ups, aero squat. it inflates in 30 seconds. aerotrainer is tested to support over 500 pounds. lose weight, look great, and be healthy. go to aerotrainer.com. that's a-e-r-o trainer.com.
to navigate your active days, weathertech has you covered. mirrorfone secures your phone to almost any smooth flat surface. ♪ ♪ cupfone keeps your phone secure while driving. ♪ ♪ hi mom. -hi. the deskfone even adjusts for horizontal viewing. ♪ ♪ while the tablet holder keeps everything in the perfect position. nice. the best way to secure your devices is at weathertech.com i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. and i only need to take it once a week. plus, it lowers the risk of cardiovascular events. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes
or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, changes in vision, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. 1 in 2 kids is under hydrated. ♪
plant-powered creative roots gives kids the hydration they need, with the fruit flavors they love. and one gram of sugar. find creative roots in the kids' juice aisle. area homeowners and one gram of sugar. 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! on the eve of this first-ever second impeachment trial here's the central story this american politics. the republican party is radicalizing against democracy. we saw it with trump, with the enablers in congress but here's the weird part of that. the other story about the republican party is mod rating on policy. josh hawley goes from calling for $2,000 checks the trying to overturn an election. the paradox make up an essay i just published today and it's to me the defining story of the biden administration. two people that following the
parties, mckay kauffman whose most recent piece is "the coming republican amnesia" and a piece today headlined "the gop is not a normal party" and joins us now. what do you think about this frame work radicalizing against democracy weirdly mod rating in lots of places on policy? >> it is really interesting. it is clearly true and i think there's no better and more recent signal of this than the fact that mitt romney who ran in 2012 as the party standardbarer as the ultimate fiscal conservative is proposing welfare payments to alleviate child poverty. this is a policy that not only would mitt romney and paul ryan have scoffed at in 2012 the majority of the republican party
would have balked at but set aside people like that, the majority of the republican party is becoming more radical on questions that were not previously seen as up for debate anymore. questions about democracy and should somebody who wins a presidential election assume the presidency. what's strange, your essay was great and what struck me about it was that as the policy differences as the parties start to shrink and there's still big policy differences but as they get smaller you would think that neither party has as much incentive to throw democracy out the window to try to win but instead you have the republican party busting all these democratic norms to try to win and it is because i think as you rightly point out is it is not about policy but who's in charge, who gets to rule.
>> who gets to rule. >> that's the core debate. >> yeah. the mitt romney plan is $3,000 per child which is remarkable. good policy. there's a democratic version of various it rations. to me this question of who rules, jennifer, has become so central, central in both directions. all democratic politics. people want to feel like they have power and control and seems central to the exclusion of other things 2349 republican party in a way that's really striking. >> it is. i would only say this to pick on mckay's point and may be giving the republicans too much credit saying that the policies have moderated. unfortunately mitt romney is not the republican party. i wish he was. those kind of republicans absolutely are mod rating. ump the rest of them and this is to your immediate question really aren't in the business of doing anything.
what do they believe in? aside from the ten republicans who went to the white house with a smallish to tiny plan for rescue, the republicans don't believe in anything right now. they don't believe that politics is a transactional business. it is all act identity. it is the need to control power because they convinced the base without it they're doing western civilization is doomed. white christianity is doomed unless they hold power so it is no longer act policies at all. it is simply about enflaming the base and making their own election a prerequisite of the continuation of life as they know it in america for their base. >> part of that, again, to maybe give too much credit, there's a core that isn't wrong and when maga rally goers look at the commanding heights of american
culture are not ruled by people like them. you can't vote out the college professor or people that write the ads you don't like and this is the venue for power is politics to get those people. >> and this is what's so interesting, right? the story of the four years, ten years in a lot of ways is that liberals have consol dated cultural power and conservatives consolidated political power. right? at the state legislative level. what conservatives i think rightly understood was that political power is fleeting. you get into this in your essay as well. we are at a moment when the parties are going back and forth in terms of control of congress and the white house, this is fairly unprecedented if you look at american history but holding on to political power only lasts
so long so conservatives are feeling uneasy. they're feeling nervous about the fact they don't have cultural power and why they lose a lot of debates of things like gay marriage or the war in iraq when the issues are being lit litigated where they don't have the influence. they try to respond by accumulating more political power and feeling like they have to hold on to it by whatever means necessary. >> jennifer, do you think there's room forward out of this sort of vice the republicans seem trapped in now? >> well, they don't think so and why they think the courts are the end all and be all. attain power in the cultural wars. they have to decide if they believe in democracy and politics is about serving the people or a spasm and temper tantrum and i think the temper
tantrum set is in control. >> mckay, jennifer, thank you both for making time tonight. ahead, what we know about the rapid spread of the uk strain spread in america and why dr. fauci is still optimistic. for some families that lost loved ones, the good news is coming. i just emailed my wife's social security number to the entire company instead of hr, so... please come back. how hard is your business software working for you? with paycom, employees enter and manage their own hr data in one easy-to-use software. visit paycom.com for a free demo. hon? first off, we love each other... [ heavy breathing ] allergies with nasal congestion overwhelming you? breathe more freely with powerful claritin-d. claritin-d improves nasal airflow two times more than the leading allergy spray at hour one. [ deep inhale ] claritin-d. get more airflow. >> man: what's my safelite story? my truck...is my livelihood.
learn, save and spend with guidance from chase. confidence feels good. chase. make more of what's yours. living with metastatic breast cancer means being relentless. because every day matters. and having more of them is possible with verzenio, the only one of its kind proven to help you live significantly longer when taken with fulvestrant, regardless of menopause. verzenio + fulvestrant is for hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer that has progressed after hormone therapy. diarrhea is common, may be severe, or cause dehydration or infection. at the first sign, call your doctor, start an anti-diarrheal, and drink fluids. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor about any fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. life-threatening lung inflammation can occur. tell your doctor about any new or worsening trouble breathing, cough, or chest pain. serious liver problems can happen. symptoms include fatigue, appetite loss, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising. blood clots that can lead to death have occurred.
tell your doctor if you have pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain and rapid breathing or heart rate, or if you are pregnant or nursing. every day matters. and i want more of them. ask your doctor about everyday verzenio. it's time for the ultimate sleep number event on the sleep number 360 smart bed. you can both adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. can it help me fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. but, can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. will it help me come out swinging? you got this.
so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise... prove. don't miss our weekend special, save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 60 months on all smart beds. ends monday. back in april we are in the height of the first wave of the pandemic in new york city when the country was shocked by images of bodies piling up in overwhelmed funeral homes. the epicenter. prisoners of rikers island burying victims and others in mass graves. that point april of last year early in this around 2,000 americans dieing from the virus per day and at that time senator schumer and congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez went to the hard hit neighborhood of corona queens to call for the trump administration to pay for funerals for families that could
not afford them. we discussed the call on this program at the time. knowing the trump administration refusing to cover the costs despite the federal government helping held pay for funerals of past disaster victims. releasing the money seemed like a no-brainer. families were absolutely desperate. the trump administration refused. it went out of the way to block the money from going out. and then in december lawmakers passed a covid relief bill with $2 billion for funding for funeral e expenses earmarked for that purpose. in december 4,000 americans died daily distributed around the country, the problem twice as bad and the trump administration still did nothing to get the money out the door. donald trump is no longer president. today schumer and alexandria ocasio-cortez returned to queens to announce that americans can
apply for up to $7,000 to cover the cost of covid-related funeral expenses. >> i lost my dad when i was about 18 and the funeral expenses haunted and followed by family and many other families one, you're talking about an expense of 4,000, 5,000, $7,000, $10,000. then during covid with overrun funeral, et cetera, families are having the pay for the storage of their own loved ones. >> the program through fema will cover funerals, it's retroactive and democrats are trying to up it in 2021 as part of the covid program. as aoc noted undocumented families will be able to ply. the country happens not began to
reckon with the loss, but this is one small thing the government can do to bridge relief to families, something the government couldn't doing due to the cruelty of the people running it and it is very, very good to see that change. e that . with hepatitis c... ...i felt i couldn't be at my... ...best for my family. in only 8 weeks with mavyret... ...i was cured. i faced reminders of my hep c every day. i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret... ...i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test... ...if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems
during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant,... ...other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions,... ...and all medicines you take. don't take mavyret with atazanavir... ...or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. if you've had or have serious liver problems other than hep c, there's a rare chance they may worsen. signs of serious liver problems may include yellowing of the skin, abdominal pain or swelling, confusion, and unexplained bleeding or bruising. tell your doctor if you develop symptoms of liver disease. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...because i am cured. if you can't afford your medicine, abbvie may be able to help. each febreze car vent clip gives you up to 30 days of fresh air. so, you can have open window freshness... even with all the windows up. enjoy fresh, any time, with febreze. ah, a package! you know what this human ordered? a backache.
consider pain, delivered. pain says you can't. advil says you can. introducing fidelity income planning. we look at what you've saved, what you'll need, and help you build a flexible plan for cash flow that lasts, even when you're not working, so you can go from saving... to living. ♪ let's go ♪ to defend against dark forces attacking your organization, you need to see in the dark. to have the wisdom to understand multiple cyber threats. the precision focus to end attacks instantly. on computers, mobile devices, servers and the cloud. join the world's leading companies in our mission to defend.
now there's a similar feeling around the variants. the virus first found in the uk is doubling every ten days. there's concern from the cdc it could be the predominant strain by march. however as dr. fauci noted in thinks covid briefing the pfizer vaccines are effective against that strain. then there's also the south african strain, and officials are concerned about data showing astrazeneca's vaccine, not yet approved in the u.s., might not be effective against that variant. a piece" inside the worst hit county in the worst hit state in the worst hit county," and he joins me now. 1 to 10, one being everything is easy breezy and we're in good shape and 10 is i'm panicked, where are you on the variants
right now? >> i'm at a 7. i'm worried. i'm not yet pulling the screaming alarm bell. that said, you know, you describe the doubling every ten days. it was less than 1% just a few weeks ago. florida it's up to 10%. you see this picture where the coronavirus vaccine is scaling upward. you have hospitalizations with the wild version, the virus that we have had going down. but then you have this virus climbing and climbing upward. it is more contagious. it is -- we have an effective vaccine, but the challenge is getting people to keep their foot on the brakes to stop this from spreading. masks work. our distancing policies work. but if we let up on this because we're feeling good about where we are, then we will land back in the soup again. >> yeah, to me it just seem like
there's this question of, are we going to have one more big awful destructive curve in this country? when we think about that that means -- that's the amount of human misery, destruction between having that or not and it's just an open question. and part of it depends on the vaccine. i mean, the trajectory seems good -- 2 million a dayle we're averaging 1.5 million. we've hit 2 million. do you think we have it in us to get to 3 million in the foreseeable future? >> i do think that the vaccine distribution is going to be going up, but it's not going keep up fast enough with the strains. what makes me more optimistic is over the last month we've gotten the entire country up above 80% face mask usage. we have big parts of the country where it's over 90%. i wrote about north dakota where it was negligible six months
ago. now at, you know, 89% mask usage. the key issue, can we keep our foot on the brakes? and, you know, the story again and again is that we have these battles, we are -- as a country coming together. the story isn't about one group of people who don't care versus another who don't care, this is a story about people desperate to have freedom again. they have had a year with their kids not in schools. they have been without, you know, restaurant and bars are laying off people. the pain many people on one side feel they're not hearing. people about other side feel they're not hearing each other. we have to find a way to keep pushing through and arguing with each other, get the brake on. >> the report on north dakota was fascinating. and partly, just that divide. but also the fact that people -- eventually, people do change
their behavior. it's one of the lessons here. like, you see enough people around you who get sick and die, that wins out in the end. it just happens too late to prevent stuff, but that is what happens in the end everywhere. >> and for the most part, the measures stick because people have seen how bad it is. you know, it's interesting -- on the flipside we have this now argument with teachers about saying, hey, schools are safe. why aren't you going back? and this is the same sets of concerns. do we hear each other well enough and can we manage this conflict -- your earlier segment was, can this not be a war to the death but instead a debate, a fight. yes, the votes are taken, and then we move forward and are able to move in a decisive direction. you saw north dakota. they did ultimately come together. but, you know, at any moment,
the foot can come off of the brakes. >> yeah, that's the big fear. goshing we all feel it during this covid winter. you said bars and restaurants. i was like, gosh, that sounds nice. that's it for "all in" tonight. the rachel maddow show starts now. >> thank you. much appreciated. thanks for joining us this hour. happy to have you hear we have a lot to get to. congresswoman to talk about how much help the american people are going to get from the covid relief bill. the fight is on as to how big they're going go in terms of trying to help people. the congresswoman holds a lot of card ♪ we're going to hear about her strategy and thinking and why she and her colleagues are really insisting that the covid