tv Katy Tur Reports MSNBC October 22, 2021 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
passed away, with bobby kennedy, signed by him a few months before he died. this is a tough one. we'll be back monday with more "meet the press daily." if it's sunday, it's "meet the press" on your local nbc news station. msnbc coverage continues right now with my good friend yasmin vossoughian. hey, everybody, good afternoon. i'm yasmin vossoughian. good to be with you. as we come on the air we have breaking news from the supreme court, which announced just a short time ago that it will hear a case relating to that texas law that effectively bans nearly all abortions in the state. for the supremes, the hearing will happen at lightning speed, just over a week from now, on november 1. the court, however, declined to block the law, at least not
immediately. so it will remain in place for now. the justices, just like the appeals court previously, did not provide any reasoning behind their decision to allow the law to stand. but justice sonia sotomayor was having none of it, writing this. the promise of future adjudication offers cold comfort for texas women who need relief now. nbc's pete williams and boston law professor wendy murphy, welcome to you both. pete, let me start with you, and folks want clarity on this question. will the supreme court decide the case on the merits of the law or over the justice department's right to sue? or is it really both here, pete? >> it's both. the supreme court's going to hear both those cases on november 1. that's the lightning speed part of this. the decisions will follow, i suspect, at the court's normal pace, complicated by the fact that on december 1, the court
hears the third big abortion case of the term, the direct challenge to roe v. wade on mississippi's law that would ban abortion after 15 weeks. so i think, let's step back here and look as a practical matter, i think as a practical matter, sb 8, the texas law, is going to remain in effect for at least several more months while that's cases work their way through the supreme court, that's point one. point two, they'll hear two lawsuits on november 1. the first one is a state lawsuit filed by abortion providers in texas that challenges the law's constitutionality. so the court will consider that direct, straight-up challenge to the law. secondly, on november 1, the court will consider the separate question of the federal lawsuit. did the federal government have the legal authority to sue texas? texas says it doesn't, that the federal government here can't act unless congress gave it some specific way to attack it which texas says it didn't do. the federal government says we don't need that, we're defending constitutional rights here. and then assuming that someone
can sue like that, what's the way to put a hold on the law? the judge that initially put it on hold says it's not texas officials that are going to carry out this law but i'm going to order texas state judges and court clerks and so forth not to do anything to follow the law if lawsuits are filed. can the courts do that? that's the other question. those are the two things they'll consider on the 1st. >> wendy, let's tick through a couple of things that pete just laid out there. first is this idea of a timeline, november 1 they'll be hearing oral arguments. how unprecedented is that for the supreme court? >> oh, it's very rare. i wouldn't call it unprecedented, but it's very rare. and it's interesting, because it's not like they're acting quickly because they want to overturn or even necessarily uphold the law, because they had that chance a couple of months ago and they declined. where this urgency came from,
who knows? i think it's a good sign to some extent, that they're also considering the merits, because there's no way under roe v. wade that they can uphold this texas law without completely gutting and destroying roe v. wade, right? they have to take it away completely in order to uphold the texas ban. and they really already have a case pending, as pete mentioned, that's going to be heard december 1, where they're going to decide a less aggressive restriction on abortion rights. so it would make no sense to me, this is the good news piece to me, i think, it would make no sense to take this case up for the purpose of overturning roe v. wade. that's how i feel. >> correct me if i'm wrong here, i'm kind of trying to get my head around this. this is exactly what abortion rights activists kind of wanted, right, to challenge the constitutionality of this law, because it very well may be
struck down, sb 8, if it's found not constitutional. >> yes. in september, when this court had a case to say things about it, it wasn't a holding but they had a chance to say things about it, it was clear even the conservatives had concerns about the constitutionality, as well they should, it's just so overtly, ridiculously unconstitutional, that it also transcends partisan lines. it really isn't the right case for the court to overturn roe v. wade, i don't see that happening. i think one of the most important things, and pete touched on this, was the curious way the texas legislature enacted this special provision to prevent courts from getting involved by limiting how the courts can only get involved if private people sue, sort of forbidding the government to get involved at all. and, you know, it's the most anti-democratic, truly treacherous and treasonous thing i've ever seen, i've never seen a law like this passed by a
state legislature, saying we know we're not supposed to pass unconstitutional laws but we're going to do it anyway and pass a special law next to it that forbids the courts to correct our unconstitutional nature. what if the texas legislature passed a law tomorrow making slavery legal and then passed another law saying, we hereby forbid the courts to get involved to overturn it? it's that bad, that grotesque, and that anti-democratic. i think even a conservative supreme court will take advantage of the opportunity to say you can't do this. >> and very much so, texas will be a test case for the rest of the country, especially when it comes to conservative states, a lot of folks will be watching the supreme court for the next few months. pete williams, wendy murphy, thank you so much, appreciate it. the question so many are asking today, what happened on the ranch? we are hearing for the first time from alec baldwin who fired a prop gun on the set of his movie being filmed in new mexico, and something went horribly wrong. the shot killed a 42-year-old
sin he noing to are aer if, halyna hutchins, and injured the director, joel souza. souza has been released from the hospital. detectives are still piecing together the series of events on the set of "rust," which was being filmed in the desert, on the outskirts of san jose. this morning in his first public response baldwin tweeted, there are no words to convey my shock and sadness regarding the tragic accident that took the life of halyna hutchins, a wife, a mother, and deeply admired colleague of ours. i am fully cooperating with the police investigation to address how this tragedy occurred and i am in touch with her husband, offering my support to him and his family. my heart is broken for her husband, tear son, and all who knew and loved her. all indications are that this was a horrific accident, accidents involving guns on movie sets are rare, but they've
happened before. back in 1993, brandon lee, son of martial arts legend bruce lee, was killed after a bullet was left in a prop gun on the set of the movie "the crow." prop guns are supposed to work by firing blanks, gunpowder charges that produce the flash and the bang, not a hard projectile, but they can still be dangerous if the paper or plastic ejected from the barrel is fired at a close range. that is what happened on a tv show set back in 1984, when actor john eric hexum fired a blank at his head at such close range that the wadding in the prop gun hit him with such force, it killed him. joining me now, nbc news correspondent juan vinegas. gaud, alec baldwin calls this a tragic accident and that's what
it appears to be. do we know anything more about how this actually went down, how this happened? >> authorities have released very few details about what happened. we know the sheriff's office is investigating. there is another statement by the d.a.'s office saying the case is in its preliminary state of investigation. they are assisting the santa fe county sheriff's office, they've offered their full support to them at this time. they also say they do not know if charges will be filed. we also know that hutchins' agent spoke, they released a statement saying everyone at innovative artists is heartbroken and are hoping this will initiate reviews of safety on movie and tv sets. halyna hutchins was an
investigative journalist in europe before coming to the united states and studying at the american film institute in los angeles and began working as a director of photography. the details of what happened on the set are still being investigated. and we are trying to find out more about what happened exactly when this weapon or when this prop gun was used on set, yasmin. >> kevin, i want to take a few steps back here because i really want folks to understand what prop guns are as we're talking about them, what blanks are, and what is actually in the gun chamber on movie sets, so folks can understand how something like this could take place or mistakes that could have happened leading up to this incident. >> it all depends upon the particular project. generally speaking, prop guns are made in such a way that you're not able to actually load a live round into the gun and it's not able to be chambered. blank rounds typically tend to be a little bit of a smaller diameter, so that way the larger
live rounds can't fit. that being said, a blank round is essentially the same thing as a bullet with different levels of black powder. the only thing missing is the projectile. these circumstances, as you already touched on, these are really, really rare circumstances. and this is really kind of shaping up to be what sounds like a freak accident. the only thing that i could even conceive of, and it's purely speculative, and i won't go further than saying, sometimes you need to use a vintage firearm that has been modified. and there may have been a safety failure in that. but again, that's purely speculative on my side. >> so aren't there safety measures in place to ensure things like this happen? as i mentioned leading up to the both of you, kevin, this has happened on sets before, brandon lee being a very notable account of something like this happening. i would suspect, and from my understanding, there were safety measures put in place to make
sure something like this didn't happen again. what security is in place to make sure this doesn't happen and is there a possibility those things were overlooked? >> it's hard to say, but generally speaking, on a film set, you're going to have an armorer or a prop master in charge of these weapons that are going to be put into the hands of the actors, and you're keeping a tight chain of control as to when they're offset, when they're brought to set, when they're handed to the actors, when they're handed back. beyond that, when you're aiming the gun, you're not going to be aiming it at another performer, you're going to be aiming off-access, you'll make sure you have no crew in the background. and a majority of the time ballistic shields are used if you have to point toward the camera. those are things normal and expected on a set. whether or not they were or were not employed has yet to be seen. >> it's tragic, it's shocking to say the least. i'm sure we'll learn more as the days and weeks tick by.
gaud venegas and kevin williams, thank you. coming up, pfizer announcing its low dose vaccine is highly effective in kids. how soon until it's actually approved? plus the house votes to charge steve bannon. now the ball is in the doj's court. and up next, the search for brian laundrie is over. will we ever know what happened to gabby petito? we'll be right back. so the national eye institute did 20 years of clinical studies on a formula found in preservision. if it were my vision, i'd ask my doctor about preservision. it's the most studied eye vitamin brand. if it were my vision, i'd look into preservision preservision areds 2 contains the exact nutrient formula recommended by the nei to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. i have amd, it is my vision, so my plan includes preservision. ♪
♪ there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. ♪ ♪upbeat music♪ transitions™ light under control. ♪upbeat music♪ transitions™ signature gen 8™ available now, in 4 vibrant style colors. transitions™ this is... available now, in 4 vibrant style colors. ♪ ♪
this is iowa. we just haven't been properly introduced. say hello to the place where rolling hills meets low bills. where our fields, inside and out, are always growing. and where the fun is just getting started. this is iowa. so, when are you coming to see us? ♪ ♪ ever wonder how san francisco became the greenest big city in america? just ask the employee owners of recology. we built the recycling system from the ground up, helping san francisco become the first city in the country to have a universal recycling and composting program for residents and businesses. but it all starts with you. let's keep making a differene together.
some more breaking news we're following this hour. the fbi has confirmed that the partial human remains found in a remote florida park are those of brian laundrie. laundrie was the sole person of interest in the disappearance of his fiance, gabby petito, whose own remains were found in wyoming in late september. an autopsy confirmed she died by strangulation. the discovery of laundrie's remains brings the nationwide search to a close. but law enforcement is still searching, of course, for answers. the question is will we get them. joining me, nbc news correspondent stephanie stanton from north port, florida, and a professor of applied forensics. stephanie, you're outside the laundrie home right now. what's happening there? >> well, good afternoon to you, yasmin. right now things are quiet. there are several members of the media here. but around 11:30 this morning we did see a delivery driver pull
up to the house. he got out and dropped off four sympathy bouquets for the laundrie family. we asked him who they were from. of course he didn't tell us. then a crush of media surrounded the gentleman, who happened to be a local florist, by the way, just asking him what he thought of everything and how he felt about what's been going on here, and he expressed sadness over the whole situation. as we know, the laundrie family has not spoken publicly at all since this entire ordeal began. but their attorney has been speaking out, and we heard from him yesterday on nbc news' tom llamas' show. he spoke to tom about several issues after the fbi confirmed those remains found in that park five miles from where i'm standing are in fact brian laundrie. he also expressed his frustration at the fact that the media, members of the public,
have been sort of pointing fingers at the parents of brian laundrie throughout this investigation. you'll recall, yasmin, they were the ones on wednesday morning that decided on their own, they say, or according to the attorney, to go out to that park, again, five miles from this house, and search on their own. that is when they found those belongings which ultimately led to police discovering the remains. and take a listen to what the attorney had to say. >> there are two families here that have suffered a great tragedy. there are two young people that have now lost their lives. there are parents that are suffering. now, i understand that. whatever happened or whatever didn't happen, whatever people know, this is tragic for two families. and anybody with a child and anybody with a sense of humanity can understand the frustration that both families feel. >> so at this point the investigation continues. exactly what the cause of death is for brian laundrie and his
potential involvement, if at all, in the death of gabby petito. of course you'll recall, police never named him a suspect, only a person of interest. at this point the fbi is looking at that notebook that was found at the scene, at that park. perhaps it is able to provide them with a little more insight or information into what brian laundrie was thinking. but at this point, yasmin, we may never know the full story here. >> so let's try and answer some of those questions with joseph scott morgan. let's talk about the remains discovered of brian laundrie yesterday, joseph scott. from our understanding, these are partial skeletal remains. they have been submerged in water for weeks at this point, from what we're hearing from law enforcement. will they be able to deduce the cause of death here and when in fact brian laundrie died, from
partial skeletal remains? >> that's the trick, isn't it, yasmin? he had been down for a protracted period of time. contrary to what you see on television and shows, this sort of thing, the best we'll be able to hope for, i think, relative to how long he has been down or what we refer to as the post mortem interval, is probably about a week, as far as narrowing it down. since they're saying this is a skeletonized body, that implies there is no soft tissue remaining. so it takes some time for this to happen. however, this is expedited, in an environment like south florida like this. you have high heat, high humidity. keep in mind, he's in a canopied area there, the trees and floor in that area hold that heat in, it's almost like a convection oven, so it speeds everything up. one of the interesting things i've heard is there is also a
partial skull. what can we deduce? they were able to do dental work and give him an i.d. the teeth were probably intact. but what part of the skull was missing? that can imply trauma, blunt force trauma, gunshot wound, you never know, everything is on the table. did this occur before death or after death? >> what about gabby petito? we can't help but think about her family, her parents that will likely not have the answers they want, the hours that led to her death with brian laundrie now gone. yes, he was a person of interest, but nonetheless, will they be able to determine what happened to gabby petito? we know the cause of death obviously was strangulation. but the hours that led up to her death. >> yeah, you know, i think that the closest they're going to be able to come at this point, this is speculative on my part, is that notebook. that is key. and keep in mind, they have yet to open that notebook, because
it's wet. and so what is going to happen is, that notebook is probably going to the questioned documents section at the fbi, at the lab, which is one of the finest in the world. and it's cellulose based so they literally have to freeze this thing in order to stop that decomposition so they can carefully open it under controlled circumstances and be able to use things like alternative lighting and that sort of thing in order to appreciate any of those writing than were in there. we all know what happens to ink when it gets wet, it smudges. they'll be looking at things like pressure from the pen, those sort of things. it's highly, highly technical. i beg for everybody at this point, please, please be patient with the forensic scientists as they work through this. this is a gigantic puzzle. >> tragic situation all around. stephanie, thank you, joseph, thank you as well. appreciate it. coming up, spending showdown. after months of back and forth negotiations and very public divisions, democrats express
optimism that a compromise is in fact within reach. and vaccinating this country. big news about vaccines for younger kids as millions more people are approved for boosters. we'll be right back. at t-mobile for business, unconventional thinking means we see things differently, so you can focus on what matters most. whether it's ensuring food arrives as fresh as when it departs... keeping crews connected as they help build communities... or providing patients the care they need, even at home. we are the leader in 5g and a partner who delivers exceptional customer support and facebook advertising, on us. network. support. value. no trade-offs. unconventional thinking, it's better for business.
effective in protecting kids ages 5 to 11. clinical trials showed an efficacy rate of 90%, that's pretty good. an fda panel will consider pfizer's request for approval for that age group next week. as of today, booster shots are available to millions more americans. the cdc officially green lit the moderna and johnson & johnson shots yesterday along with mixing and matching of boosters. here is what the director of the cdc said earlier on "today." >> the vast majority of people will probably select the one that they originally received and did really well with. but there may be some people who would prefer a different vaccine or if you go into a pharmacy and they don't have the vaccine that you originally got, it really is fine to get a different vaccine. >> and nbc news correspondent miguel almaguer has more. >> reporter: yasmin, with the cdc's director's signoff overnight, those booster shots can start going into arms immediately. well over 30 million americans now qualify for a booster shot of moderna or johnson & johnson.
the cdc giving the all clear, after reviewing a trove of data presented by moderna and j&j, supporting their case for an added dose of protection. moderna's data shows antibody levels spiked with a third shot of its vaccine. recipients who qualify would be the same as pfizer's. those who were inoculated at least six months ago, who are immunocompromised, and those 65 and older, as well as americans at higher risk of catching the virus. for johnson & johnson, anyone who has been vaccinated for two months could get a booster. >> i think boosters are a really important part of getting beyond the pandemic, especially for high risk people who are older and at risk for chronic diseases. >> reporter: with the cdc endorsing the mixing and matching of booster shots, the agency says those who qualify can select any of the three brands. research shows those vaccinated with j&j get more protection
when followed by a shot of moderna or pfizer. >> you were vaccinated with johnson & johnson and you're eager for a booster. >> i think that extra layer of protection will make us feel more comfortable. >> reporter: with new hospitalizations, deaths, and infections all dropping nationwide. >> we demand our freedom! >> reporter: many americans, including first responders, are protesting vaccine mandates, refusing to even get their first shot. and now, as we approach winter, and more americans gather inside, cases could spike again. health officials offering another layer of protection for tens of millions of americans. to date so far, more than 9 million americans have already received pfizer's booster. again, the booster rollout for moderna and johnson & johnson already under way. yasmin, back to you. >> miguel almaguer, thank you for that. i want to bring in dr. peter hotez. he is co-director at center for vaccine development at texas
children's hospital. dr. hotez, as always, thank you for joining us on this, we really appreciate it. this is huge, i have to say, it popped up on my phone today. as a parent of two young children, i was very excited. 90% efficacy for pfizer for a vaccine for children 5 to 11 years old, a game changer, really, for what we're dealing with this pandemic. >> it certainly has the potential of getting our kids, k-12 kids, safely through the school year, especially if we start seeing a big increase in covid-19 as we move into the fall and winter as many of us expect. so even though it's starting to go down now, it's still at a high level. there's many of us who think there's going to be a pretty significant rise in the fall and winter. so it is welcome news if we can vaccinate our 5 to 11-year-olds. >> this is a stop on the train of the eua process. the fda meeting next week and the cdc will have to give its final approval when it comes to the emergency use authorization. you've got parents already asking pediatricians questions,
me being one of them, are you going to be offering this vaccine. you're asking your school board, your pta, will you be offering this vaccine inside schools, how quickly is this thing going to get approved and when will we be able to see shots in arms for young kids? >> i think it's going to move pretty quickly, assuming the fda vrbpac committee, the advisory committee, signs off on it in the coming week, and it goes to the centers for disease control, which i expect it will. how eager parents are going to be to get this vaccine is going to be depend on a number of factors. i think you'll see a lot of regionalzation. in the northeast, where the majority of the 12 to 17-year-olds are vaccinated, that's a sign that parents are all in and they'll probably want to vaccinate their little kids as well. here in the south, where it's the rates of vaccination among 12 to 17-year-olds are half or a third of what it is in the northeast, not so much. we're going to probably see the same resistance. and, you know, how much of that is influenced if and when
covid-19 transmission goes up is also going to be interesting to follow. >> let's talk boosters. will kids need boosters, dr. hotez? >> most likely yes, because, you know, if you look at the way the antibody responses are going and other factors, t&b cells, to me it looks like both mrna vaccinations were always a three-dose vaccine, and the j&j vaccine was always a two-dose vaccine. in the case of the j&j, it's not really a booster, it's not like the antibody is waning after a single dose, it's staying up, it's just that it was never that high a level in the first place. this is more of an auto correction, it's probably really always been a two-dose vaccine. >> rochelle walensky talked about this mixing and matching of boosters this morning on the
"today" show. is it okay to get pfizer or moderna if i had johnson & johnson originally? what do you think is most effective for folks, mix and match or not? >> i would be careful about giving the message that it's willy-nilly, you can do whatever you want. i don't think of it that way. i got two doses of the pfizer biontech vaccine, and i deliberately decided for my third immunization to get another pfizer biontech immunization, a homologous boost, because there's going to be a lot more data on it coming out of israel and the uk, a lot more data from the manufacturers. the manufacturers do not have a lot of incentive to collect information about mix and match vaccines and our cdc is doing a modest job in terms of collecting vaccine effectiveness information. so the default, i think, should always be homologous boosters, same with the moderna vaccine, if you got two doses of moderna, get moderna. the j&j is a bit different, if
you're in an at risk group for thrombotic events, if you're pregnant, you may want to switch to one of themrna vaccines but even that's a soft call because there's not a lot of data on the durability of protection. >> thank you, as always, dr. hotez, great to see you. ahead, let's make a deal. new optimism in washington. can you believe that? the months-long talks between democrats are finally leading somewhere. and we're live on the ground in west virginia. what do people there make of joe manchin's role in the democratic party? we'll be right back. tonight, i'll be eating a buffalo chicken panini with extra hot sauce. tonight, i'll be eating salmon sushi with a japanese jiggly cheesecake. (doorbell rings) jolly good. fire. (horse neighing) elton: nas? yeah? spare a pound? what? you know, bones, shillings, lolly? lolly? bangers and mash? i'm... i'm sorry?
i don't have any money. you don't look broke. elton: my rocket is skint! people everywhere living with type 2 diabetes you are waking upoke. to what's possible with rybelsus®. ♪ you are my sunshine ♪ ♪ my only sunshine... ♪ rybelsus® is a pill that lowers blood sugar in three ways. increases insulin when you need it... decreases sugar... and slows food. the majority of people taking rybelsus® lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk.
♪ ♪ traveling has always been our passion, even with his parkinson's. but then he started seeing things that weren't there and believing things that weren't true. that worried us. during the course of their disease, around 50% of people with parkinson's may experience hallucinations or delusions. and these symptoms can get worse over time. nuplazid is the only approved medicine prescribed to significantly reduce hallucinations and delusions related to parkinson's. don't take nuplazid if you are allergic to its ingredients. nuplazid can increase the risk of death in elderly people with dementia-related psychosis and is not for treating symptoms unrelated to parkinson's disease. nuplazid can cause changes in heart rhythm and should not be taken if you have certain abnormal heart rhythms or take other drugs that are known to cause changes in heart rhythm. tell your doctor about any changes in medicines you're taking. the common side effects are swelling of the arms and legs and confusion.
now this is something we want to see. don't wait. ask your healthcare provider about nuplazid. so, should all our it move to the cloud? the cloud would give us more flexibility, but we lose control. ♪ ♪ ♪ should i stay or should i go? ♪ and we need insights across our data silos, but how? ♪ if i go there will be trouble ♪ ♪ ♪ wait, we can stay and go. hpe greenlake is the platform that brings the cloud to us. ♪ should i stay or should i go now? ♪ ♪ ♪ we had a very positive meeting this morning. i'm very optimistic. >> reporter: you feel like a deal is close? >> i think it's very possible. >> very possible. house speaker nancy pelosi there leaving a breakfast meeting at
the white house, optimistic on the future of the president's legislative agenda. democrats are now again aim to take votes next week on both the hard infrastructure package and that sweeping social spending overhaul. but will a deal be hammered out in time? talks so far have yielded a series of concessions, but no firm framework yet. and yet in a town hall last night the president again predicted the deal with get done. will get done. >> are you close to a deal? >> i think so. you know, look, i was a senator for 370 years. [ laughter ] and i was never -- i was relatively good at putting together deals. >> he said it. joining me now, nbc news capitol hill correspondent ali vitali, ali, great to see you as always, my friend. >> you too. >> is the president's confidence that we saw last night in that cnn town hall, is it matched in the halls of congress? and now we're talking about this pared-down deal, no more $3.5 trillion, no more $6 trillion where it initially started.
>> right. >> what is in this thing today at this hour? i know things change constantly. >> yeah, look, the optimism up here on capitol hill has felt more real in the last few days than it has over the course of the last few weeks. the momentum also has been there too. i asked joe manchin at the beginning of the week what all of these conversations would actually amount to in terms of action. last night, we sort of got our answer in the clearest terms that we've gotten it so far. we start to hear what's in the bill and we've started to hear what's out of the bill from the president of the united states' mouth, the man who he's been driving these negotiations and at the center of them, trying to bring all these different factions of democrats to the table to actually get to something that you can agree on. what we've started to see is some things that we already knew, things like paid leave are going to be in the bill for a shorter period of time. initially advocates wanted 12 weeks, now we're going to get four weeks. universal pre-k is in there. the child tax credit is on a one-year extension, that's shorter than some progressives wanted but nevertheless still in there.
you're going to see dental care vouchers, that's the president last night laying out an alternative to something that has fallen out of the package which is a medicare expansion that includes things like dental, vision, and hearing. but also we're seeing in this bill funding for childcare centers, climate change funding, elder care provisions. also drawing your attention to increases to pell grants, because this is, again, another one of the solutions to something that fell off the negotiating table. the president on the campaign trail was outspoken about the fact that he wanted to do a free community college program. that's not going to be in the reconciliation bill. he says he can circle back to that at a later time. but increasing pell grants is one way that he thinks he's going to be able to get there. you also see on your screen there the clean electricity performance program. this is sort of which joe in washington do you believe. manchin says he doesn't want to see it in the reconciliation program. president joe biden, though, says it's not off the table yet. and of course we know because of senator kyrsten sinema, tax hikes on corporations and the rich are also off the table now because that's not something
she's going to support. so this is a balancing act of policy. but if you listen to the president last night, it's also a balancing act of personality. listen. >> joe's not a bad guy. he's a friend. he's always at the end of the day come around and voted. he's smart as the devil, number one. number two, she's very supportive of the environmental agenda in my legislation, very supportive. when you're in the united states senate, and you're president of the united states and you have 50 democrats, every one is a president. [ laughter ] every single one. >> yasmin, perhaps that explains nothing better than the president just did, the state of these negotiations, with margins this tight, everyone's a president. >> and we're going to be talking about that other president in just a moment with cal perry. ali vitali, as always, great to see you. so the other president, senator joe manchin, as president biden just said, has played a
public-facing role in his negotiations on the hill. and his home state of west virginia is in desperate need of assistance. west virginia has long hovered at the bottom of states when it comes to health care, early childhood education, and economic development. it's also coming in dead last when it comes to infrastructure. the state has also been impacted by climate change and while the state's dependence on the coal industry remains high, jobs in that industry have shifted away, in a decades-long decline. on the outside, it's easy to see how biden's agenda would help manchin's constituents. but how is manchin's role in washington, how is it playing back home? with me to try to answer that from charleston, west virginia, nbc news correspondent cal perry. cal, good to see you. i just asked the question, so answer it for me. how is it playing in west virginia? >> i'm surprised by the patience that people have shown in charleston. let's be clear, this is a county that joe manchin won handily. we came here because we wanted to talk to the people who voted for him and wanted to see if
they still support him. the other number to keep in mind, donald trump won this state by 70%. it's an unbelievable margin. that is the fine line that joe manchin is walking. he's the head of the democratic party in a state that is red and getting redder. a lot of people see this as politics as usual. we spoke to some elected officials who know joe manchin to get their thoughts. take a listen. >> i know how this works. it is like watching sausage. eventually they'll have a bill and we'll see what's in it. but we here in west virginia have to trust our representatives. i trust joe manchin. >> i think he's being the same person he's always been. he's always been a mainstream conservative democrat. that's what he was when he was in the house, that's what he was in the senate. he was basically that way as governor. he was tight with the money. >> your introduction laid out really well where west virginia is. it's a state that desperately
needs the infrastructure, joe manchin supports that. but the human infrastructure bill, that's what joe manchin is pressing back on. everybody we spoke to yesterday said we don't really know what's in the bill, it's changing hour by hour. people want to say, see what's in the bill, and then judge joe manchin. >> cal perry, as always, great to see you, my friend. a new documentary, "civil war," airing this sunday on msnbc, examines how differing narratives of that pivotal event continue to shape our beliefs to this day. >> no one on the civilian side, on the confederate presidency, was ever forced to concede and repudiate what they believed. and we allowed a group of people that waged an armed insurrection against their government to build statues to their heroes. so that has kept it alive. we have never solved the core problem of the civil war. >> you can watch "civil war" this sunday, 10:00 p.m. eastern,
right here on cnbc. up next, everybody, the house votes to charge steve bannon with contempt of congress. will the department of justice agree? we'll be right back. . all they need is a bike and a full tank of gas. their only friend? the open road. i have friends. [ chuckles ] well, he may have friends, but he rides alone. that's jeremy, right there! we're literally riding together. he gets touchy when you talk about his lack of friends. can you help me out here? no matter why you ride, progressive has you covered with protection starting at $79 a year. well, we're new friends. to be fair. eh, still. ♪ ♪ hey i'm joe montana. when you get to be our age, you have little patience for nonsense and inefficiency.
after years of practice you become a pro at pretty much everything. so when i qualified for medicare, i got wellcare. they're pros at making things streamlined, efficient and convenient. i don't even need to leave the house anymore, because wellcare offers great benefits like free grocery, meal, and prescription delivery. [ doorbell rings ] i have your delivery. appreciate it. ♪ ♪ yeah! plus, a flex card to pay for extra dental, vision and hearing expenses. an over the counter allowance, and even giveback plans that put money back into your social security check every month. and if you need to see a doctor, you can get in-home visits and 24/7 virtual visits. wellcare is no nonsense. just great benefits and none of the hassles.
wellcare is committed to getting rid of the nonsense and inconvenience associated with health insurance. instead, they're just focusing on giving you great benefits like free grocery, meal, and prescription delivery, an over-the-counter allowance that you can use on things like toothpaste, cold remedies, and mouthwash, a flex card to use for your extra dental, vision, and hearing expenses, giveback plans that put money back into your social security check, and the ability to speak to a doctor from the safety and comfort of your own home with virtual visits. call for a free wellcare guide today. or visit our website at enrollwellcare.com. that's enrollwellcare.com. ♪ ♪ wellcare. it's medicare done well. to make my vision a reality my varilux progressive lenses provide seamlessly transition
from near to far. with every detail in sharp focus. that's seeing no limits. varilux lenses by essilor. ♪ ♪ there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. ♪ #. mr. bannon wants to wait to see if there's a privilege issue by a court and as a consequence this is all just theater to setup the utilization of criminal process against steve
bannon. >> don't you think it's important that when we're exercising our article 1 powers to get the evidence we need in order to legislate that people obey the subpoenas of the united states house of representatives? >> if it's a legitimate investigation, sure. >> those protests from republican congressmen matt gaetz and jim jordan did not ultimately help their cause. the house voted on thursday, the ball is now in the department of justice's court. the u.s. attorney's office in washington, d.c. will make the final decision on whether the former trump aide will in fact be charged. let's talk more about this. joining me now politico national correspondent betsey woodruff swan. thank you, both, guys. joyce, i want to start with this one and ask you a question of timing now. what can we expect when it comes to the department of justice as to whether or not they're going to move forward with a prosecution of steve bannon?
>> i don't think we can have a set time line, yasmin. the reality is this will be looked at through several layers of supervisors inside the d.c. u.s. attorney's office. presumably they'll consult with folks at main justice. they may for all we know have made up their minds and be on a quick time line. but this could also take a longer amount of time as they gather evidence and make some of the other considerations that the federal principles of prosecution ask them to make before they make a prosecutive decision here. >> i want to get into those federal principles of prosecution in a moment, but, betsey, to you on this one, which is what is the end game for the committee here when it comes to steve bannon? >> well, the number one priority of the committee of course is for bannon to come in fork over the documents they want and give an answer to questions verbally. that's their ultimate goal.
however, they realize that may not be something they may be able to immediately get. the second tier priority is making an example of bannon and using this particular episode to send a signal to all the potentially recalcitrant witnesses they're targeting, if they don't play ball, if they don't comply with these congressional subpoenas, they can face the same major legal headaches bannon is going through right now whether or not doj makes a charging decision. it was important to this congressional committee in this very first instance of the subpoena being publicly defied that happens to be publicly defiled by a very high profile figure, that they push back as hard and fast as possible so that a precedent wouldn't be set it's okay for witnesses to try to engage in funny business when it comes to these subpoenas. everything obthey've done over the last several days has been designed just for that purpose, to send a loud, clear signal. >> here's the thing. is there any talk that steve
bannon is a easy target versus someone who is on the fringe ala steve bannon? >> what makes bannon an easier target is not his particular political opinions or where he's situated on the political spectrum but the fact the arguments he and trump would be able to make regarding executive privilege are so incredibly 10 tenuous in his case. the only reason bannon would be able to level why he couldn't testify is this idea of executive privilege, that presidents have a right to have secret conversations with their advisers. but the idea executive privilege would cover a conversation between somebody who no longer is president with somebody who was a podcaster and not an executive branch official within any time soon of that conversation happening is part of the reason this is a particularly easy move for the
committee. >> joyce vance, you brought up the federal principles of prosecution. merrick garland mentioned this in his statement yesterday. this is basically a way they deduce whether or not they're going to move forward with prosecution. there's four questions they need to answer. walk us through that and what you expect to happen here, what you expect the answers to be. >> sure. this is just the bible for prosecutors, different questions apply in different situations. but first prosecutors have to be sure that they have sufficient admissible evidence to obtain and sustain a conviction. that question looks like one that they can answer in the affirmative here. betsey references the executive privilege aspect of that question, and if bannon really wanted to assert that in a serious way he would have to appear in front of the committee and assert it question by question that he hasn't done that really influences the calculus here.
along with the fact there's an old olc memo that addresses the fact executive privilege could extend to people outside the white house, in a situation like this where the president has already made a decision the privilege should be waived, we know the privilege isn't absolute and must fail in a great public need for information. so that calculus about evidence seems like something doj could answer in the affirmative. then they have to make sure that the prosecution would be in national interest seem like an easy question here where the oversight ability of a branch of government is at stake. perhaps the more challenging question, yasmin, is whether there's a non-criminal remedy. and doj might decide particularly since prosecution here doesn't guarantee that bannon will testify, they might decide that congress has a better route with a civil lawsuit. >> interesting. betsey woodruff swan, thank you. joyce vance, thank you as well. great to see you, ladies. i'll be back here tomorrow
and there you have it- woah. wireless on the most reliable network nationwide. wow. -big deal! ...we get unlimited for just 30 bucks. sweet, i get that too and mine has 5g included. that's cool, but ours save us serious clam-aroonies. relax people, my wireless is crushing it. that's because you all have xfinity mobile with your internet. it's wireless so good, it keeps one upping itself.
johnson & johnson is the world's largest healthcare company. building a future where cancers can be cured. strokes can be reversed. joints can be 3-d printed. and there isn't one definition of what well feels like. there are millions. we're using our world to make your world a world of well. there are new signs this afternoon that democrats are closer than ever before to a deal on that massive social spending bill. they're now targeting a vote for next week. speaker pelosi emerging from a white house meeting with president biden saying she's very optimistic, but is a vote next week realistic?