Skip to main content

tv   CNN Tonight With Don Lemon  CNN  April 7, 2021 11:00pm-12:00am PDT

11:00 pm
we got an update for you on our guest last night. georgia representative, park cannon. arrested, last month, after knocking on the governor's door during the bill signing for that restrictive-voting law. well, let's bring in d lemon, because we've both been covering this. prosecutors confirmed, today, they won't charge cannon, whose lawyer told us that she faced eight years in prison. in response, she tweeted the hashtag, keep knocking. good trouble, d lemon. >> yeah, that is good trouble. and, listen, we thought that it would happen. but as you warned, you're the attorney. you never know. and as we thought, her attorney said the same thing you said, and he is right. this is down in georgia, and you saw how it happened. a all the guys in there, signing the picture -- siegning the bil under a picture of a plantation. and here's this black woman trying to knock on the door, she is at work, just to go in and be able to witness what her governor is doing. outrageous. but i'm glad they -- i'm glad that it won't happen. >> and, look, to people who say,
11:01 pm
boy, you guys, you know, you are overhyping this. really, there is a disinformation campaign afoot right now, all over social media. being given a loud speaker 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 that there were weapons recovered. and by the way, a lot of the people, do we -- do you really know if there were? and they are saying armed. what they mean by armed is guns. >> yeah, like you can't whoop somebody's ass without a gun. >> or with bear spray or with pepper spray or with a bicycle gate or with a fire extinguisher. come on, people. >> a hundred cops, injured. what was it, their feelings that were hurt? and these are the guys that always wave their flags. well, they are not using it to beat you over the head. >> i tell you what. you have a lot of cop friends.
11:02 pm
i have a lot of cop friends. my hcop friends are not happy about this. and there were some that actually supported the former president and watched state-run tv. not anymore. i got to be honest with you. a lot of -- a lot of people, i knew, who were supportive of the administration, very conservative. their whole world was turned upside down that day, because everything that they thought they believed in had turned upside down. they're like, wait a minute. you mean, state tv is lying to me? you mean, the former president is? you mean, they don't support cops the way that they do police officers? >> they do when it suits their agenda. >> yeah. but it was a real, wake-up 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 the new guy puts it. in his credibility with -- with -- i don't know how -- i would say, a substantial portion of his base. i really do. >> well, look. >> i don't know if it's long lasting. >> we've never seen anybody do
11:03 pm
anything worse, in terms of fomenting political discord in this country. >> yeah. >> 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. >> but we got to call it out, which is what i am going to do. but i, also, have to call you out because, what were you telling me during the commercial break? >> listen. i can't believe you want to introduce this to people's lives. i am trying to help this guy. because i love him and he is messing with his tie. his tie is, like, all the way over here. and he's got 19 people working on him. >> behind the scenes. here is the thing. i am trying to fix my cord. i it's pulling my tie. oh, now i took it off. >> and, you know, mr. number-one best-seller now is a new guy. he's like, i'm not 90.
11:04 pm
you wear the same thing every night. shut up. these are dimples. >> the cord was pulling my tie. it's not. what you do is when you -- when you are 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. it's -- i have a pocket square. that is enough. and so, anyways, you -- you are trying to tell me about fashion? >> here it comes. >> come on, brother. >> like, an old lady, in church. >> he's got the papers. he's got the papers, now. calm down, don. >> oh, lordy. >> sorry for trying to help. >> i got to get to the news. i can -- can't you hear that? >> i love you, d lemon. you and your whack tie. >> i love you, brother. you and your same tie. i got to get you a new one. this is "cnn tonight." i am don lemon. listen. chris is right. we have got a lot of things to talk about. this is an outrage. you should be mad about this. you should be outraged by this, because it is pure gas lighting.
11:05 pm
the biggest of big lies actually being defended on, where else, the fox-propaganda network. tucker carlson, night after night, minimizing the intersection 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, that the last election was not entirely fair. >> okay. that's downplaying 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.
11:06 pm
just a bunch of people talking about the constitution and their rights. it's just more riot denialism from the, from the right. it's just more lies. that, as we are learning tonight, at least one defendant is flipping against the proud boys. the first sign, that people charged in the insurrection are cooperating against the trump extremists. now, if you want to know why fox and the right have -- have to pretend that the insurrection didn't happen. if you want to know why, well, of course, it's because of the former guy. i like this one. the inciter in chief. the twice-impeached, one-term president. insurrection-starting president, who never won the popular vote. that they can't shake their devotion to him, and their misguided belief that he holds the key to power. case in point. today's endorsement of one of his allies who whipped up the crowd, just before they marched on the capitol. trump endorsing moe brooks for senate. praising his courage, in all caps, and fight, also, in all
11:07 pm
caps. fight, really? i want you to remember, okay, because, again, this is all about gas lighting, just flat-out lying. and people will start -- chris is right. people will start to believe, like, the insurrection never happened. this never happened. none of it. but i want you to remember, this is moe 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! [ cheers and applause ] 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 world 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
11:08 pm
takes to fight for america? [ cheers and applause ] 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 a guy, trump thinks should be a senator? that guy? the guy, who whipped up people, who went on to march on our capitol? attacking police? hunting lawmakers? chanting, "hang mike pence"? >> 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. propaganda network is saying never happened. the former-house speaker, john boehner, lashing out at trump in
11:09 pm
his new book. in very boehner-style language. saying the former president incited that bloody insurrection for nothing more than selfish reasons. that he perpetuated by -- selfish reasons, perpetuated by and i quote here bullshit he had been shoveling since he lost a fair election, the previous november. a trump adviser firing back, calling boehner a swamp creature. no matter what lies the right tries to spin, we all saw what happened on january 6th. there is no denying it, no matter how much you try to deny it. no denying it. it was one of the dark edest da 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.
11:10 pm
why is that? why is that? fox propaganda? perhaps, that's a question that you should be doing on your panels. why is that? a lot more on all of this, tonight. but i want to turn, now, to the big moment today in the trial of the police officer, who kneeled on george floyd's neck, for nine and a half minutes. it was about what we heard on that infamous tape today. not when george floyd begged for his life. not when he called out 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. >> do you -- did you ever hear mr. floyd say, i ate too many drugs?
11:11 pm
>> no. >> 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. >> hmm. 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 -- that you were shown as exhibit 1007. is the discussion of the officers. in hearing that section of the audio, did that help you to understand what mr. floyd might
11:12 pm
have been saying, that you were asked about by counsel? >> yes. and, your honor, then, we would ask to play 127 -- exhibit 127, which is queued up to 20:30, 20:21 where mr. reyerson was asked about. >> please! please. please, i can't breathe. >> get on the side dewalk, plea >> ah. >> get his legs up? >> nope, just leave him. yep. just leave him. >> all right. >> found a pipe.
11:13 pm
>> please, please! i can't breathe! >> so, the record should reflect that we played through 20:21:10 with the quote that you were asked about appearing at 20:21:01, correct? >> yes. >> and having heard it in context, are you able to tell what mr. floyd is saying there? >> yes, i believe mr. floyd was saying, i ain't do no drugs. >> so, that's little different than what you were asked about when you only 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. now, honestly, here, 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. they want you to think that
11:14 pm
george floyd died because of drugs. they want you to, again, deny what you are seeing, with your very-own eyes. which is the 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. they -- 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. what you saw. you know what you saw on january 6th. you know what you saw on that video. and if you really listen to all of that, in context, you get the gist of what someone saying. again, it's pretty hard to -- i'm not denying that -- it's pretty hard. but they want you to ignore, on this tape, nine-and-a-half minutes of derek chauvin
11:15 pm
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 nine-and-a-half 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 backseat of the vehicle, yes. >> right. and in fact, he was using his legs to push back, and to use his body weight to -- against the officers, right? >> yes. >> and at one point, three minneapolis police officers were attempt attempting to get him into the backseat of the squad car from the passenger side of the car, correct? >> correct. >> they were not able to do so? >> no. >> now, just remember, that was in the back of the car. on the pavement, handcuffed, behind his back. so, they want you to doubt that
11:16 pm
george floyd meant it when he said, i can't breathe. they want you to think that 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 did 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 nine-and-a-half, excruciating minutes. those nine-and-a-half 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.
11:17 pm
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 nine-and-a-half minutes. you're smarter than that. for minneapolis, and for the capitol insurrection, you did see it. don't let 'em 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? >> would you agree with the statement, in your custody, in your care? >> yes. >> what does -- what does that mean? >> that means once you take someone into custody, then you're responsible for -- for their care.
11:18 pm
aliens are real, alright. there's just too much evidence. kill weeds not the lawn with roundup for lawns products. gillette proglide. five blades and a pivoting flexball designed to get virtually every hair on the first stroke. so you're ready for the day with a fresh face for a fresh start. for a limited time get a 5th cartridge free.
11:19 pm
11:20 pm
♪ ♪i've got the brains you've got the looks♪ ♪let's make lots of money♪ ♪you've got the brawn♪ ♪i've got the brains♪ ♪let's make lots of♪ ♪uh uh uh♪ ♪oohhh there's a lot of opportunities♪ with allstate, drivers who switched saved over $700. saving is easy when you're in good hands. allstate click or call to switch today.
11:21 pm
prosecution of the derek chauvin trial, adding to the mounting testimony that chauvin used excessive force against
11:22 pm
george floyd. a use-of-force expert saying that chauvin used deadly force, by holding his knee on floyd's neck for nine-and-a-half minutes. or nine minutes and 29 seconds but nine-and-a-half minutes. where no force should have been used. so joining me now, cnn senior legal analyst, laura coates. and the former president of the national organization of black law enforcement executives. good evening, to both of you. thank you so much for joining. laura, the defense, today, trying to argue that floyd was resisting arrest, when he said i can't breathe to officers putting him in the squad car. i want to play more of that, and then we will talk about it. >> that one of the things that an officer has to do, in the assessment of the reasonableness of his use of force is take, into consideration, what the suspect is saying, and how he's acting. >> yes, 100%. >> right. 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,
11:23 pm
right? >> yes. >> and 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 backseat 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 are trying to prove, we already know. i mean, 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, don, is whether you could continue to exert the same level of force you would use, for somebody who is resisting, when they are no longer resisting. when they are no longer breathing. when they are no longer posing any threat, whatsoever. this case has never been about whether an officer can, generally, use force. it's about whether an officer has used excessive force, and
11:24 pm
gone beyond what's reasonable, into the realm of criminal assault by maintaining the application of lethal force, after the person has stopped moving, breathing, and being conscious. >> you know what i should have asked you? which is a better -- do you think the jury bought it? >> you know, i don't think the jury does buy what's being sold to them, at this point in time. we have no way of knowing. of course, the jury is comprised of human beings but they are also comprised of wildcards there. but if we are all in the court of public opinion, watching this, and we are having the same questions they're probably having there. why are you bringing this up? why are you focused on what happened in the back of the squad car when chauvin wasn't, yet, on the scene, at one point? why do you focus on that aspect, unless you're -- unless -- focusing on the part where george floyd is actually prone on the ground and handcuffed because, remember, that's the lens, by which this case should be judged. and 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,
11:25 pm
is accused of. jurors must be raising an eyebrow and wondering, why are you mentioning that, defense? >> so, cedric, even if floyd was resisting arrest, in the beginning, shouldn't the use of force have ended as soon as he stopped resisting? when he was cuffed and laying, face down, on the ground? >> absolutely, it should have. and there is no question about that. and as you heard lieutenant stiger, the use-of-force expert, is that you use the amount of force necessary. and when that resistance stopped, of course, you stop. but, we all saw -- 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're 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 -- to -- to remember, and we hear a lot about this. and -- and it's such an important piece here, don, is that once a person that you arrest is in your custody.
11:26 pm
you're surly responsible for them. and you are responsible for -- 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 -- 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 can bite you. >> correct. >> they can thrash and get free, and start running, right? >> in certain instances, right. >> and in certain instances, they can even get your weapon, right? >> yes. >> so, cedric, we have all seen the video. he wasn't resisting, when chauvin was kneeling on his neck. was floyd a threat, at that point? >> no, and the defense is really making a real stretch, here. because certainly, we know, once we have someone subdued, at that level, usually, we have them under control.
11:27 pm
and even -- even if they continued to resist, we still apply what we were taught in the academy. and in in-service training. you use the level of force that's necessary. the defense here is just stretching. they are trying to create some doubt. but i think that people, when they watch that video, that jury and -- 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 -- it's -- 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 with this -- with this case is all act? i mean, you know, taking things out of context? is the defense overplaying? what did you make of that moment? >> well, first of all, you know, you don't want to lose your jury, in terms of being able to
11:28 pm
engage them. you, also, don't want to lose your jury in terms of making self-inflicted wounds that makes you looked like you tried to pull an okeydoke on people, by giving slivers, noncontextualized portions that are, later, found to be, oh, wait. now, that i've heard it again, that actually is not what's being said. and i'm sure the defense was able to hear the full breadth of that particular clip and was able to lead -- make its own conclusions, at that. so, the jury is watching this, and begins to start to doubt the people who are 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 by george floyd about whether he didn't use drugs or he 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 that there was
11:29 pm
some, alternative source of the physical distress that george floyd was enduring. well, why didn't he render the care that's required if they are in your custody? imagine, if he was in a jail cell and had gone into cardiac arrest. do we want our jail guards to go, oh, well, i didn't cause that. therefore, let the person go. and -- and see as they fit. you wouldn't do that. so he is in the custody, in handcuffs. it's the same thing. >> before -- before i let you go, i have to -- i can't let you go, without saying something about our friend, laura. charles. who, sadly, passed away, we found out, overnight. he was on this show. a frequent contributor, on this show, and on 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. and i'm not sure if you knew her, cedric. but we knew her and we loved her, and i just wanted to -- you want to say a few words, laura? >> well, i just -- you know, i
11:30 pm
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. h her whit and i have it oh tell you it is such a sad thing. >> cedric, laura, thank you so much. we really appreciate it. rest in peace, our dear friend. we'll be right back. 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 ♪
11:31 pm
11:32 pm
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 - [narrator] we miss being together, but you can still feel a strong sense of community harry's. with custom gear from custom ink. we've developed new tools to make it easy for you. custom ink has hundreds of products, including masks, to help you stay connected. upload your logo or start your design today at
11:33 pm
11:34 pm
wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. over the next 10 years, comcast is committing $1 billion to reach 50 million low-income americans with the tools and resources they need to be ready for anything. i hope you're ready. 'cause we are. 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 "washington post" op-ed that he will not
11:35 pm
vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster in the senate. cnn's gloria borger is here. charlie dent, as well, the former republican congressman. gloria, i am going to start with you, because let's start with what joe manchin is saying. he is saying that he is not going to vote to weaken the senate filibuster in "the washington post" op-ed. and he says this, and i quote. senate democrats must avoid the temptation to abandon our republican 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 kumbaya-senate world that he is describe -- it's, like, a 1950s leave-it-to-beaver world. we're not in that world, anymore. it's -- maybe, i'm wrong. >> we are not. no, you are right. we're not in that world. i think, joe biden would join him, in that perfect world.
11:36 pm
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 change. i'm just going to say i'm -- 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, increase to 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 it's at -- you said he needs ten republicans in the -- gloria, is that ever going to happen? >> he would need -- yeah. i -- i mean, well, you know, we'll -- we'll have to see. >> i would hope. but -- >> in a way, and -- it -- well, but, in a way, there is one
11:37 pm
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 the larger sense, it's a real problem. >> listen, charlie, for the country. and, listen. i -- people know this. voting rights. that -- 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, it's a bit unfair to put this all an joe manchin. i happen to agree with him on the filibuster. i witnessed when republicans were in control. listening to the most -- the most extreme voices in republican conference in the house, at the time, demanding that mitch mcconnell eliminate
11:38 pm
the pfilibuster. this is 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, that 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. same with the -- that's -- that's the harsh reality. their political safety is tacking hard to the bases, that's why they do it. it's not about the filibuster. >> charlie, i don't disagree with you. i -- i agree with you, everything you said, except it's not about the filibuster. because it is about the filibuster because you are never going to get republicans to move. and the only way you are going to get the legislation done is if you -- maybe, there is an exemption to the filibuster. but something as important as voting rights. that is -- that's the only way you are going to get it because republicans are not going to come over. what you are saying, you -- you -- you saying -- hang on. i promise you, i'm going to let
11:39 pm
you finish. you, saying that, you know, there is 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 it. but some sort of compromise. go ahead. i promised i'd let you finish. >> don, i just got to say, look. i was in congress in 2004 with george bush as president. republican house, republican senate. and, you know, we passed a reauthorization of the 1965 voting rights act. we did it, in spite of a filibuster, the act, itself, was passed and it overcame the filibuster because it had a consensus in the country to do something. i think they can get some reforms on voting rights. i really do. i agree, there are all kinds of problems with the georgia law. some of the problems are overstated, to be candid. the motivation of the republicans was bad but they can certainly come to some agreements on this stuff. certainly, they could do it on infrastructure. they could have done it on the most recent covid bill. hell, they did four or five before on a bipartisan basis. so i think it's doable. >> but what year was that?
11:40 pm
i'm not -- i'm not being facetious. 2006, you said? >> 2006. >> i'm going to give you the last word. but go ahead, gloria. go on. >> that was a long time ago. but i want to agree with -- with charlie on this. that i -- i think that part of the problem is the way we elect members of congress. >> uh-huh. >> and they are 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 it wasn't a jungle primary in the senate. they wouldn't be that afraid of what was going to happen to them, because then they'd have to face a runoff. so 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 you do that, this whole issue about the -- you know, about the -- the -- about voting rights will be over. and -- >> yes. >> and done. >> i'm talking long-term. yeah. i am -- i am -- i am talking
11:41 pm
long-term, if you want to look at the -- 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 gerrymandered districts. you know, you try and make the districts more like the country, and you don't draw them politically in the house. so, it's a process. it's a very long process. >> yeah. >> but right now, it's not working. >> god, i had so much to talk to you guys about. but anyways, thank you for putting up with my -- but i love these conversations with you guys. thank you, both. i will see you soon. be well. thank you so much. >> thank you, don. >> sure. >> bye-bye. new worries 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. ♪ forget what your smoking-hot moms and teachers say, just remember my motto. if you ain't first... you're last! woo-hoo! so you want to make the best burger ever?
11:42 pm
then make it! that means cooking day and night until... [ ding ] success! that means... best burger ever. intuit quickbooks helps small businesses be more successful with payments, payroll, and banking.
11:43 pm
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. ♪
11:44 pm
11:45 pm
coronavirus cases rising in
11:46 pm
young people and children. the cdc says it's because of new, 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, what dr. walensky said about clusters of cases in daycare, 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 director of the center of child-health behavior and development in seattle. seattle's children's hospital.
11:47 pm
thank you, so much. i really appreciate you joining us, doctor. this is some 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 pediatrics. there were over -- excuse me -- 63,000 new cases of covid-19, among kids last week, alone. is this due to variants? what -- what's going on? >> well, you know, it's a little bit of a perfect storm, don. what we have here his a situatin where we have many variants. the dominant one or emerging-dominant one in the united states is the b.1.1.7 the so-called uk variant. that's rising. it's more contagious. maybe, 30%-more contagious. we also have sort of a false sense of security, because case counts have been falling as we have vaccinated older people. we have nonvaccinated, young people, which, as dr. fauci said, are still susceptible to this virus. and we have pandemic fatigue, right? we're all, you know, 14, 15 months into this, sick and tired
11:48 pm
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 have 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 win this game, but we're at the two-minute warning. and we can't spike the football, yet. we have to stay focused on -- on winning the game. and then, we will. >> whatever analogy you can make, that if it helps people get it that they have to be safe, we will take it. seriously. so, listen, i want to talk about pfizer announcing last week that their vaccine is 100% effective in kids age 12 to 15. they plan to submit their data to the fda for emergency approval. they are going to do that soon, in the coming weeks. how far away are we come getting
11:49 pm
kids vaccinated? what is the timeline? >> it's a really good question. i haven't seen their data and there is a whole process that has to go through, to get emergency-use authorization. i -- i have every reason to believe that, in that age, the vaccine probably will be safe and effective. one of the challenging things about pediatrics, which is what i practice, is that we draw these sort of artificial distinctions between what makes a child an adult. and we, historically, have done it at 18. and said that, when you become 18, now you are an 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 are, clearly, a very different phenomenon. but it's not just about when the vaccine is declared safe. the bigger issue is when it's available, and when it's being widely distributed. the truth is that, i think, that, come fall, young children
11:50 pm
in particular, will not be vaccinated. and there will be circulating covid amongst them. the good news, and it's very good news is that adults, and even older children over the age of 16 for sure will have vaccine available that is likely highly effective, even as far as we know against the existing variants. so all of those people take advantage of the advantage, take it, we will be protecting the most vulnerable segments 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's approved for them. >> doctor, thank you. i appreciate you joining us. >> my pleasure. take care and stay safe. >> he is saying the quiet part out loud. one state's top election official is warn about the next
11:51 pm
election, and take this, woke student voters. 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
11:52 pm
now, simparica trio simplifies protection. ticks and fleas? harry's. see ya! heartworm disease? no way! simparica trio is the first chewable that delivers all this protection. and simparica trio is demonstrated safe for puppies. it's simple: go with simparica trio. this drug class has been associated with neurologic adverse reactions, including seizures; use with caution in dogs with a history of these disorders. protect him with all your heart. simparica trio. ahoy! gotcha! nooooo noooooo quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent,
11:53 pm
so you can use less. bounty, the quicker picker upper. hey lily, i need a new wireless plan for my business, but all my employees need something different. oh, we can help with that. okay, imagine this... your mover, rob, he's on the scene and needs a plan with a mobile hotspot. we cut to downtown, your sales rep lisa has to send some files, asap! so basically i can pick the right plan for each employee... yeah i should've just led with that... with at&t business... you can pick the best plan for each employee and only pay for the features they need.
11:54 pm
itchy? scratchy? family not getting clean? get charmin ultra strong. it just cleans better, so your family can use less. hello clean bottom! enjoy the go with charmin.
11:55 pm
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 imploring all the federal university, and colleges to register as many folks as they can via the administration. think about all these woke
11:56 pm
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 got an uninformed ed citiz who may not be ready and prepared to vote and it is forced on them. go make the choice. >> he actually said that. think about that. how much sense does that make? how much -- 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. everyone as a right to vote. think about what you're saying, sir.
11:57 pm
so for so long voting fraud has been the boogieman about restricting access at the polls. that has been debunked many, many times. we're hearing a new set of them, now it's wokeness. watch out for those woke voters. it might sound crazy, but with hundreds of bills in the works across this country to restrict voting rights, it's clear those who want to restrict that right will stay or do just about anything. president biden is getting ready to take on guns now. he is selling his $2 trillion infrastructure plan. but can he get his full party on board?
11:58 pm
these folks, they don't have time to go to the post office they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the services of the post office plus ups only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to and never go to the post office again. to be a thriver with metastatic breast cancer means... grabbing a hold of what matters. asking for what we want. and need. and we need more time. so, we want kisqali. living longer is possible and proven with kisqali when taken with fulvestrant or a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer. kisqali is approved for both pre- and postmenopausal women, and has extended lives in multiple clinical trials.
11:59 pm
kisqali is a pill that's significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant alone. kisqali can cause lung problems, or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious skin reactions, liver problems, and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain, a change in your heartbeat, dizziness, yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills, or other symptoms of an infection, a severe or worsening rash, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding. avoid grapefruit during treatment. kisqali is not approved for use with tamoxifen. it's our time. for more time. we asked for kisqali. ask your doctor about living longer with kisqali.
12:00 am
see every delivery... we asked for kisqali. every yikes... and even every awwwwwwww... wait, where was i? introducing self protection from xfinity.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on