Skip to main content

tv   Cuomo Prime Time  CNN  October 20, 2021 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT

6:00 pm
joining us for tomorrow night's town hall with president biden, i'll be moderator, the news kocontinues, i want to han it other to chris for prime time. >> it's a great moment to have the conversation with people and the president. great to have you there. i'll be watching, not just because i have to come on after it. i'll be watching. it is chris cuomo, welcome to "primetime, we may have a couple more answers in the gabby petito case. one comes from an exclusive interview with the laundrie family attorney in a moment. the other comes from the fbi about what was found today and whom may have been found today. >> investigators found what appears to be human remains along with personal items, such as a backpack and notebook belonging to brian laundrie.
6:01 pm
>> now, identification could take a while, why? remains is suggestive of a degree of decomposition, and authorities have said it seems that what was found and who may have been found have been there a while. now, the probabilities are that human remains found near brian laundrie's belongings will be brian laundrie but we're going to have to wait and see. in terms of what we know, the remains were found in the carlton reserve. western florida, investigators have been searching there for more than a month. the fbi says the area where they were found was underwater until recently. is that true? and if so is that why the discovery wasn't found sooner. were they even searching in this place before? clouding the discovery is the fact that brian laundrie's parents were there today when the discoveries were made.
6:02 pm
is that a coincidence? well, they were with authorities when the discoveries were made, and the parents didn't discover the actual remains so there were authorities there with them the whole time, but afterall the weeks and teams and dogs, the day the parents show up, the remains are found. it is fair to be suspicious, given the disposition of the laundrie family from the beginning of this saga so how did the events of today come to pass. we have someone who can explain. laundrie family attorney counselor steven bertalino joins us by phone to discuss. can you hear me? >> yes, good evening, chris, how are you? >> appreciate you taking the opportunity. why today? why did the parents choose today to go to the preserve? >> well, it is my understanding that the preserve was only open to the public as of yesterday. so my clients reached out to me
6:03 pm
and informed me that they wanted to go in to the preserve this morning and i thought it would be wise to notify law enforcement of their intentions. i did so by text, and i contacted the north port police department and they responded with thank you for the heads up, and then they met my clients there this morning. >> why did they meet your clients there? >> well, i presume they thought it would be a good idea just to accompany them in. they knew the press had been following my clients for weeks and weeks on end. you have to ask them why they chose to come. they did not indicate to me last night that they would be there, they just, again, thanked me for the heads up. >> one quick question sideways, and i want you to take me through what you understand of how the discovery was made. why didn't the parents ask to go sooner during all of these agonizing weeks? >> well, the parents had assumed that the experts, the fbi and all the tracking teams they had
6:04 pm
would be able to locate brian based upon the information that we had provided them to the specific areas and trails in the park that brian liked to visit. the park had been closed to the b public. there was no other reason for the laundries to go search anywhere else. >> let's deal with the specifics of today. is the area that they were searching when these discoveries were made, is this a new area that the parents hadn't informed the authorities about before? >> no, not at all. indeed, this is the very area of the park that we initially informed law enforcement on i believe it was september 17th that brian would be most likely in the preserve in this particular area as i know it, near the bridge. i think it's the bridge that might connect the mienvironment park reserve.
6:05 pm
>> was this a deep way or distance into the preserve? >> no, mr. laundrie informed me that it was quite near the entrance. he didn't put an exact distance on it. he put a time frame of about 30 minutes in. but i would guess it could be a mile or two into the preserve. >> so can you help us understand how an area that the authorities were told about you say by the parents that isn't even that deep into the preserve wasn't located all these weeks with all the dogs and the teams and everything else until the parents showed up? >> well, listen, the explanation that the fbi gave today certainly makes sense. if that area was under water, one can certainly understand why you might not have been able to find the items that were located today. if that water had cleared, you know, two weeks ago, perhaps could have circled back and looked again. perhaps they meant to. perhaps they were further, deeper into the park and never
6:06 pm
got back to this park because it is so near the entrance, chris and roberta went to this area first, and as happenstance was, they stumbled upon these items. >> all right. now, the key understanding, what do you know from your clients about how the discovery was made, what was going on, you know, what did they tell you about how it happened? >> so fortunately one of your rival news people were there with a camera, and i say fortunately because, you know, some people don't believe how the events laid out today, but chris and roberta walked into the preserve. it's my understanding that they were followed closely by the two law enforcement personnel, and when i say closely, certainly within eye shot, and as they went further in, chris ventured off the trail, into the woods, he was zigzagging in different areas, law enforcement was doing the same thing and roberta
6:07 pm
laundrie was walking down the trail, and i believe that is on some video for some other news outlet. at some point chris locates what's called a dry bag. the dry bag is a light bag laying in the woods i'll say 20 feet or so off the trail. according to chris it was in some bramble. chris didn't want to pick the bag up because he wanted law enforcement to see it. this was caught on camera. chris couldn't find the law enforcement because they were then out of sight because chris had been in the woods, so he didn't want to leave the bag there with the news reporter standing nearby, so he picked it up. he did meet up shortly with law enforcement. they looked at the contents of the bag. at that time, law enforcement officers showed him a picture on the phone of a backpack that law enforcement had located also nearby, and also some distance off the trail. at that point, the laundries were notified that there was
6:08 pm
also remains near the backpack and they were asked to leave the preserve. >> what do you make of the suggestion that mr. laundrie planted the bag and the backpack? >> in nice terms, it's hogwash. >> would the authorities have known what they walked on to the trail with? >> absolutely. they met them at the gate or somewhere nearby. they walked in with them, and more importantly, chris, this is what i said, fortunately for the laundries the press was following them in the whole time. >> why wouldn't the dogs have found these remains? >> you would have to ask the experts on that. that's not by expertise. if it was under water maybe the dogs couldn't, you know, detect the remains under water. maybe the dogs were never brought back to that area. i don't know. you'd have to ask someone else that question.
6:09 pm
>> what were your clients' reaction to what happened while they were there? >> you know, that also was caught on video, and you know, it's quite sad. you can imagine as a parent finding your son's belongings alongside some remains, and that's got to be heartbreaking and i can tell you that they are heartbroken. >> do they believe it is their son? >> chris, it's not about belief. i mean, as you said at the onset, the probability is strong that it is brian's remains, but we're going to wait for the forensic results to come in and verify that. >> now, obviously the family is under a veil of suspicion because of their lack of cooperation from the beginning optically in terms of contacting the petitos, et cetera, and dealing with authorities. the police gave the impression that the family delayed notifying them about brian laundrie's disappearance.
6:10 pm
>> well, you say that they gave the impression. they have come out right and said it, and certain members of the north port police department have said it more than once. and as i discussed with you once before, let the record be clear, the laundries reported brian did not come home the night he went out for the hike. i actually reported that to the fbi personally. on friday, the 17th, the fbi called me. we didn't call them. they called me and said we have a tip that brian was seen in tampa and we want to see if he's in the house. after some back and forth, we agreed on a time. at 6:15, friday the 17th, the fbi was going to come to the house. during that conversation with agreeing on the time, i said to them, if you got a tip, where did this come from because a member of the north port pd gave
6:11 pm
a press conference the night before and said we know where brian is. he was asked again, do you know where brian is, he said, we know exactly where brian is. i immediately called my clients and said, hey, was brian picked up? do you know where he is because i don't know where he is? how do they know where he is if we don't, and that was on thursday. on friday when the fbi came to the laundrie residence, we then said, yes, we will fill out a missing person's report. that got twisted as though the family waited until friday to report him missing, which is not how it happened. >> it's unfair in the micro, but understandable in the macro because it just doesn't look right that the parents haven't wanted to cooperate, that brian didn't want to cooperate, that they wouldn't want to talk to the other family, so you can
6:12 pm
understand why people would be suspicious about their actions. >> absolutely. and you know, now's not the right time to talk about, you know, the situation with gabby, but the family was following my directions. i told them not to talk to anybody. not to say a word. i was the intermediary between the family and law enforcement, and that's why we're confident that, you know, law enforcement, specifically the fbi was informed, brian did not come home that night. whatever played out in those three days after that, that's on the police and the fbi. that's not on the family as i heard you say once before. >> no, i get the issue about you telling the fbi and what they did or didn't tell the local police. that explains that part. that's fine. look, you know, you don't have to be a lawyer to be suspicious. when somebody won't cooperate with looking for someone they supposedly care about, what is the good reason that they wouldn't want to speak to authorities or to their fiance, their son's fiance's family.
6:13 pm
>> you know, you can label it good reason, but i can tell you the reason. i told them not to. >> and the question becomes who doesn't talk unless they have something to hide. >> and you know what, you hear a lot of talk these days about, you know, individual rights, you know, some people want first amendment rights, some people want second amendment rights. conveniently, the public seems to forget about the fourth, the fifth and the 6th amendment right, and you know what, defense attorneys and i would say every attorney including yourself should push those rights. some of the experts that have been on these programs, they all espouse, oh, this, this and this but they don't step up and say, you know what, everybody has the right to remain silent, and that's what i told my clients, and that's what they did. >> there's no question, they have the right. i've never suggested anything else, but having a right and
6:14 pm
sho something being the right thing to do are often different. it's been mentioned that if and when brian laundrie is found, then the parents will explain the situation. if this is brian laundrie, and he is gone, will the parents tell what they knew? >> well, now is not the time to discuss that, chris. it may come out in the future. it may not. right now we're just going to wait for the forensic results, as i said earlier, and you know, we may come back on that subject sometime in the future. >> you've known the family a long time, yes? >> well over 20 years. >> is it hard for them to follow your advice? >> hard, no. i've never had clients follow my advice so intently. >> but you know what i'm saying, this is hard advice to follow. not to talk to the petitos, not to talk to anybody about what happened, this is not easy to do, i'm sure because they know the weight of expectation, and they know how it makes them
6:15 pm
look. >> absolutely. absolutely. they know the weight. they know it's been hard. but ultimately, you know, this is the advice i gave them. this is the advice they're taking and that's on me. and i took that heat, you know, ce september 14th when i had to give a little speech in front of the camera. somebody in front of my office got to me, and i said to them, i'm the one who told them not to talk. that's been on me from day one. that's not on the family. and if it turns out my legal advice is wrong in that perspective, so dbe it. that's on me, not the family. >> giving the advice is on you. taking the advice is on them. they know they are the only people who may be able to tell the story of what happened to gabby. >> at some point in time, now is not the time to discuss that. we're going to wait for the forensic results to come in, and we may revisit this in the future. >> counselor, look, i appreciate especially last second like this, you coming on to explain
6:16 pm
how they came to be there today and the correction on what they told authorities and when about the disappearance, and we'll take you at your word that there's a chance that once this is cleared up that it's brian, the family will want to make a p proffer of what they knew because obviously the curiosity is immense especially for the petito family. >> appreciate you having me on tonight. be well. >> you too. what are the chances that it's not him, very small. but they're going to do every everything the right way. decomposition, makes identification. this is not law and order, dna is not done in 15 minutes. in all likelihood, it is brian laundrie, will that be the end of the story or will there be a chapter of learning what happened from the parents. i'm going to bring in joey jackson and bobby shacone, and i'm going to give you one reason they may want to talk.
6:17 pm
here's why. it looks terrible not to speak, joey jackson, and bobby shacone, but it is not illegal to know that somebody killed somebody else and not saying anything, joey. what do you think the chances that to relieve their guilt, to reestablish themselves in their own community, that once it is his son, and he is out of harm's way, the lawyer relents, so they stop taking advice, and say we'll tell you what he told us. >> very little. you have to ask yourself the question of what you have to gain. from a human perspective, you're absolutely right. from a humane perspective, you should tell what you know. there's an interest in the story, obviously the family beyond heartbroken, and wants answers that only he potentially, the deceased could provide, and perhaps the family, right, and we don't know that it's brian laundrie but strong indications are that it is, right, but the family would have to know an awful lot, and you want to gather that information. you want to know that information and the family has
6:18 pm
it. i don't think that there's any up side beyond perhaps the humane factor to them telling it. the legal that would be caused by inconsistencies, inaccuracies, misrepresentations would be problematic. last point, and that's this. there's one thing for counsel to indicate you told your client not to say a word. quite another for you to be helpful through counsel to facilitate an investigation, how? you protect your client to the extent they're not talking to anyone, and any information coming out is not from the client, and so there's no misrepresentation, there's no hindering prosecution, there's no obstruction of justice. that's one thing. to not even from counsel give indication of where anyone is or where gabby could be or brian would be, that to me is highly problematic, i'll leave it there. >> we don't know the absolute specifics of what counsel told authorities or not other than his admission tonight he told
6:19 pm
the fbi that night or the morning after that brian laundrie hadn't come home but you're right, that is an important part of the story. now, bobby on the forensic side, i know some people are going to speculate that, oh, the parents showed up and then they found him, they must have known where he was all along, i don't know, i mean, you had the authorities right there. the parents aren't the ones who found the remains. do you think this is about the parents making this happen or the authorities just missing what's going to look a little embarrassing? >> well, i think it could be a little of both, chris. i don't think those are mutually exclusive. i have been involved in searches for 20 years. i was a leader of a fforensic search team. under water was my specialty. things get missed. we search and research. significantly where there's been significant weather events or water movement, it's not uncommon to go back and search an area again under water that you searched already, and sometimes the body of water
6:20 pm
moves things and water changes things so i don't see that as mutually exclusive. it's a complete hypothetical on my part but you know, if the parents did know and they were waiting for the police to find him on their own, they didn't, the father went out there a couple of weeks ago to kind of maybe guide them in the right area if they knew, and last night when they found out the public was going to be trampling through there starting today, and they didn't want some random stranger, you know, finding their son and taking pictures and posting or whatever, they wanted law enforcement to find it. they went out one more time with law enforcement, and went right to the place. hypothetically you can see how someone might think this is what the parents did. there's no proof of that. you know, and it's probably immaterial at this point. we have a murder, we have the person we think committed that murder, now they're dead and the d.a. has to kind of mop this up and in a legal sense, you know, what are you going to do. are you going to close the case, and how are you going to do that? how are you going to provide gabby's family with what they
6:21 pm
need as far as opening up the investigation now, the investigative file can be kind of open now and shared with them because they deserve that. >> there's no question about that. but the question is how does this end? and the people with the most information have said the least. joey jackson, bobby shacone, thank you so much. a big night, glad to have you both. another legal issue, merrick garland is the attorney general. he's going to have a big decision to make. it may be a slam dunk for the democrats in congress to say that bannon should be prosecuted for contempt but what will the attorney general do? is it a different decision for him than it is for the politicians on the january 6th committee? and did president biden make things tougher for garland? how? we'll explain. and then we'll take up the question with a former attorney general under a republican president. what would he do? next.
6:22 pm
6:23 pm
we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. tonight, i'll be eating a buffalo chicken panini. fire! nas... spare a pound? what? you know, bones, shillings, lolly? lolly? i don't have any money. you don't look broke... ♪ i'm a reporter for the new york times. if you just hold it like this. yeah. ♪ i love finding out things that other people don't want me to know. mm-hmm. [beep] i just wanted to say... ♪ find yourself in these situations and see who you are. and that's just part of the bargain.
6:24 pm
♪ cough cough sneeze sneeze... [ sneezing ] needs, plop plop fizz fizz. alka seltzer plus cold relief. dissolves quickly. instantly ready to start working. so you can bounce back fast with alka-seltzer plus. now available for fast sinus relief. in 2016, i was working at the amazon warehouse when my brother passed away. and a couple of years later, my mother passed away. after taking care of them, i knew that i really wanted to become a nurse. amazon helped me with training and tuition. today, i'm a medical assistant and i'm studying to become a registered nurse. in filipino: you'll always be in my heart. tv: mount everest, the tallest mountain on the face of the earth. keep dreaming. [coins clinking in jar] ♪ you can get it if you really want it, by jimmy cliff ♪
6:25 pm
♪ [suitcase closing] [gusts of wind] [gusts of wind] [ding]
6:26 pm
the next step for steve bannon sa vote on contempt of congress in a full house vote. that will likely be tomorrow. the democrats should have the numbers to have it pass. it will be interesting to see how many republicans will ignore what is obviously not a strong legal argument and is a highly unethical situation for bannon and frankly the former president. will any do the right thing? then it gets tricky. because that vote gets certified and it gets sent by the speaker of the house to the ag, and now it's all about what merrick garland wants to do at the department of justice, prosecute or not, grand jury or not, indict or not. this hasn't happened since the reagan administration, and the doj doesn't have the best record with convictions. let's discuss.
6:27 pm
a great guest, alberto gonzalez knows the discussion from all sides as former white house counsel and attorney general under president george w. bush. counselor, it's good to have row. >> hi, chris, it's good to see you. >> what is your assessment of a likely prosecution against steve bannon? >> well, chris, you're not going to be hear me surprised to say, it really just depends. i suspect there's information in the hands of the attorney general that we're not privy to that may influence his decision. one of the factors will be whether or not -- is there any other way for congress to get this testimony from steve bannon, for example, sending out the sergeant at arms or perhaps pursuing this thing civilly. that will be one consideration. the other consideration would be likely the likelihood of successful assertion of k executive privilege. he has an opinion with the office of legal counsel at the department of justice informing them of their view as to the likelihood that an assertion of
6:28 pm
privilege would be up held and recognized in the courts, so there are a number of factors. i think public comments have been made by president biden are unfortunate. as a general matter, you want to try to keep the white house out of commenting publicly on ongoing -- certainly ongoing criminal -- possible criminal prosecutions and so i think that's unfortunate. >> explain what you think is unfortunate. sorry to interrupt. >> well, because -- not a problem. because again, the hope in the american people, and i think the hope in congress is that you have an attorney general that's not going to be swayed by any kind of political pressure but will make decisions in terms of criminal investigations and prosecutions based on the law. and irrespective of what the white house says, the job of the attorney general is to identify wrong doing and prosecute wrong doing, and you know, i think having the public comments from
6:29 pm
the president were unfortunate but also unnecessary in that i think the white house has already signalled. >> right. >> signalled by the public statement that they weren't going to exert executive privilege which i think sends a pretty strong signal to the department of justice about what the white house would desire. and that would have been sufficient, and all that would have been appropriate to signal to the department of justice. >> what would you have done when you were ag? >> well, again, it's hard to say, chris, because there may be additional information that merrick garland has that i'm not privy to it, and that might make a difference. if i knew that information i think i could probably answer your question, i would be very interested in how strong, for example, my lawyers at the office of legal counsel feel about the privilege claim because if the lawyers are telling me, we think that there is a possibility for the former
6:30 pm
president to successfully assert a claim of executive privilege, then i might say, well, maybe i don't want to take this on. >> there's no precedent for that, is there, sir? >> there really isn't. you know, i think the notion that there is no right of a former president to assert executive privilege, yeah, i think there's some -- while the supreme court has never, i think, directly said that a former president has or does not have the right to assert privilege, certainly even as recently as an obama executive order, that executive order included a process by which a former president could alert privilege, and so there was a recognition by as late as the obama administration that there was some right for a former president to assert executive privilege, so i think there are some legitimate questions here
6:31 pm
as to whether or not what an assertion of executive privilege, once litigated in the courts, would that be successful or not. >> let's say merrick garland says, okay, we're going to take this up, how late is too late for steve bannon to say, okay, i'll go? >> oh, at any time, you know, steve bannon could -- once the department of justice makes clear what they intend to do. >> then he could say i'll do it. >> of course at any time that could happen. >> that's going to be something to watch for. alberto gonzalez, thank you so much, it's not as simple as it seems, and i appreciate you walking us through it. >> thanks, chris. here's a simple decision, you got to watch cnn tomorrow night. it is a great time to have the president of the united states deal directly with people about his agenda during very important times. anderson cooper is going to be moderating a cnn special presidential town hall. begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern. i'll be here with "primetime"
6:32 pm
right after. i'll be watching, and think everybody should. to the white house on another level, they unveiled plans to roll out vaccines to 28 million kids who have been ineligible for them so far. good idea? how is this playing with parents? what does it mean overall? dr. anthony fauci next. n arthril my husband's got his moves back. an alternative to pain pills voltaren is the first full prescription strength gel for powerful arthritis pain relief... voltaren the joy of movement >> tech: when you get a chip in your windshield... trust safelite. this couple was headed to the farmers market... when they got a chip. they drove to safelite for a same-day repair. and with their insurance, it was no cost to them. >> woman: really? >> tech: that's service the way you need it. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪
6:33 pm
♪ limu emu & doug ♪ got a couple of bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. what do you say we see what this bird can do? woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. looks like we're walking, kid. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
6:34 pm
with clean, fresh ingredients, panera's new chicken sausage and pepperoni flatbread is a mouthwatering explosion of yes. craft? yes! heartiness? yes! living life to the flavor-fullest? heck yes. panera. live your yes. now $1 delivery.
6:35 pm
6:36 pm
135,000 kids have been diagnosed with covid in just the last week. the white house today playing up their plans to get kids 5 to 11 vaccinated. fda authorization could come within a few weeks but there's a bigger hurdle, parents. messaging has been squishy. people are nervous. this has been politicized, and weaponized. only about a third of you say you want your younger kids getting the shot right now. i got one. i got an 11-year-old. she's going to be 12 in f february, so i'm there with you. we're talking about some 28 million kids in between the ages of 5 and 11. let's discuss the challenges with dr. anthony fauci. d doc, it's good to have you. >> good to be with you, chris. >> let's do it a different way. you know me, christine and i have cha cha, carolina, she's 11. i say to you, i'm nervous, i'll
6:37 pm
take anything. i had covid, i'll do anything not to get it again. you tell me to take the vaccine, i'll take it. she's small, fragile, i worry about her, why should i have confidence that this is right thing to do? >> well, the reason is, chris, that the vaccine is highly effective. we know that from a lot of experience. and it's safe. you know, the idea that children cannot be negatively impacted by covid-19 is just false. it is true that children when they get infected generally, statistically, have less of a likelihood of having a severe outcome than adults, particularly the elderly, and those with underlying conditions, but children are not completely exempt from the difficulties of getting infected. in fact, if you go to pediatric hospitals throughout the country, you see that many of the beds are filled with children who have serious illness, so it's important to
6:38 pm
protect the children, and also children do get long covid. namely, something that you have obviously very difficult experience with yourself when you were infected. children can get that lingering symptomology after they get infected. it just makes sense, chris, for the children to get vaccinated, and that's the reason why we reach out to the parents to explain to them why it's important not only for the safety of the children but also the safety of the entire family because children can spread infection in the family unit. >> yeah, we've seen it. so here's where it gets sticky for the parent that the number of definitely not parents in terms of will they give their kid the vaccine hasn't moved even during the delta variant surge, and my best sense of why is a little bit lack of confidence because things change too much on the government level
6:39 pm
and then the hard stop is we just don't know with this thing. it hasn't been tested. it's brand new. they don't know how it is on kids. they barely know how it is on adults. they're learning in realtime. i don't want them to go to school on my kid. >> well, chris, the issue is if you look at the data itself, you look at the data, there have been literally billions of doses that have been given worldwide. there have been about 400 million doses given in the united states. it's very very clear that the experience with these vaccines is rather intensive, so the idea of saying we don't know a lot about the vaccine is just not true, chris, and that's one of the things we have to reach out to the parents to answer their questions. parents have valid questions that need to be answered. and it's up to us to be very transparent with them, and to give them the correct answers to
6:40 pm
the questions they ask, and i think if we do that, i hope that the vast majority of parents will realize the real benefit for the children to get vaccinated. >> what do you make of the sense of people having a sense of give and get with the vaccine. fine, if my kid gets vaccinated can i stop having to deal with masks in school? what's the answer? >> well, the answer is right now with the degree of virus that is circulating in the population where we have about 80,000 new infections per day, even if you are vaccinated, you've got to really be careful about transmission. there will come a time, i promise you, chris, when we will be putting the masks aside, but that time is not now. now you need vaccination and under certain circumstances, particularly in situations in which you are indoors with people that you don't know their vaccine status, masks are
6:41 pm
appropriate and should be worn. >> so why don't i just have the kid keep wearing the mask and not take the risk with the vaccine? >> well, for the simple reason that masks as we know are not the ultimate protection. >> neither is the vaccine. >> they do help. they are effective. well, you know, but it is much much more so than any other. vaccine is the standard, gold standard of prevention of viral infections, and we just know that from so much experience we have not only with covid-19, chris, but with many other childhood and adult vaccines. >> i appreciate you doing it, doc. look, obviously i know your answers to these questions. you've been coaching me on this for a long time. i tell you i'm having this conversation with people all the time on this. and that's where they're coming from. it's one thing if you want to have an adult get it, and it's another thing when it's a teenager, it's a third thing when it's a kid.
6:42 pm
thank you for the dialogue, i appreciate you and i hope you're well. >> thank you very much, chris, good to be with you. >> dr. anthony fauci, always a pleasure. all right, so another big aspect of this is mandates. now, look, i have never gotten what the controversy is here. i'll be honest, i don't see the rights issue. we've already passed the threshold. we have been doing this with kids, getting them vaccinated so they can go to school. this is different, there's no polio. go look at how effective the polio vaccine is. look at how many breakthrough cases there on the basis of that. we don't completely cure things. this is not a new situation, but i'll tell you what, the mandate fight is real, and once it's real, it doesn't matter whether or not it's warranted. even in hollywood, which is supposedly so lefty, right, some people are doing it, some people aren't. there's no mandate. sean penn, star upon stars, and i say nothing that has to do with asking. this man has been in the trenches, testing, vaccines, he
6:43 pm
knows the deal, hollywood, but also everywhere. let's talk to him about the realities, next. from a pioneer in photographic film to a master of the digital age, we're always searching for new ways to imagine, create and capture your world. but why stop there? when there's so much more we can do.
6:44 pm
in healthcare, we are revolutionizing diagnostics by applying our imaging expertise and ai technology which aim to enable earlier detection of disease. but why stop there? when we can apply our expertise in cell biology to help make vital vaccines and treatments available to all. and we can focus our research and development on medicines to tackle unmet medical needs, including cancers and infectious diseases. but why stop there? when we can also consider the health of the planet. our innovations in data storage are reducing co2 emissions. we'll never stop innovating for a healthier, more sustainable world. fujifilm value from innovation
6:45 pm
wealth is breaking ground on your biggest project yet. worth is giving the people who build it a solid foundation. wealth is shutting down the office for mike's retirement party. worth is giving the employee who spent half his life with you, the party of a lifetime. wealth is watching your business grow. worth is watching your employees grow with it. principal. for all it's worth.
6:46 pm
6:47 pm
everybody knows sean penn, but do you know his work with his organization core, how much of the testing they did in los angeles. i think at one point it was like 15,000 tests a day. do you know how much work he's been doing with vaccines in and around los angeles, and now around the world, brazil, india. he knows what he's talking about, and he also knows how it's playing out in hollywood. now, to me, what he's learned about the difference between us and everywhere else matters the most, but we'll talk about the industry as well. but first we welcome our guest, sean penn, good to have you. >> thanks, chris, good to be with you. >> applaud your work and for good reason. very impressive.
6:48 pm
now, insight, you've seen what it's like in our politics and people opting out, and how it is here. how do you contrast that with what you've seen in brazil and in india? >> yeah, well, you know, there's just not the same cultural conflict with it, and we've had, you know, extraordinary response in both brazil and in india. a lot of demand. what's complicated there, of course, is getting the work that we do is getting to the more marginalized, the sex workers, the street dwellers, people that aren't even have a place in a slum, but there's an enormous amount of hunger, and gratitude there, here, of course, we had the original surge of people that were anxious to be vaccinated for themselves and for the health of others. and then we ran into this, you know, between some of it being political. some of it being a certain kind
6:49 pm
of entrenchment and this idea of freedom. some of it being lack of information. one of the information gaps, i think still isn't emphasized enough is the length of time that the mrna technology has been being worked on. a lot of people think this came as a result of warp speed, and this has been decades, and this is an adjustable format, so it's really such a dependable thing. it's very sad to see that we're holding ourselves in this strangle hold like this. >> the politics extend to your profession as well. even the lefties in hollywood don't want vaccine mandates. how can they be right for anywhere? what's your sense on that? now, just so people know, sean's not about that. he just was wrapping up a movie called "gas lit," he wants people vaccinated on it, he
6:50 pm
offered the shots for free to do it because of his access and his inclination, but how do you explain why hollywood won't mandate it? >> well, you know, it's funny, full disclosure, i kind of see through the word mandate into basic citizenship here, and rationality, and it's a shame that these information silos have been able to be dominated by so much misinformation. as for hollywood, you know, the like in a lot of the unions do often bow to their fringes and there has been that fringes that occupy both the left and the right politically who are not seeing through to their responsibility here as americans and human beings. >> do you think that -- so you believe what is happening in hollywood is mirrored everywhere else? people are people and unions have their fringes.
6:51 pm
what is your biggest concern going forward? >> well, my biggest concern and obviously, i'm not a scientist or doctor but my concern is that it seems from everything that research comes my way is that i pursue that, you know, as long as people voluntarily remain vessels for this virus, we can have further mutations. clearly, we have economic problems here for so many people and also socially, we need to put this virus to an end i think would really positively impact not only all of us and the parents of those children who are hesitant or entrenched but the children and being able to move on in a life that isn't dominated by pandemic. we have enough problems. >> listen, we have enough problems and we don't have enough solutions but you're part
6:52 pm
of it. i love you as an actor but i couldn't respect more what you're doing of the ground to help people, motivate the vaccine and testing before that and i'm sure you'll be a part of whatever comes next. brother, good luck with the work you're doing and i appreciate you for it. i'll take silence as a thank you. talk to you next time. >> i said thank you. [ laughter ] >> thank you very much. take care. sean penn. it's almost election day again. and the race to watch is in virginia. why? don't ask me. it's the wizard of oz who says it. his answer, next.
6:53 pm
you could fret about that email you just sent. ...with a typo. aaaand most of the info is totally outdated. orrrr... you could use slack. and edit your message after it's sent. [sigh of relief.] slack. where the future works. ♪ ♪ ♪ easy tools on the chase mobile app. simplicity feels good. chase. make more of what's yours. (cooking timer rings) ♪ this is how we do it ♪ ♪ this is how we do it ♪ (tools drop) (squeaking sound) ♪ this is how we do it ♪ turns out, montell jordan knows how to do almost everything. and it turns out the general is a quality insurance company that's been saving people money for nearly 60 years.
6:54 pm
♪ this is how... ♪ i got it, i got it, i got it. for a great low rate, and nearly 60 years of quality coverage make the right call - and go with the general. ok, let's talk about those changes to your financial plan. bill, mary? hey... it's our former broker carl. carl, say hi to nina, our schwab financial consultant. hm... i know how difficult these calls can be. not with schwab. nina made it easier to set up our financial plan. we can check in on it anytime. it changes when our goals change. planning can't be that easy. actually, it can be, carl.
6:55 pm
look forward to planning with schwab. schwab! ♪ what can i du with less asthma? with dupixent, i can du more....beginners' yoga. namaste... ...surprise parties. aww, you guys. dupixent helps prevent asthma attacks... ...for 3!... i can du more of the things i love. dupixent is not for sudden breathing problems. it's an add-on-treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma that can improve lung function for better breathing in as little as two weeks. and can reduce, or even eliminate, oral steroids. and here's something important. dupixent can cause serious allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. get help right away if you have rash, shortness of breath, chest pain, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection, and don't change or stop your asthma treatments, including steroids, without talking to your doctor.
6:56 pm
are you ready to du more with less asthma? just ask your asthma specialist about dupixent. as goes virginia, so goes the country for democrats. we'll see. big governor's race. latest poll shows democrat t
6:57 pm
terry, glen dead heat 46-46 among registered voters. the wiz harry here to dig into the numbers. i thought mccauley was supposed to walk away with this. >> the poll haves been closing. not just that one individual. i like looking at averages. look at terry mccullough's average. five points on august 20th and three points on september 20th and october 20th, look at that just two points in the average and it's a little squeeze there, that is well within any margin of error. at this particular point, i wouldn't be surprised if either candidate won. >> boy, that's a very gutsy call on your part. >> i know. late hour. >> help me. interesting, i'm not from virginia, though. i don't care. why should i? >> i mean look, if we flip forward to slide four, i think this can give you a good understanding why we should care if you're not in virginia and if you look at slide four, look at the virginia gubernatorial races
6:58 pm
since 1977. what happens? the party who wins the governor's race there, do they gain house seats in the next midterm? yes. eight out of 11 times that worked out to be the case so virginia has been a pretty good w bellwether. i think it's more than that. slide three there is interesting dynamics in virginia that gives you an understanding of the nation. look at this. the voter sentiment here, joe biden versus donald trump. normally, an ex president you wouldn't give a flying hoot what the voters' perception of them was. look at this. very motivating to your vote. feelings about trump 51% of voters in the state say yes, he's a very motivating factor this their vote versus just 48% for biden and if you look at the net popularity rating, trump is more unpopular than biden even though biden himself isn't popular. if terryccullough wins, you really don't like donald trump and it may motivate their voters to get out there and vote. >> weird in a race for governor
6:59 pm
who was the former president and who is the president now matters that much. one more why. what does it tell us about what matters to voters in that election. >> yeah, look, coronavirus was the top issue for the last two years basically but look here. what are we seeing in slide two? we see that the coronavirus, is it the most important issue to your vote? look at that. september it was 18%. now it's down to 11%. the jobs and the economy, look at that up six points overwhelmingly the top issue with 27% and education in schools, school choice, something that has been pushed. that's also up. we're seeing the issues move more in the republican's direction in virginia and that could make a big thing going forward in virginia and the nation and i should point out everything is nationalized, chris. that's the thing about politics these days. so few things are local and that's why feelings towards trump and biden could make a big impact in the race. >> it's interesting. mccullough is talking about the death of democracy.
7:00 pm
i'll tell you what, i'll say and i may be wrong but on the list of grievances, if the democrats get whooped until the midterms, not making federalized voting rights and those protections the hill to die on for them. i think may come back to haunt them. thank you very much. appreciate you. the wizard of oz. check out harry's podcast margins of error. very popular but how could it not be with that? thank you for watching. "don lemon tonight" with the big star d. lemon. >> not just the hill to die on, it will be the hill they die on. it will be the hill the democratic party dies on because that's what voters want, the voters who push this president into office black and brown voters, black and latino voters, women. they want voting rights. they want access, equal access, not special access, equal access to the voting booth. and they are n


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on