tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC November 30, 2021 1:00am-2:00am PST
good to see you there my, friends thank you so much, much appreciated. >> thank you. >> and thanks to at-home for joining us this hour, really happy to have you here, hope you had a good holiday weekend. out as of tonight, midnight tonight on the eastern the caribbean this older woman who you might recognize will no longer be the head of state. as of the stroke of midnight tonight, queen elizabeth will no longer be, among her other titles, the queen of barbados. as of tonight there will no longer be a queen of barbados. there will be a president. dame sandra mason. she's currently the governor general of barbados. that technically means she's been the top representative of the queen there, but tonight that job goes away. barbados will cease to have a queen or king for that matter. it will become as of tonight an
independent republic with a president and a prime minister. it will no longer be a monarchy. and i should mention this is a friendly transition. prince charles who is next in line for the british throne when his mother's reign is over, prince charles is there? barbados for the ceremony that will mark the tradition. barbados will keep its name and its flag and its dollar and its "national anthem." there will be some changes right away. right now there are police forces called the royal barbados police force. that will change. they will be the barbados police service. they became a colony of the british empire 394 years ago, in 1627. barbados is where they solidified the sugar plantation
model where slaves worked to death at an inhumanly unfathomable pace. the life expectancy of people enslaved to work on those plantations was 18 years. 18 jeers not the length of time they spent working on the plantations. was the average length of their life, period, under that form of slavery. 18-year-old life expectancy. that is the worst known life expectancy for anyone enslaved in the world at any time in the world. they had major uprisings in the early 1800s, but slavery was not abolished under the british empire until 1834. so that's more than 200 years of brutal, brutal slavery in barbados. and it was not until more than 100 years after that in 1960s that barbados stopped being a
british colony. november 30th, 1960 is their official independence day. it's the day they became a constitutional monarchy with the queen as their head of state. tonight as the clock strikes midnight and we go from november 29th to november 30th, tonight barbados will hit the 5 59 anniversary of the day the island gained its own independent government under the british monarch as the head of state. but tonight for the first time, they will drop the monarch and stand alone for the first time as an independent republican. i mean for context, this is not a thing that happens all the time, and there are a lot of countries, large and small, that still have the queen technically as their head of state. this decision that barbados has made tonight, this is something, for example, that canada has thought about doing from time to time, but they've never done it.
queen elizabeth is still their head of state. it's weird, but i mean, do yourself a favor. google yourself the phrase "queen of canada." hey, there's a queen of canada. what they're doing is something australia held a national referendum on as recently as 1999, but that referendum lost, so queen elizabeth is still their head of state as well. if you google queen of australia, there she is, queen of australia. tiny barbados, 285,000, tonight they will make their break. as of tonight there will not be a queen. change is hard. change seems impossible until change happens. it's kind of an amazing thing. what are you doing after your
thanksgiving? barbados is leaving the british monarchy. that's what they're doing. what's on your to-do list? tonight we've got a lot of news we're watching in addition to the moment ceremony coming up in the caribbean. our government in the united states, for example, is due to run out of money and shut down at the end of the week, on friday, unless congress acts to avert that. our supreme court is convening the day after tomorrow to hear a case that has been teed up to overturn rw roe versus wade. the court won't rule right away. that will take some matter of weeks or months. that said, we're not naive. we know what the purpose of this case is and we know why the republicans picked the particular justices they picked
to be on the supreme court, so, it's frankly a matter of emerge women having to seek out illegal abortions instead of having the right to get one, being protected by the court. republicans have already succeeded in banning abortion effectively in the state of texas since september 1st of this year, but now here it comes for every other state that has republicans in control of the government. again, that will be wednesday morning. we don't know exactly when the court will rule, but there are pretty grave expectations for what that rule willing mean. tomorrow before that, we're expecting arguments in a federal appeals court on the question of whether or not records and documents from the trump white house have to be handed over to the january 6th investigation. now, this comes as more former trump officials appear to be looking at potential prosecution by the justice department for refusing to testify to that investigation.
again, a federal appeals court will be hearing arguments on that tomorrow morning, but we'll hear a little more coming up later on tonight. as we're watching all of those stories, who among us did not experience our thanksgiving inflated stomachs falling a few floors when we learned over these last few days about this new variant, the new omicron variant of the coronavirus. this variant was first reported to the world health organization by authorities in south africa just five days ago. it has reportedly become the dominant strain of the virus in south africa already. the w.h.o. has made a formal announcement, formal proclamation, that this is, quote, a variant of concern. yeah, tell me about it. but as new travel bans go into effect around the world because of omicron, as the cdc changes its recommendations tonight to no longer say emerges may get
boosters but instead they say emerges should get boosters for the vaccine, the same fundamental questions are still out there, keeping our stomachs flipping and changing our future for what's going to come next. some of this may be more answerable over the weekend. we're going to get expert advice to answer some of these the best we can in just a second, but in terms of what i've been worried about or at least things i want to understand better, first of all, they say there are a large number of mutations in this variant, and large number compared to other known variants like the delta varjt. why is that bad? why is it worse to have large numbers of mutations. they say there are a large number of mutations on the spike protein.
if the spike protein itself is specifically mutated, is that why there are concerns that the vaccines might not be effect active against reacting to this particular kind of mutated virus? for that matter, how long is it going to take? we know they're testing it right now. a report in "the new york times" today says scientists started within one hour of the variant first being described. within one hour they were already trying to test the effectiveness of various vaccines we've already got. how long will it take? if they're not effect active, how long will it take to build new vaccines that will work against it? for that matter -- and this is something that has just arisen as of tonight with the cdc changing its advise telling
emerges we should get boosters of our existing vaccines now, why is the cdc telling us we should get boosters of our existing vaccines now before we know if our existing vaccines actually work against this variant? what's more dangerous, if you get infected with the omicron virus, is it likely to make you more sick? kill you? we don't have enough people in the data to know whether it has a clinically different manifestation. also do we know if it's more or less susceptible to treatment than other variants are? we don't have a ton of different treatments, but we've got monoclonal antibody treatment and a pill from pfizer. do we know if those treatments also work well against the variant? if we don't know that, how long will it take to figure out? what about testing? do tests work just as well to test the variant as they will against other variants of the
virus? is that an issue? and finally as a policy matter, do these travel bans make sense? we've got countries all over the world putting travel bans in effect after this was first detected in and reported from south africa, but it's already been found all over the place. israel, uk, canada, portugal, the netherlands, all over the country. have we learned anything in our best practice with the experience of coronavirus and the mutations thus far? i have all of these questions. you may have questions as well. i'm about to be talked out of this feeling in my stomach, but i've got these questions to ask before i let that happen. luckily i'm very pleased to say joining us now is dr. david kessler. he's now the chief officer for the white house covid-19 response. dr. kessler, it's always an
honor to have you, particularly tonight when so many emerges may have questions about this new variant. >> fire away, rachel. i'm ready to answer all of your questions. >> thank you. you're exactly who i want to be talking to. let me ask you the first question. we've had it described as having a very large number of mutations, a large number of mutations specifically affecting the spike protein, which has been specific for the development of our vaccines. can you tell us why a large number of mutations is a worry and why that's band why the spike mutations themselves might be worrying or bad? >> we have experience with some of those mutations because we've seen some of those mutations in other variants, and those mutations can affect transmissibility, and they can affect how well our vaccines work.
look, there is still a lot we need to learn. we need to learn about the transferability. there is early data from south africa that suggests the transmissibility of the omicron variant. we should not jump to any conclusions this. is still very early days with this variant. ask your next question. >> well, in terms of what you just said about figuring out whether it's susceptible to vaccines and whether or not it's responsive to antivirus or antibody treatment, how long you do think it will be before we have answers to those questions about the effectiveness of the convenience and also the treatment question? >>. >> with regard to the vaccines, we would need at least four weeks swrechl to get the virus
or make what's called a pseudo virus so we can handle it so we can test it so we will know exactly what the effectiveness is. we need about two to four weeks to get those answers. >> what about the treatment options that we've got. >> very important. you know, we have two important sets of treatment options, monoclonals you and i talked about, and we have a number of monoclonals. there may be a differential response we have to be prepared. not each will work exactly the same. some may work well. others may drop out. with regard to the antivirals, none of those are yet authorized. the fda is going to consider the first one tomorrow. you and i have talked about these, and you and i understand the importance of antiviral certainly in hiv, and i think they can be a game-changer. the good news is it doesn't
appear to be significant mutations of how the antivirals work, but, again, we have to see. >> if there is bad news in terms of the effectiveness of the vaccines, if it appears the variant evades them in some way and new vaccines or boosters need to be developed, is the new mrna technology that led to the moderna and pfizer vaccines, that those new boosters could be made quickly, and by asking it in those terms, i guess i should be asking, how quickly? >> the answer is, yes, we have the tools to handle this. we can do this quickly. again, let's not jump to any conclusions. you know us, rachel. we are planning, and we're planning for all of these scenarios. and, again, no decisions have
been made, but if and when we can do that, it will be a month at least. nothing like the first go-around. can do this quickly. we have the tools. >> why is the cdc telling us now we should get a booster of our existing vaccines before we know if it works against this variant or do we know enough to think that they might be at least partially effective even if we don't have a complete picture yet? >> very well said. we know that from every variant we have dealt with, the more neutralizing antibodies you have on board, the more effective those vaccines are against variants, and we expect even if it's not perfect, that certainly the more neutralizing the antibodies -- the faster you're boosted, the greater protection you can have. let me just step back for a
second. i just want to -- look. i understand the concern. i understand the need for vigilance, but let me deal with that knot in your stomach. i think that, to be very direct, the biggest problem i have tonight, it's not the variant. it's about getting everyone vaccinated and boosted. you are right. there's news tonight. the cdc upped its recommendations. everyone 18 and older should get boostered. if you're sitting out there tonight and you've been vaccinated and not boosted, this is the time. it certainly is not going to hurt. it will likely help. we'll see how much it will help, but please go get boosted. and certainly if you haven't been vaccinated, that's our biggest battle, getting everyone vaccinated. that right now is where we're going to save the most lives.
>> if this variant you're talking about does somehow change the contours of the epidemic in this country, of the pandemic globally, one of the things that we're going to need to know is whether our testing regime still makes sense. we'll also need to know very basically -- and i think this is part of what i think freaked a lot of people out. certainly freaked me out reading the first reports from the w.h.o. this weekend, was the prospect of whether it's this variant or someone in the future, is one of these variants going to be more deadly? is it going to be something where you get worse symptoms or you're more likely to get very sick or more likely to get killed by these things? we don't know whether this variant has that kind of a difference with the wild type or the other variants we've seerngs but i think part of the reason we all got worried sit feels like if this thing is going to
keep mutating in a way that changes so much about the way we have to deal with it, is it ultimately going to mutate in a way that's going to be profoundly more dangerous to humanity? >> we have a lot more tools. we're in a very different place today than where we started, but, you know, you raise an important point. you know, we are learned more about how these -- where these viruses mutate. it's also good news. you and i dealt with go back 20 years ago. immunocompromised people, wherever they are, can incubate the virus for months on end, and they need -- their immunosuppression needs to be treated. for example, if you have hiv, you need to be treated with your antiviral drugs. we know a lot more so we can,
with therapy, decrease the chance of these variants from happening in the future. but it's going to take a lot of work, rachel. >> dr. kessler, in terms of where we are right now and you and the team at the white house and the upper levels of the biden administration, i know that this is a matter of intense concern, and it's not like you guys were slacking on the job anyway in working against the covid pandemic and trying to get everybody vaccinated. the bottom line do, you feel like we're going to have to change course significantly as a country as this variant emerges, as future variants emerge, or do we keep applying the same tools because it seems as it gets more complex, effectively it stays the same. >> we have the tools to handle this. we may have to fine-tune those tools, we may have to adapt those tools, but we do not have
to change our course. we are going to have to make sure we convince each other to take advantage of those tools. those tools of vaccination, of boosting and, you know, hypothe antivirals that we see -- i don't want to get ahead of the fda in the coming weeks, but i think they can be game-changers. the good news is we have additional tools to our armamentaria. let's just use the tools we have wisely. >> dr. david kessler is the former fda commissioner. as i said, it's always an honor to have your time, especially on a night when a lot of emerges have so many questions. thank you so much, sir. >> thank you, rachel. >> i should underscore what dr. kessler said. the fda advisory group tomorrow, the first of two antiviral pills -- these are treatments that are going to the fda for approval. the first one is the merck pill.
for rob, it took years to find out why his constipation with belly pain just wouldn't go away. despite all he did to manage his symptoms... day after day. still came the belly pain, discomfort, and bloating, awful feelings he tried not showing. finally with the help of his doctor it came to be, that his symptoms were all signs of ibs-c.
and that's why he said yess to adding linzess. linzess is not a laxative. it helps you have more frequent and complete bowel movements, and is proven to help relieve overall abdominal symptoms belly pain, discomfort, and bloating. do not give linzess to children less than two. it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain. especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach area pain, and swelling. could your story also be about ibs-c? talk to your doctor and say yess to linzess. learn how abbvie and ironwood could help you save on linzess. mom, hurry! our show's gonna start soon! talk to your doctor ai promised i wouldn'ts. miss the show
and mommy always keeps her promises. seriously? oh. - what the- i don't suppose you can sing, can you? watch the full story at www.xfinity.com/sing2 you said michael flynn would come back even bigger and better. would you bring him back into your administration? >> i would certainly consider it, yeah, i would. i think he's a fine man. >> would you have him back into the white house? >> i think i would. he's a great gentleman. >> he's a great gentleman. while president trump was running for reelection last year, he talked more than once how in a hypothetical administration, he would gladly welcome back his disgraced national security adviser michael flynn. he pardoned him as he headed out
the door, and he didn't get the second term. if there ever is one, he'll be back in because he's such a great gentleman. what has potential general mike flynn, what has he been up to? >> somebody sent me a thing this morning where they're talking about putting the vaccine into salad dressing. >> yes. >> have you seen this? and i'm thinking to myself, this is the bizarro world. this is definitely the bizarro world. >> have you seen this? have you seen this? the salad dressing thing? oh, yes. who hasn't seen that. the government forcing the covid vaccine into all of us through our precious, precious salad dressing. that's a way to get everyone -- that's not the only interesting idea that general mike flynn has been publicly propounding recently.
also that the united states should have one religion, one religion for the whole nation. he said one nation under god means one religion under god. this all comes after he spent the weeks after the 2020 election advocating that president trump should declare martial law, have military seize voting machines around the country and have the military rerun races trump lost. he later endorsed the idea that the united states should have a flat out military coup where the military ousts the civilian government and takes over. he was asked about that in a military coup in myanmar earlier this year. he said, we should have one of those here too. aside from those sort of headline-making moments, what general flynn has been up to over the course of the past year, what's been essentially his job, the thing he spends his time on, and apparently monetizing to a pretty great effect, is his role as the
prominent endorser of the qanon conspiracy tlir in which they believe the democratic party and government and also hollywood maybe run by a cabal of blood-drinking pedophiles that will all be massacred in a public execution by donald trump when he bringed the storm, and, therefore, donald trump must be restored to power immediately so he can kill all the satan worshippers running the world. mike flynn is, i think, the biggest qanon celebrity as there is to the extent you can define that term. there's a photo of him and his family members citing an oath, a pledge of allegiance to qanon. he launched a merchandise site that features qanon featured products. he's appeared at conferences and
auctioned off items like this qanon quilt. by the way, the winner would not only get the quilt but the quilt signed by mike flynn. recently there has been a turn in this world. all is not well amongst these qanon celebrities. just a few months ago, there they all are signing quilts together for money, but lately the qanon world has been consumed by internal fighting. the attorney i mentioned, lynnwood, has accused other figures of running a grift. he's released a recording of a phone conversation between him and flynn in which flynn is
heard to dispairj the whole qanon ideology. gasp. i know. not totally ingenious in terms of his public adopting of this concept. to be clear, i have to tell you, we've not been able to independently verify this audio. we have tried. we have reached out both to mr. wood and general flynn, but we haven't heard back. we also don't know when this audio was recorded, although general flynn appeared to public it this month. here is what mike flynn had to say about qanon. brace yourself. >> i think it's a disinformation campaign. i think it's a disinformation campaign that the cia created. i don't know that for a fact, but i think that's what it is. it's a disinformation act. there's actually a very
interesting article today out that was sent to me. i'll send it to you, about how the qanon move hadn't has failed and all that. but i think it's total nonsense, created by the left. >> that's former trump national security adviser now qanon darling mike flynn talking smack about qanon on a phone call along with another who's fighting with mike flynn and a bunch of other folks. pass the popcorn. it's always fun to see guys fighting with each other, particularly when you think about how the qanon has been mass destruction to those sucked into it. people who are hoping for the sort of demise and discrediting of people, this squabbling is delicious, right? but there is a sub stannive
question. so many people in the january 6th attack were qanon curious. so many people who have turned up in the darkest corners of the trump-supporting world have dragged the qanon stuff with them. if we're seeing fracturing, is that good news or could it also be kind of dangerous moment? this article mike flynn was referred to, the one about how the qanon movement has failed, that article says the answer to the failure of qanon is we just need to turn to violence. is the movement fracturing? if the movement is fracturing, is that a mix of good and bad? how do people who study the stuff and who have reported it deeply see this as a moment of potential promise or peril?
joining us now is will summer, the author of "trust the man." it's coming out next spring. mr. summer, thank you for coming out tonight. it's a real pleasure to have you here. >> thanks for having me. >> let me see if i'm asking the right question and if i sort of framed this appropriately in terms of the people involved and roy kind of moment this is in the qanon world. >> sure. this is a moment of real tumult right now. lynn wood has turned on people. lynn wood has minions or associates and they're turning on michael flynn between this audio. he gave a weird prayer, which they claim is a satanist. this is a classic qanon thing,
claiming someone is a satanist. there's a big qanon thing that's going on that a lot of people are going to have to face in their personal lives. >> is the dynamic that you're describing sort of tin inevitable -- do you feel like it's an inevitable crossroads this world is coming to because it was built on prophesies that have specific dates attacked to them that didn't come true. is this the sort of crossroads that was going to have to happen because it was built on promises it couldn't keep, or is it a product of personalities, volatile personalities and this is less predict active in terms of how this is going to resolve in the future? >> sure. you look at what has been promised, this sort of utopian moment. within the first week of qanon and back in 2017, they said
hillary clinton was going to be arrested and sent to guantanamo bay. obviously it didn't happen. or maybe it did. they even come to believe maybe the hillary clinton we see today is a clone and it gets more and more bizarre. people like michael flynn sign on to all of these. on january 6th, all were kick off the social media platforms, and a lot of people thought that was the end of it. what i find out from people who have family members they lost to qanon, and i talked to a poulter who said they've never been more popular, it continues to move. when they take a slice and move it in their own direction, sort of field people this yid of a secret world and trump is coming back some day, they really keep
it going. >> is the support for trump a constant in the qanon world? i even been surprised to see some people like flynn, like sidney powell, people like some of the other -- people who have had so much attention within that world. i've been surprised to see the skiz matic forces throw some of them off from some of the movement. is the support for trump a constant or is it at play as the movement gets to this crux moment as you described it? >> sure. i mean, so far they're all on trump. they love trump. trump has won that loyalty not just by doing things that qanon believe in policy-wise, but by not denouncing them. he said, oh, people are going after pedophiles? maybe they are, what's wrong with that. and he would do this dance.
and he would wink at michael flynn. people think that outside of -- outside of qanon think, we can cause them to defect. here's jeffrey epstein. then they say, trump was going under cover to take down epstein. not rationalizations to continue to have this really undying loyalty to trump. aparchlly it never ceased. >> i feel as somebody sort of outside of this looking in on it. the one thing that looked to many is a cultification. that will be tested over time. will sommer, reporter from "the daily beast." thanks very much for helping us understand this weird moment. i really appreciate you being
it's a thirteen-hour flight, that's not a weekend trip. fifteen minutes until we board. oh yeah, we gotta take off. you downloaded the td ameritrade mobile app so you can quickly check the markets? yeah, actually i'm taking one last look at my dashboard before we board. excellent. and you have thinkorswim mobile- -so i can finish analyzing the risk on this position. you two are all set. have a great flight. thanks. we'll see ya. ah, they're getting so smart. choose the app that fits your investing style. ♪♪
tomorrow a federal appeals court is going to hear formal questions on whether trump's records during his time in the white house should be turned over to the january 6th investigation. donald trump lost in the lower court. tomorrow the d.c. court will hear his appeal. if he loses tomorrow, he's running out of court. the supreme court would be the final stop for him. meanwhile there's a scheduled meeting to consider whether federal contempt charges should be brought against another trump official. the justice department has indicted steve bannon. next time it will be jeffrey clark. he's the justice department official who with trump reportedly cooked up a plan to try to use the powers of the justice department to block the election results from being
counted. on top of the charges already pending for bannon and the charges it looks like that aren to be recommended for mr. clark, adam schiff said they'll consider a criminal contempt referral for former white house chief of staff mark meadows who has also refused to cooperate with the investigation. joining us now congressman aguilar. appreciate you making time. >> thanks for having me. >> how important are trump's white house records important to the investigation? there's no-noing how the courts are going to handle this, particularly if it goes to the supreme court. would it be a critical factor for your investigation if ultimately you weren't able to get these trump white house records? we've said all along we want to tell the full and complete story, and in order to do that
we're going to need documents and interviews. clearly that's what's helping about the documents request and national archives request. we're pleased that the court is addressing this and it will be argued before the court of appeals tomorrow. we're excited to move to that next step, but it's helpful and important to the work that we need to have those documents. >> we've already seen the justice department charge steve bannon for his refusal to hand over documents and testify for your investigation. it looks like there's a possibility -- you and your colleagues will decide on wednesday -- whether a similar referral to be make with regard to jeffrey clark. what's the difference between jeffrey clark and the formal investigation and the other officials or those related to the investigation who have slow-walked you or not testified
yet or not handed over the documents that you've requested? it sounds like there's been a lot of resistance encouraged by president trump. what puts you in the same boat as bannon in terms of this could be potentially criminal contempt? >> mr. clark is in a small group that has continued to stonewall us. he's not produced any documents. he came to the deposition but refused to answer questions and exerted both executive privilege and attorney/client privilege, which is a little confusing, and so we're going to proceed. and that's what the business meeting on wednesday meeting will be about is the referral for criminal contempt. we feel he has shown just a willing -- unwillingness to come forward and testify. we feel that of the 250 people that have come before us and
submitted interviews, this should be no different including his two superiors at the time, acting attorney rosen and donahue. we've received a lot of information. there was information put out that talked about mr. clark's role and delegitimizing the election results, and we feel he has an obligation to come before us and share what he knows. >> did you say over 250 people have communicated with the investigation at this point either giving you documents or testified or both? over 250? >> 250 interviews. there has been a ton of activity that has been going on. 25,000 documents that the committee is sorting through and has sorted through. so there's a lot of activity. i know some of these names that are in the news obviously, but an overwhelming portion of the people we've asked to sit for
interviews and folks we have subpoenaed have come forward and have been interviewed. and so we continue to make progress. chairman thompson and vice chair cheney continue to lead our group in pursuit of the truth, and we want to make sure our fundamental goal is this never happens again. in order to do that, we're going to need documents and testimony and a we're going to need to tell the complete story. >> congressman peting a glar out of karks member of the january 6th investigation. thank you for being here. i did not realize the interviews had grown that large. that's remarkable. thanks for helping us understand that, sir. >> thanks, rachel. >> we'll be right back statement with us. rachel. >> we'll be right back statement with us.
requirement at the pentagon from the department of defense. all across the country, there will certainly be some small number of international guard members who don't want to get vaccinated and then they're going to get disciplined, and that will be a story in its own right. but in the state of oklahoma, this coming deadline, it's turning into a little shoot yourself in the foot showdown. governor stitt fired him. he said, quote, no oklahoma guardsman will be required to take the covid vaccine, notwithstanding any federal requirement. not with standing is like a stunt word in this case. it sounds like a double negative, but notwithstanding in this case means in speights of. the oklahoma national guard's
current orders are you don't need to take the covid vaccine compared to the government saying you do. the governor of oklahoma sent a formal request to fundamentalist gone asking for permission for the oklahoma national guard troops to ignore the federal vaccine requirement. today the pentagon gave them a formal response. this is from secretary lloyd austin. it says, quote, all members of the oklahoma army and international guard regardless of duty status must follow the directions of the secretary of the army and air force respectively. failure to do so may lead to a prohibition on the member's participation in drills and training conducted under title 32, and it may, quote, jeopardize the member status in the national guard, which means request denied. if members of the oklahoma national guard defy the federal order that they have to get
vaccinated, they may very well lose their jobs as members of the national guard. that's what the rule means. a spokesperson for the oklahoma governor tells the oklahoma newspaper that governor stitt maintains the governor is in charge while they're on title 32 status, meaning they're not deployed or on a federal training or mission. so neither side is backing down. we called the oklahoma national guard today to find out what it actually means for their members. they say as far as they know, their orders come from the governor and have not changed. but as far as the pentagon and government are concerned, people will get kicked out of the national guard if they don't comply because the national guard participates in all of these federal things commanded by the commander in chief, who's president biden. oklahoma national guard officials tell us they will not speculate as to what it will mean for members of the oklahoma
national guard. they instead directed us once again to the governor's office. this is once again turning into a standoff, one that has a shoot yourself in the foot quality, particularly for members of the oklahoma international guard and national guard who may be following state guidance here that's going to end their military careers regardless of whatever the governor says. i told you this was going to go badly. it's going badly. watch this space. y. it's going badly watch this space don't just put on a light show—be the light show. make your nights anything but silent. and ride in a sleigh that really slays. because in a cadillac, tradition is yours to define. so visit a cadillac showroom, and start celebrating today. ♪ ♪
that is going to do it for us tonight. i have run into the last words real estate, which means i owe them one. i'll see you tomorrow. "way too early" is up next. the third thing i'm going to be putting forward in detailed strategy with how to deal with this new variant, and that is not shut down or lockdowns but more widespread vaccination and more boosters, testing, and more. >> president biden on what he will and will not do to protect the emerges from the omicron strain of covid, but with little information on the variant, the question is how quick will le be able to adapt? plus, senator joe manchin hits the brakes to get the