tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN April 7, 2021 7:00pm-8:00pm PDT
on our guest last night. georgia representative park canon arrested last month after knocking on the governor's door during the bill signing for that restrictive voting law. let's bring in d. lemon because we've been both been covering this. prosecutors confirmed today they won't charge canon whose lawyer told us she faced eight years in prison. in response she tweeted the hashtag keep knocking. good trouble, d. lemon. >> yeah, that is good trouble. listen, we thought it would happen but as you warned you're an attorney, and her attorney said the same thing and he's right. this is down in georgia and you saw how it happened. all the guys in there signing the bill under a picture of a plantation and here's this black woman trying to knock on the k door, she's at work just to go in and be able to witness what her governor is doing. outrageous, but i'm glad it won't happen. >> and to people who say oh, boy, you're overhyping this, really there's a disinformation
campaign afoot right now all over social media being given a loudspeaker on hate tv that january 6th was no big deal. man, was it overblown. they really weren't even armed. most of them were just patriots who went there to protest. >> well, i spoke to some folks who said there were weapons recovered. and by the way a lot of the people do you really know if they were? what they mean by armed is guns. >> like you can't whoop somebody's ass without a gun. >> or with bear spray or pepper spray or with a fire extinguisher. come on, people. >> 100 cops injure. what was it their feelings that were hurt? and these were the guys who always wear their flag pins and wave their flags. >> i'll tell you what you have a lot of cop friends, i have a lot of cop friends. my cop friends are not happy about this. and there were some of them who supported the former president
and actually watched the state run tv. not anymore. very disappointed. and i've got to be honest with you -- and a lot of people i knew who were supportive of the former administration, very conservative, their whole world was turned upside down that day because everything they thought they believed in had turned upside down. they were like wait a minute you mean state tv is lying to me? you mean the former president is -- >> right. >> you mean they don't support cops the way they do police officers? >> they do when it suits their agenda. >> yeah, but it was a real wakeup call for a lot of people. and i think that i really do believe that that put a dent in the former -- the former guy as a new guy puts it in his credibility with i don't know i would say a substantial portion of his base. >> we've never seen anybody do
anything worse in terms of fomenting political discord in this country. we've never covered anything like that because nobody's ever done anything that even approached it let alone incited it. and i have to say be careful because once again the fringe right will win the messaging war. they will get more of their people to believe that january 6th didn't happen because the left doesn't talk about it. >> bought we've got to call it out which is what i'm going to do. but i also have to call you what because what were you telling me during the commercial break? >> listen, i can't believe you want to introduce this to peoples lives. i'm trying to help this guy and tie is all the way over here and got 19 people working on him like -- >> i'm trying to fix my cord. >> and you know mr. number one best-seller now is a new guy and he doesn't have any time for me telling him about his time. like i'm not 90, you wear the same thing every night.
>> the cord was pulling my tie and you were trying to get me to do the dimple. when you're putting the tie on, you yank it, that causes a dimple. i don't want a dimple every night because i'm not an old man. i have a pocket square and that is enough. you're trying to tell me about fashion? come on, brother. like an old lady in church. >> he's got the papers now. calm don, don. >> i've got to get to the news. >> i love you, d. lemon. you and your wack tie. >> i love you, brother. you and your same tie, got to get you a new one. this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. chris is right. we've got a lot of things to talk about. this is an outrage. you should be outraged by this because it is pure d gaslighting, the biggest of big lies actually being defended
over on where else the fox propaganda network. tucker carlson night after night minimizing the insurrection at the seat of our government. even putting the word "insurrection" in quotes as if it didn't really happen. watch this. >> they didn't have guns but a lot of them had extremely dangerous ideas. they talked about the constitution and something called their rights. some of them made openly seditious claims. they insisted, for example, the last election was not entirely fair. >> okay. that's down-playing it. and he was at it again tonight. all in the service of lies upon lies. lies on top of lies. the big lie that joe biden did not win, the big lie that there was widespread voter fraud, there wasn't. but they're using that lie to pass new jim crow bills across this country. and the new big lie that we should forget about the insurrection, that's what it is. that it's no big deal, just a bunch of people talking about the constitution and their
rights. it's just more riot denialism from the right. it's just more lies. that as we're learning tonight at least one defendant is flipping against the proud boys, the first sign that people charged in the insurrection of cooperating against the trump extremists. if you want to know why fox and the right have to pretend why the insurrection didn't happen, if you want to know well, of course because of the former guy. i like this one better. the inciter in chief, the twice impeached one-term president, insurrection starting president who never won the popular vote. they can't shake their devotion to him and their misguided belief he holds the key to power. case in point one of his allies who whipped up the crowd. trump endorsing mo brooks for senate, praising in his courage in all caps and fight, also in all caps. fight, really? i want you to remember, okay,
because again this is all about gaslighting, just flat out lying. and chris is right people will start to believe the insurrection never happened, this never happened. but i want you to remember this is mo brooks, what he said to that cheering crowd this is january 6th. roll it. >> today is the day american patriots start taking down names and kicking ass. now our ancestors sacrificed their blood, their sweat, their tears, their fortunes and sometimes their lives to give us their descendants an america that is the greatest nation in history. so i have a question for you. are you willing to do the same? my answer is yes. louder. are you willing to do what it takes to fight for america?
louder. will you fight for america? >> well, there you go with the fire pelosi -- pelosi is now the house speaker, by the way. so so much for the fire pelosi hat. that's the guy trump thinks should be a senator, that guy. the guy who whipped up people, who went onto march on our capitol attacking police, hunting lawmakers, chanting "hang mike pence." >> hang mike pence! hang mike pence! hang mike pence! >> so that right there what you just saw that's what the propaganda news network -- the propaganda network is saying never happened. the former house speaker john boehner lashing out at trump in his new book in very
boehner-style language saying the former president, quote, incited that election for nothing more than selfish reasons, that he -- selfish reasons perpetuated by and i quote here, bullshit he's been shoveling since he lost a fair election last november. trump advisor firing back calling boehner a swamp creaturech no matter what lies the right tries to spin we all saw what happened on january 6th. there's no denying it no matter how much you try to deny it, no denying it. it was one of the darkest days in the history of this country. and no matter how many lies they tell we all saw it happen with our own eyes. funny how in this country, right? people always want to change history, rewrite it, whitewash it.
why is that? why is that? fox propaganda? perhaps that's a question you should be doing on your panels. why is that? a lot more on all this tonight, but i want to turn now in the big moment today in the trial of the police officer who kneeled on george floyd's neck for 9 1/2 minutes. it was about what we heard on that infamous tape today. not when george floyd begged for his life, not when he called for his mother, but about a few seconds when he said something about drugs. the defense wants you to believe that he said i ate too many drugs, and at first the lead investigator on the case agreed until he listened again. >> and did you attempt to understand and hear what various parties were saying at various times? >> yes. >> did you ever hear mr. floyd say i ate too many drugs? >> no.
>> i'd like to publish exhibit 1007, and i'm going to ask you, sir, to listen to mr. floyd's voice. did you hear that? >> yes, i did. >> did it appear that mr. floyd said i ate too many drugs? >> yes, it did. >> okay. but just a few minutes later the prosecutor played a longer clip and the officer's answer was very different. >> prior to the short clip of lane's body camera you were shown as exhibit 1007 is there discussion of drug use by the officers in attempting to peek to mr. floyd? >> yes. >> and hearing that section of the audio did that help you to understand what mr. floyd might have been saying that you were
please i can't breathe. >> so the record should reflect we played through 202110 with the quote you were asked about appearing really at 202101, correct? >> yes. >> having heard it in context were you able to tell what mr. floyd was saying there? >> yes, i believe mr. floyd was saying i ain't do no drugs. >> that's a little different what you were asked about when we saw a portion of the video, correct? >> yes, sir. >> funny how things work, right? context, nuance. i ain't do no drugs. that's the opposite of i ate too many drugs. listen, it's pretty hard to hear exactly what george floyd was saying. after all this was a man begging for his life while derek chauvin had his knee on his neck. but it's pretty clear what the defense wants you to think. he may want you to think george floyd died because of drugs.
may want you to, again, deny what you're seeing with your very own eyes, which is a whole -- that's the whole theme of this entire opening statement that i'm giving now, my take. people don't want you to believe what you see with your own eyes. that means that they think you're dumb or there's something wrong with you. you're not, right? you know what you see with your own eyes. you know what you saw on january 6th. you know what you saw in that video. and if you really listen to lal of that in context you get the gist of what someone is saying. again, it's pretty hard. i'm not denying that. it's pretty hard. but they want you to ignore in this tape the 9 1/2 minutes of derek chauvin kneeling on george floyd's neck and instead focus on those few words.
and they also want you to doubt what you heard george floyd saying over and over during those 9 1/2 minutes. this was clear, "i can't breathe." >> in this particular case when mr. floyd was initially saying that he couldn't breathe he was actively resisting arrest. >> initially when he was in the back seat of the vehicle, yes. >> and in fact he was using his legs to push back and to use his body weight against the officers, right? >> yes. >> and at one point three minneapolis police officers were attempting to get him into the back seat of the squad car from the passenger side of the car, correct? >> correct. >> and they were not able to do so. >> no. >> just remember that was in the back of the car. on the pavement, handcuffed behind his back. so they want you to doubt that george floyd meant it when he
said i can't breathe. they want you to think it was just his way of resisting arrest. so the big picture here. this is about the defense raising doubt, doubt about what killed george floyd, doubt about what he said or didn't say about drugs. doubt about george floyd saying i can't breathe. but think about it, smart people. none of that changes the fact that george floyd is dead. dead after a police officer kneeled on his neck for 9 1/2 excruciating minutes. those 9 1/2 minutes, that's what matters here. the video of the insurrection, the people who were injured, what you see on tape, that's what matters there.
but in this case the defense is trying to convince jurors not to believe what they saw, what we all saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears for those 9 1/2 minutes. you're smarter than that. for minneapolis and for the capitol insurrection you did see it. don't let them gaslight you. they want you to believe that what happened to george floyd had nothing to do with the police officer kneeling on his neck while he was dying, but shouldn't the use of force have stopped when he was cuffed and on the ground? >> do you agree with the statement in your custody, in your care? >> yes. >> what does that mean? >> that means once you take someone into custody then you're responsible for their care.
they grow from our imagination, but they can't be held back. they want to be set free. to make the world more responsible, and even more incredible. ideas start the future, just like that. as carla wonders if she can retire sooner, she'll revisit her plan with fidelity. and with a scenario that makes it a possibility, she'll enjoy her dream right now. that's the planning effect, from fidelity.
neck for 9 1/2 minutes or 9 minutes and 29 seconds, but 9 1/2 minutes where no force should have been used. so joining me now cnn's senior legal analyst laura coates, and cedric organizer of the organization of black law executives. good evening to both of you. thank so much for joining us. laura, the defense trying to argue floyd was zetisting arrest when he said i can't breathe to officers putting him in the squad car. i want to play more of that and we'll talk about it. >> it's fair to say that one of the things that an officer has to do in the assessment of his reasonableness of the use of force is take into consideration what the suspect is saying and how he's acting. >> yes. 100%. >> so if somebody is saying i can't breathe and they're passing out and they're not resisting that's one form of an analysis, right? >> yes. >> and in this particular case when mr. floyd was initially
saying he couldn't breathe he was actively resisting arrest. >> initially when she was in the back seat of the vehicle, yes. >> okay, so, laura, but once floyd was on the ground what he said was consistent with his actions. he wasn't resisting, he became nonresponsive. do you buy the defense's argument? >> what they're trying to prove we already know. the idea here that an officer is able to use force to restrain or subdue a resisting person is obvious. no one disputes that. the question here is whether you can continue to exert the same level of force for someone who's resisting when they're no longer resisting, no longer posing any threat whatsoever. this case has never been about whether an officer can generally use force, whether an officer has used excessive force and gone beyond what's reasonable into the realm of criminal assault by obtaining the
application of lethal force after the person has stopped moving, breathing and being conscience. >> you know what i should have asked you which should have been better, do you think the jury bought it? >> i don't think the jury does buy what's being told to them at this point in time. of course the jury is compromised of human beings but also compromised of wild cards there. but if we're all in the court of opinion watching this, they're probably having the same questions. why are you bringing this up, why do you focus on that aspect instead of focusing on the part where george floyd's actually prone on the ground and handcuffed because remember that's the lens by which this case should be judged. so any reference that tries to lose focus and muddy the waters away from the actual conduct that the defendant, derek chauvin, not george floyd is accused of. jurors must be raising an eyebrow and wondering why are you mentioning that, defense in.
>> so cedric, even if floyd was resi resisting arrest in the beginning shouldn't it have have ended when she was cuffed and laying face down on the ground? >> absolutely it should have. there's no question about that. and as you heard lieutenant stiger the use of force expert state is you use the amount of force necessary. and when that resistance stops of course you stop. what we saw or we all observed rather mr. floyd when he went to the ground, and they had him handcuffed. they had him in a prone position. they were on top of him. it just was not necessary any longer to treat him the way in which they did. you know, it's very important to remember and we hear a lot about this, and it is such an important piece here, don, is that once a person that you arrest is in your custody you're solely responsible for them. and you're responsible for their
care during the time that you have them under arrest. and i think what we saw on may 25th was something that certainly did not demonstrate taking responsibility for another human being. >> but the defense is trying to argue that floyd still could have been a threat. listen to this, cedric. >> a person who's in handcuffs can continue to be a threat, agreed? >> yes. >> they can kick you. >> correct. >> they could bite you. >> correct. >> they could thrash and get free and start running, right? >> in certain instances, yes, sir. >> and in certain instances they can even get your weapon, right? >> yes. >> so cedric, we all saw the video. he wasn't resisting when chauvin was kneeling on his neck. >> and the defense is making a real stretch here because certainly we know once we have someone subdued at that level usually we have them under control. and even -- even if they
continue to resist we still apply what we were taught in the academy and in service training. you use a level of force that's necessary. the defense here is just stretching. they're trying to create some doubt. but i think that people when they watch that video, that jury and that's what really matters right now, what the jury sees and perceives in all of this. they're going to see right through this. it's -- there was no resistance here. >> yeah. laura, i want to -- you saw the exchange that we talked about earlier about the i ate too many drugs or i ain't do drugs. does that get to the point what this case is all about, taking things out of context, is the defense overplaying their hand? what did you make of that moment? >> well, first of all, you don't want to lose your jury in terms of being able to engage them. you also don't want to lose your jury in terms of making
self-inflicted wounds that makes you look like you tried to pull an okie doke on people by giving slivers, noncontextualized portions of later found to be a way now i've heard again was not being said and i'm sure the defense was able to hear the breadth of that particular clip. and the jury is watching this and begins to doubt the people trying to plant the seeds of reasonable doubt. but remember i have to focus people on this case because it's not about whether this indiscernible audio about george floyd about whether he didn't use drugs or ate drugs. the real issue here comes down to two questions. number one, why did derek chauvin use an unreasonable amount of lethal, nonproportional unnecessary force after somebody was rendered neutralized? and number two, even if derek chauvin believed there was some alternative force of the physical distress that george
floyd was enduring, why didn't he render the care that's required during your custody? imagine if he was in a jail cell and had gone into cardiac arrest. do we want our jail dpards to go, oh, well i didn't cause that therefore let the person go and see as they fit? you wouldn't do that. so he's in custody in handcuffs it's the same thing. >> i can't let you go without saying something about our friend who sadly passed away we found out overnight. on this show, a frequent contributor on this show and other networks. she was a friend to the show, and she was often -- appeared with you, laura, where she talked about legal issues. she was an attorney and our hearts go out to her family. i'm not sure if you knew her cedric, but we knew her and loved her. you want to say a few words, laura? >> well, i just -- i respected her a great deal. and i'm just devastated that a
47-year-old has lost her life. we don't know all the details, but her family i'm sure is reeling as her friends and her loved ones are. and it was her mind, it was her analysis, it was her pep, and her wit i'll remember. and i have to tell you it's such a sad day to have lost that bright light so soon anytime but especially now. >> 47 years old, we're going to miss her. cedric, laura, thank you so much. we really appreciate it. rest in peace our dear friend. we'll be right back. there's just too much evidence. kill weeds not the lawn with roundup for lawns products. the harry's razor is not the same.
late tonight democratic senator joe manchin putting up what could be a serious roadblock to president biden's ambitious agenda and possibly handing a big victory to republicans declaring in a "the washington post" op-ed that he will not rote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster in the senate. so let's discuss now.
cnn's chief political analyst gloria borger. thank you very much for joining. good to see you both of you. gloria borger, i'm going to start with you because let's talk about what joe manchin is saying. he's saying this and i quote, senate democrats must avoid the temptation to abandon our democratic colleagues on important national issues. republicans, however, have a responsibility to stop saying no and participate in finding real compromise with democrats. so, gloria, we've known his feelings on the filibuster but joe manchin seems to be the only person living in this ckumbaya senate world. we're not in that world anymore. maybe i'm wrong. >> no, you're right. we are not in that world. i think joe biden would join him in that perfect world from decades ago when perhaps it used
to work that way and sometimes it did and sometimes it didn't. but that's not life right now. i think with joe manchin stating yet again i'm not going to move, i'm not going to amend, i'm not going to say, i'm just going to say we're not going to do anything with the filibuster, that means for joe biden, it means he needs ten republicans for voting rights. it puts the minimum wage -- increasing the minimum wage in danger, the dream act in danger, sort of large legislation like universal background checks in danger. so this is not news -- good news for joe biden. and it puts manchin right where he wants to be, which is at the center of everything. >> but you said he needs ten republicans in -- gloria, is that ever going to happen? >> he would need -- yeah, well, we'll have to see. >> i would hope but -- >> well, in a way there's one thing this does for joe biden
that's not terrible, and that is progressives who want more of what joe biden is proposing, biden can now say to them i can't. in order to get anything through i need joe manchin. so in that sense it might work for him but in a larger sense it's a real problem. >> listen, charlie, for the country -- people know this. voting rights, it's important for our democracy. does joe manchin really want to go down as the guy who held up the voting rights act, who restricted voting for people in this country, poor people, people of color? does he want to go down as that guy? >> well, i think, don, i think it's a bit unfair to put this all on joe manchin. i happy to agree with him on the filibuster. i witnessed when republicans were in control, listening to most extreme voices in the republican conference and the house at the time demanding mitch mcconnell eliminate the filibuster. this was always coming from the
extreme voices because they wanted to jam very harsh partisan legislation that would not be sustainable or durable. and i think the democrats know in their guts this is not a good thing. the problem isn't the rules. the problem is the members who don't have the capacity for compromise. they don't see a political reward. they don't see a political reward for compromise. that's why they don't do it, with or without a filibuster. that's the harsh reality. their political safety is tacking hard to the bases. that's why they do it. >> charlie, i don't disagree with you. i agree with everything you said except it's not about the filibuster because you're never going to get republicans to move. and the only way you're going to get legislation done is maybe there's an exemption to filibuster. something as important as voting rights, that's the only way you're going to get it because republicans are not going to come over. what you're saying -- you saying -- honang on and i promi
i'm going to let you finish. you saying there's no political reward, that's why you're never going to get any. so maybe on this one issue there has to be some sort of compromise when it comes to the filibuster. maybe not get rid of but some sort of compromise. go ahead. >> i was in congress in 2006 when george bush was president, republican house, republican senate. and we passed a reauthorization of the 1965 voting rights act. we did it in spite of the filibuster the act itself was passed and overcame the filibuster because it had a consensus in the country to do something. i think they can get some reform on voting rights. there are all kind of problems with the georgia law. the motivation of the republicans was bad, but they can certainly come to some dpreemts on this stuff. and certainly they can do it on infrastructure. they could have done it on the most recent covid bill. hell, they did four or five bills before on a bipartisan basis so i think it's do-able. >> what year is that?
i'm not being facetious. 2006 you said. i'm going to give you it last word. go ahead, gloria. >> that was a long time ago. i want to agree on charlie on this. i think part of the problem is the way we elect members of congress, and they're all afraid of being primaried on the right. the republicans are afraid of donald trump. and if we had different kinds of primaries where it wasn't winner take all and so-called jungle primaries or something like that in the senate, they wouldn't be all that afraid of what was going to happen to them because then they'd have to face a runoff. if we found different ways to elect people in primaries, they would not be so afraid -- >> but, gloria, by the time you do that the voting -- by the time we do that this whole issue, you know, about the -- about voting rights will be over. >> yes. i'm talking long-term. i am talking long-term if you
want to look at the big picture. you have to look down the road. i know, you know, president obama is talking about how you elect people in the house and you don't have jerry mandered districts. you try to make the districts more like the country and don't draw them politically in the house. so it's a process. it's a very long process, but right now it's not working. >> i had so much to talk to you guys about, but anyways thank you for putting up with -- i love these conversations with you guys. thank you both. i'll see you soon. thank you so much. >> thank you, don. new words about coronavirus spreading among children. we're going to tell you what's causing the increase and how you can keep your family safe. that's next.
more contagious variants and some after school extracurriculars. here's what dr. fauci told anderson tonight. >> there's relatively more protection among older individuals as opposed to younger individuals, so what we're seeing now is what appears to be but it's actually the reality of a disproportionately more infections in younger individuals. you combine that with what you just mentioned with dr. walensky said about clusters of cases in day care as well as school sports particularly team sports which people engage in close contact without masks. i think that is what is explaining these surges of cases in young individuals driven by the variant. >> so let's talk about this with dr. dmitry, the director of the center of child health behavior and development at seattle children's hospital. thank you so hutch. i really appreciate you joining
us, doctor. this is some really serious stuff here because these new cases are spiking among young adults and children. that's according to one report by the american academy of pediatric. there were over 63,000 new cases of covid-19 among kids last week alone. is this due to variants? what's going on? >> well, you know, it's a little bit of a perfect storm, don. what we have here is a situation where we have many variants, the emerging dominant one in the united states is b117, the so-called u.k. variant. that's rising, more contagious. maybe 30% more contagious. we also have a sort of false sense of security because case counts had been falling as we vaccinated older people. we have non-vaccinated young people which as dr. fauci said are still susceptible to the virus and we have pandemic fatigue. we're all 14, 15 months into this sick and tired of not
getting back to our lives. we think we see the light at the end of the tunnel. we do see the light at the end of the tunnel and we're really eager to let our guard down. you know, if i may use a sports metaphor, a football metaphor, if you will, you know, we've been getting our butts kicked against this virus for three quarters of this game. we're in the fourth quarter now. we're making a serious comeback. we will will this game but we're at the 2 minute warning and we can't spike the football yet. we have to stay focused on winning the game, and then we will. >> whatever analogy you can make. if it helps people get it that they have to be safe, we will take it. seriously. i want to talk about pfizer announcing last week their vaccine is 100% effective in kids ages 5 to 15. they plan to submit their data for approval in the coming weeks. how far aare we getting kids
vaccinated? what's the time line? >> ysk i haven't seen their data and there's a whole process that has to go through to get emergency use authorization. i have every reason to believe that in that age the vaccine probably will be safe and effective. the challenging things about pediatrics, which is what i practice, is that we draw these artificial distinctions between what makes a child an adult and we historically have done it at 18 and said when you become 18 now urine adult and adult data apply and not pediatric data. 16 obviously is more like 18. 14 is more like 16. i think the vaccine probably will be safe in kids that age. i don't know about younger children because they're clearly a very different phenomenon. but it's not just about when the vaccine is declared safe. the bigger issue is going to be when it's available and when it's being widely distributed. the truth is i think that come fall young children in
particular will not be vaccinated and will be -- there will be circumstlating covid amongst them. the good news and very good news is that adults and children over the age of 16 for sure will have vaccine available, that it's likely highly so if all of those people take advantage of the vaccine, take it, we will be protecting the most vulnerable parts of our population and diminishing spread. the best thing we can do if we want to be mvp in this football game is get the vaccine as soon as we can. get it for our children as soon as it is approved for them. >> doctor, thank you. i appreciate you joining us. >> my pleasure. take care and stay safe. >> you too. he is saying the quiet part out loud. one state's top election official is warning the next
election and take this, woke student voters. get charmin ultra strong. go get 'em. it just cleans better. with a diamond weave texture, your family can use less while still getting clean. goodbye itchy squirm. hello clean bottom! we all go. why not enjoy the go with charmin. we're carvana, the company who invented car vending machines and buying a car 100% online. now we've created a brand-new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old. we wanna buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate answer a few questions. and our techno wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot and pick up your car, that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way at carvana.
you know that look? that life of the party look walk it off look one more mile look reply all look own your look... ...with fewer lines. there's only one botox® cosmetic. it's the only one... ...fda approved... ...to temporarily make frown lines... ...crow's feet... ...and forehead lines... ...look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic, may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. so, give that just saw a puppy look. and whatever that look is. look like you... with fewer lines. see results at botoxcosmetic.com
i've always focused on my career. but when we found out our son had autism, his future became my focus. lavender baths always calmed him. so we turned bath time into a business. and building it with my son has been my dream job. at northwestern mutual, our version of financial planning helps you live your dreams today. find a northwestern mutual advisor at nm.com the harry's razor is not the same. our razors have five german engineered blades designed to stay sharp, so your eighth shave is as smooth as your first. and we never upcharge you for high quality. harry's. available in store and at harrys.com.
dignity. this thing you can neither see nor measure... ...but that demands the return of small moments illness attempts to steal. ♪ dignity demands a rapid covid test, ♪ because we all need an answer to move forward. ♪ dignity demands your heart stays connected to your doctor, so you know it's beating as it should. ♪ it demands a better understanding of your glucose levels, so you can enjoy movie night. ♪ and knowing your baby is getting the nutrition he needs, no matter how you choose to feed him. dignity is not effortless nor easy. at abbott, we fight for it every day, developing life-changing technologies. because dignity demands it. ♪
scotts turf builder triple action kills weeds, because dignity demands it. prevents crab grass and feeds your lawn. all three,in just one bag. i like that. scotts turf builder triple action. it's lawn season. let's get to the yard. so take this, the top election official in mississippi saying the quiet part out loud about expanding voting access. republican secretary of state michael watson explaining why he is against automatic voter registration. you have to listen to this. >> there was an executive order that came out about two and a half weeks ago dealing with voter registration, basically i imploring to register as many as they can via the administration. think about all these woke college university students who will automatically be registered
to vote, whether they wanted to original. if they didn't know to opt out, they wouldn't be registered to vote and then they receive a mail-in ballot that they didn't know was coming because they didn't know they were registered to vote. you have a citizen not toward vote and it is forced on them. >> he actually said that. think about that. how much sense does that make? everyone should be, everyone who is of legal age should be able to vote. whether they're a college student or not. you're talking about woke people, woke people? have a right to vote. even racists in this country have a right to vote. think about what you're saying. for so long racism has been the boogie man.
that has been debunkedle, many times. we're hearing a new set of them, now it's wokeness. with the restricter rights to vote, it is clear those who want to restrict that right will do or say just about anything. president biden is getting ready to take on guns now. he is selling his $2 trillion infrastructure plan. can he get his full party on board?