>> but they're there. what we did last time is literally unprecedented. be rebuilt the whole industry because we inherited nothing. what we inherited from the previous administration -- not only were the cupboards bare i say but we inherited broken testing. i just left the top executives at abbott, who would have that would happen where they have such great tests -- unless you have further questions from the secretary of treasury -- if it's for me we can wait. we have to get him back to work. >> for secretary mnuchin, a question one of my colleagues who's not able to be in the room. they're curious about the sba rule that prevents small casinos from getting some of this relief. is that something you're taking

a look at? is there going to be a change to -- >> not small casinos, but there are such things as small taverns and restaurants that have literally, you know, small gaming things. and we are coming out with some additional guidance on that. but i want to be clear, it's not small casinos. >> secretary, there was a letter that some house republicans sent this weekend about the liquidity for mortgage services. can you explain what you're looking at on that front? >> sure. i think i commented on this a week or so ago. we had a subcommittee task force that specifically studied this issue. we have all the appropriate people on it. we've had some conversations with the fhfa on what they're going to do for franny and freddy. we're very aware of the issue. quite frankly we've been studying this issue way before

covid and had concerns about some of these nonbank servicers not being well capitalized. >> we have seen a number in these relief bills the democrats and republicans have been able to push for different non-coronavirus specific funding priorities. >> and if there are going to be other additions, for instance, a change to labor rules some on the right are wondering if you should also be pushing, you know, for their preferred add-ones. >> i think our expectation has always been this is covid related. some people have a rather broad view of what covid related is because it has impacted almost every single business. i mean, i think the president has talked about the kennedy center, which is a good i

institution. the president has instructed we want to be very specific in the next bill it's covid related items. >> the democrats wanted it in, we didn't want that but they wanted it in and we had to agree in order to get something done for the workers. we're not looking for extraneous nonsense. >> let me clear, i had nothing to do with the china ban. i wasn't on the task force at the time. i think i was traveling at the time, but i never had any -- i was not part of -- i did become very active and after the china ban, but that report in "the new york times" was not accurate. i was not part of the task force at that time and i was not involved. in fact, i think i may have been

traveling. again, that is the ppe. the ppe is basically sending money to small business, 50% of american workers to keep those people paid, and it's the most efficient way. every dollar as i said we do through that is one last dollar of unemployment. and more importantly we want those people to be associated with the business, so as soon as the president is ready to open up the economy those businesses are together. we don't want those businesses to fall apart. that's why this is such a successful program -- >> we would have preferred it was sent directly to the people. the democrats wanted it to be sent through the unemployment system, and, you know, i talked to you about it. we have 40-year-old equipment in

many of those systems run by the state, but i'm hearing they're get them out anyway. >>. >> we're working with the states to try and update their computers but it's a long haul. >> phase four, steve. come on, steve. >> a quick question about what you just said. you said when someone is president of the united states, their authority is total. that is not true. who -- >> we're going to write up papers on this. it's not going to be necessary because the governors need us one way or the other. because ultimately it comes with the federal government. that being said we're getting along very well with the governors, and i feel very certain there won't be a problem. >> has any governor agreed you have the authority to decide when their state -- >> i haven't asked anybody. you know why? because i don't have to. >> who told you the president has total authority? >> enough. please. >> governor hogan of maryland

has urged your administration to ask congress for $500 billion to help stabilize budgetary shortfalls -- >> we appreciate governor hogan's statement. >> governor cuomo said the cares act ignored -- >> cuomo. which one? >> he said the cares act ignored the budgetary shortfalls. >> well, they're looking at things in phase four, you know, where they talk about states and they're also talking about hospitals. they talk about states who have been battered and also talking about hospitals. >> will you urge congress -- >> we'll see what we come back with, but they are talking about states and they're talking about hospitals. >> thank you, mr. president. the governor of michigan gretchen whitmer has on thursday signed an executive order banning the sale of nonessential goods. >> ban on what? >> she has banned the sale of nonessential goods.

many are calling this draconian, unconstitutional. as president do you think that if other states were to follow her example in the coming weeks that the federal government should intervene? >> well, i don't think that's going to happen. i think it's very extreme, but she's doing it, and i think it's going to be over a long way before we have to start thinking about it too much. it is strong. it's a very strong position to take, but they're making a lot of progress in michigan, so let's see how it all works -- >> what is the status for the funding of the world health organization? >> we're going to be talking about that very soon. i'm getting a full report. i'm not happy with the world health organization. not happy with the world trade organization either. we've been ripped off by everybody. and we have in this country for so many years has been ripped off by everybody. whether it's a world health or world trade. they're like i call them the bobsy twins. they look at our country for years and years we had people who did nothing about it. so we'll have a report, and

we're also talking about the world trade organization. we've had a lot of progress there. we're winning cases for the first time because they know i'll leave if we don't get treated fairly. this country, our country was at a point where we rarely if ever won lawsuits and we will pull out if we have to. we just won a $7 billion lawsuit which was very nice. >> do you expect a decision this week -- >> i would say by the end of the we can i would make a decision on that. right now there's a lot of things happening. >> on china, where are there no consequences for china -- >> how do you know there are no consequences? >> what are the consequences, mr. president? >> i wouldn't tell you. china would find out. why would i tell you? >> people are concerned that -- >> how do you know there are no consequences? you're going to find out.

i wouldn't tell you. you'd probably be the last person on earth i'd tell. go ahead. >> actually this is a question for mr. vice president. do you agree with the president's statement and his understanding of federalism that his power is total in the way he described it. is there anything you'd like to add in what he was discussing then? >> i support the president's leadership under the national emergency declaration that he signed. we're standing before you today for the first time in american history when all 50 states have issued emergency declarations and the territories. this is an unprecedented time in the life of the nation. unfortunately as the president's reflected and our health experts will continue to reflect because the american people have heeded the president's coronavirus guidelines for america because state governors have taken those

and implemented them even in states where there was not a significant outbreak and implemented additional measures as we provided them with data about cases and best practices, we're making real progress as a country. make no mistake about it -- well, make no mistake about it in the long history of this country the authority of the president of the united states during national emergencies is unquestionably plenary. you can look back through times of war and other national emergencies. and as and the president said we'll happily brief that. in the days ahead what the president has charged us to do is work with our health experts, we're going to bring together an extraordinary group of business leaders to counsel with the president. and working with the cdc we're going to produce new guidelines based upon the data for every state and territory in this nation. we're going to give them

guidance. and as the president's indicated we'll continue to respect the leadership and partnership that we forge with every governor in america but this is an unprecedented time. i have to tell you when you look at the fact despite the heart breaking loss of more than 22,000 americans -- when you look at the fact of what the health experts told us this could be, i think -- i only can feel a sense of gratitude to the american people, gratitude the extraordinary team that has counseled this president. the steps the president has taken, the policies governors have implemented all across america. we were discussing today at the task force when you look at the european union as a whole, they have nearly three times the mortality rate that the united states of america has today. and that is a tribute to our

extraordinary health care workers, their dedication, their tireless work. but it's also a tribute to the fact the american people put into practice the mitigation efforts that the president counseled the nation to do on the advice of our best scientist now more than a month ago. and our hospitals were not overwhelmed and are not overwhelmed at this hour. and i have to tell you standing here today, i couldn't be more proud to stand alongside this president and to be a part of this team that has served the american people during this challenging hour. and i just say to you to every american looking on as we see the numbers leveling and maybe even beginning to go down, i just encourage you to keep doing what you're doing because the sacrifices americans and american families have made through these mitigation efforts

you're saving american lives. >> did the states tell you -- you've been talking to the governors quite a bit. did those coalitions, did they tell you what they're going to be announcing before they announced it? >> governor phil murphy and the governor of connecticut expressed today they were going to be speaking and discussing on a regional basis what their recommendations would be. and we assured them today -- we assured them today on our conference call i think 48 governors that were with us today for the better part of an hour and a half, we told them what the president would be producing is direct today be produced through additional guidelines for the states, certified by the cdc that would inform those governors and local communities and mayors about the best way forward based on the unique circumstances that those states and those communities are facing. i think what's clear is the

american people have seen the experience in washington state where this really all began for us and in california, and now the extraordinary challenges in the greater new york city area including new jersey and connecticut, the challenges in new orleans and louisiana and detroit. still chicago, parts of houston. but they're also seeing that in each one of those cases, that the mitigation efforts are truly working. and so we'll work with those states. and in some cases it'll make perfect sense for them to work together on a regional basis, but the president -- the president will be -- i'm sorry, i didn't hear your question. >> can you tell us do they -- >> i didn't hear. >> and we are going to have their cooperation. they will cooperate perfectly. watch. >> and let me just refer to what the president said. we heard it again today in what

i think was our ninth conference call with governors is i think every american would be proud to see the partnership that this president has forged with governors across the country. i mean it is an extraordinary statement, and you'll see some data when the admiral gets up in a few moments bch but the flow of resources from around the world, i mean this president has directed us to ensure every state has what they need when they need it. and the spirit i heard again from republicans and democratic governors today was reflective of that partnership. and as we move forward to the president's goal of reopening america, we expect the same kind of partnership in the interest of the nation. >> the district of columbia argues they were short changed in the most recent funding bill

because they were treated as a territory instead of as a state. will that be made right in phase four? >> well, we're looking at that certainly. i heard that complaint, but the mayor seems to be very happy with everything we're doing. and she was on today saying very good things. okay, go ahead in the back. >> mr. president, you talked about this being the most difficult decision you're going to have to take about whether to reopen the economy. i wonder how much it weighs on your mind the thought that if there is a second wave you've reopened the economy, and you might have to shut things down again. >> it does. and i certainly hope that won't happen, but it does weigh on my mind. okay, in the back. go ahead. >> a question for one of my colleagues who wasn't able to beal here. china deployed an aircraft carrier in the south china sea this weekend amid claims by

chinese state media that covid has reduced military restraint in the region. what kind of responses are you thinking of, will you have a response to this action? >> china has their own difficulties. we have a relationship with china that we're not happy with certain things that happened over the last period of time as you know, and i've been very explicit on that. but we know all about that, and no, china is -- we've seen what they did. we've seen many other things they've done, both pro and con, and we'll be just fine. >> -- you said you're putting together the economic task force and you thought the recommendations were happening earlier than expected. do you mean to suggest it could be before may 1st you start recommending -- >> we're going to be putting out guidelines and recommendations fairly quickly in a few days. i'm not going to say, but

certain states are doing very well. certain parts of the country are doing very well. they're doing really very well, so we're going to be putting out recommendations and guidelines pretty soon. steve? >> will your guidelines, will they fit each area or uniform -- >> right now we have a very strong indication we know pretty much. we have some good ideas. we'll have videoconference or at least a conference call with a lot of very good people having to do with certain fields whether it's energy or whether it's entertainment and restaurants, et cetera, et cetera. we have to get people back into restaurants, whether it's deductibility or not. it was one of the hot businesses and they ended it a long time ago, many years ago. but we may need that to get people back into the

restaurants. >> michelle obama today got behind mail-in voting -- >> briefing and of course the president taking questions. good evening, i'm erin burnett. that was president trump giving the latest update on the pan demming. the president was very angry if you were watching that over the past hour and a half or so trying to rewrite history in response to coronavirus. coronavirus as of today has killed more than 23,000 americans. i want to get straight to our panel who has been standing by as we all have been watching this. john king, let me start with you. the president was extremely angry and lashing out, frankly, multiple times at various reporters. >> erin, the briefing was breathtaking from beginning to when we dropped out and at times bordered on dangerous. the president began with a propaganda video. he played it in the room, cherry picked moments. in this is a trump is awesome video at taxpayer expense played in the white house briefing -- look, the president has done

some things right. but the president bristles at the suggestion he's done anything wrong like saying there will not be a pandemic, anybody who needs a test will get a test, this going to go away in april. we had a trump is awesome propaganda video, and then in the conversation about reopening, this is where it gets dangerous. the president needs to read the constitution of the united states of america. in even in a national emergency the president's power is not as he said total. he said the president's authority is total. the president calls the shots. the president will tell the governors what to do, and he seemed to almost intimidate them by saying they need things from us, when i tell them to reopen the economy they will do it. the governors don't see it that way. they want to work with the administration in two weeks and they can work this out. the vice president had a more nuanced approach. some states are different, we'll work it out. but to have a president of the united states after he runs a propaganda video in the white house briefing room say my authority is total, the constitution says otherwise.

>> so my authority is total. the president of the united states calls the shots, he said it angrily. he said it curtly, jim acosta. and it does come right as -- the question came to him. you have groups of governors in the west, in the northeast, governors that represent, you know, 60% of the people in this country who have been known to be infected. more than 60% of the people who have been known to have died from this virus. so the president is obviously angry at that. >> that's right, erin. and i have to tell you that is the biggest meltdown i have ever seen from a president of the united states in my career. i don't think a reasonable person could watch what we just saw over the last hour and conclude that the president is in control. he sounds like he is out of control. and he was ranting and raving for the better part of the last hour during that news conference as john king was just saying he's claiming he has authorities that he doesn't have. the constitution does not give the president of the united

states total authority, and i thought it was very illuminating that vice president mike pence got up there at the podium and described the president's authority as plenary or absolute. that is not the case. that is a fact check false. but getting to your question, erin, i do think to some extent the president is realizing that the walls are closing in on him when it comes to managing this crisis. he ignored the severity of this crisis for a couple of months, and now he's trying to seize control over the situation as governors are going off on their own and coming up with their own plans. and one very important thing to keep in mind, erin, throughout all of this and that is one of the most trusted people in america right now, dr. anthony fauci despite the fact he had to fall on his sword a little bit during that press briefing he is talking to these governors individually. he's getting on the phone with these governors and help them

formulate these reopening plans optheir own. top health officials and governors are working around the president for precisely the reason we just saw unfold in front of our very eyes in the last hour, and that is the president doesn't like he's in control on multiple levels, erin. >> and, you know, of course as you point out dr. fauci did fall on the sword, obviously yesterday said to jake tapper had they started mitigation earlier, yes it bears to fact lives would have been saved. he made it clear today that when he and dr. birx first recommended to president trump that he start these mitigation factors he listened to it and went ahead with it. if there's blame to be put he shares some of that blame, it seems he was saying that. the president, though, there was one exchange he had with multiple -- but one particularly stood out to me with one cbs news reporter it was personal and denigrating and frankly shocking for a president who

often does go after people asking questions. >> still scenes of fairly small fights with the press instead of focusing with the virus. and that anti-media propaganda video is an example. he started this briefing with an anti-media propaganda video which is nothing short of disgraceful but shows us where he's coming from. he's focused on the past. he wasn't talking as much about the present or future. finally later in the briefing he eventually got around toi talkig about the government's response to the virus and what's happening now. but he was so focused on the past, erin, i found myself thinking of people in hospital wards who they don't want to talk about the past. they want to talk about right now. they need help right now. but the president is not showing empathy for those people. not showing compassion for the families that have lost loved ones, and trying to fight against the media because that works for him. cultural war fights work for him. he knows how to do those.

he's good at those. but i think we have to keep focusing on the questions he's not answering, about the lack of testing, lack of plan to get us out of this mess. he attacks the media instead, and i hope most people can see through it. it's been one month, erin, since he said i don't take any responsibility at all. and this was sort of a repeat of that. >> daniel dale, you've been going through and looking at the facts. what stands out to you i know his claim of absolute authority where governors have had right to control their states has got to be at the top of the list. >> that's number one. states in this area, in the area of public health have a long established power to deal with emergencies in their states. the federal government does have some power as well. but it's simply not true when it comes to emergencies this is the president's deal alone. the president also repeated his claim he banned travel from china and europe not through

restriction policies but actual bans. both contain exemptions. the president also claimed you're not even hearing about ventilators anymore because everyone's so happy. maryland republican governor hogan was on yesterday and said that's not accurate. everyone still has tru-mind s needs so it's not true that issue has gone away. fourth, erin, the president claimed joe biden apologized for having called him xenophobic in the past. >> you bring up the china ban. i want to scuyou about this. when the president recommended as best as he could when he wanted to stop flights from china, that order came on january 31st. it was to take effect on february 2nd. and i want to make two points with that. first is we didn't then have mitigation efforts until mid-march. that would mean if the president

like he was saying saw this when no one else saw it, when dr. fauci wasn't recommending those moves and the w.h.o. wasn't recommending those moves, but he alone saw what a disaster was going to be so he ordered that flight ban, if that was the case he would have not only done the mitigation sooner presumably, right, but one would presume tests would have been fired up and ppe would have been ordered and check-ins with governors on what they needed and ventilators. but none of that happened. meaning his claim this ban on china flights he suggested, you know, indicated, you know, his clairvoyance on this, it just doesn't add up. >> the other pieces don't add up. again, the president was roundly criticized. one of the reasons he was so angry today is o because he believes he did the right thing with the china ban. and it wasn't a total ban, but it was severe restrictions on travel from china and the president believes and the public experts now agree that it likely helped the spread of the disease in the united states. and he bristles i did that, give

me credit for that, stop analyzing everything i did. dr. fauci got up and he fell on his sword trying to say there was a debate among public health officials, do you take such a drastic step when the case numbers were so low. the president did though at that moment when the debate was starting to boil, put the vice president in charge, shake-up the task force, put the vice president in charge, silence the people we viewed as alarmist saying this is going to spread and spread fast and consolidated the messaging of the group. that is a simple fact. but to your other point which is more critical, at the end of the obama administration, let's say the shelves were empty. the obama administration dispute that. they do say they had some disasters late in their tenure, and they had to sequester the budget act. he's been president for 38 months at that point, number one. number two he always says obama

didn't leave him a good test. the novel coronavirus popped up in china in 2019. president obama was gone, long gone. and the administration, their first test was bad and they simply had a lot of problems here. we would give them some grace if they say we were having a lot of problems here, this is new and it's difficult. the president keeps saying we have there the testing they need. they just announced today to get 750 hoar from south korea. if we had all the testing we need, why are we buying them from another country? >> you also again to this key point the president is making and this whole propaganda video i ban flights from china, i got it right, not only of course does his actions after that show that to be untrue, but his words after that show that to be untrue. here he is on february 10th, february 25th and february 26th. so, again, these are all weeks

and then up to month after this ban on china flights which he said was a sign of his clairvoyance, here's what he was saying about coronavirus. >> looks like by april, you know, in theory when it gets a little warmer it miraculously goes away. you may ask about the coronavirus, is very well under control in our country. we have it so well under control. we really have done a very good job. >> so that's what he was saying day after day after day, week after week after week. >> that's right, erin. and, you know, the president was trying to argue his way out of the fauci controversy by saying, well, you know, when dr. fauci was telling us to start social mitigation that's when we started it. but that totally avoids the point you're making, erin. and that is for the better part of a month, a month and a half, the president was down-playing the severity of this virus. he was describing it as

something like the seasonal flu, when it's not. he was saying it would go away like a miracle. it has not gone away. he was saying it would go away in april when it got warmer outside. that has not been the case as well. he's also said his administration has everything under control. as john king was saying a few moments ago, he's been in office for 38 months now. he's had plenty of time to restock the shelves. and we should point out numerous fact checking organizations have pointed out that is just false. when the president says i inherited an empty shelf, empty cupboards, that is false. that's a flat out lie he repeats over and over again, and it goes to the problem he's having. he's trying to talk his way out of a mess he created himself over the past 45 to 60 days both me and members of the conservative media were in this echo cham bar saying to one another the public did not have to worry about this when clearly

his own administration should have been preparing for the pandemic that unfolded, perhaps not to the severity we're seeing right now, but obviously they had time to get ready, the president had time to get the public ready. remember there were red states very late to issue their own stay at home orders, stay at home guidance. that's because in part they were listening to the president, listening to the man they put above almost everything else in politics these days, arguably above everything else in politics these days, and it cost the american people precious time. and i don't think there's any way to avoid that. the president is trying to delete days and days of footage that just are never going to go away. and the public is going to be reminded of this from here until the end of the year. erin, part of the problem i think is the president has a temperament issue, and you and i have seen this since the 2016 campaign. he became the chaos president, but what the american people want right now and they're not getting is a coronavirus

president, and a chaos president just isn't fitting the bill. >> all right, thank you all very much. we do now have calling in on the phone here the governor of new york, andrew cuomo. and i wanted to give you a chance, governor, to respond. i saw your press conference today with several other governors as you're trying to coordinate your plan for reopening and dealing with the coronavirus. don't know if you just heard everything the president said but there were a couple of moments he took this on, he specifically said the president of the united states calls the shots, and he has total authority to decide over new york or any other state. do you agree? >> well, i don't agree, erin. thank you for having me, by the way. i don't agree with the president's legal analysis. the president doesn't have total authority. we have a constitution. we don't have a king. we have an elected president. that's what our founding fathers did when they wrote the constitution. and the constitution clearly says the powers that are not

specifically listed for the federal government are reserve tod ed to the states. and the balance between federal and state authority was central to the constitution, it's one of the great balances of power. and the constitution has served his nation very well for a long time. again, they didn't want a king otherwise we would have have had king george washington. we didn't. we had president george washington elected by the people. having said that, the president also said that the cdc was going to issue guidelines. now, guide lines are not mandates. guidelines are what they did on closing down the economy. remember the federal government did not close down the economy. the president's right. he did a travel ban with china. that was not closing down the economy. closing down the economy is what the states did at different times in different ways. the cdc issued guidelines, most states well beyond the cdc

guidelines and guidelines are just guidelines. guidelines are do this if you like. but it's not a coordinated, national approach and it's clearly not the federal government enacting it. so you're either doing a federal takeover or you're doing guidelines which the states can follow if they want to follow. he seems to be saying both so i don't really know -- >> so when the vice president said -- because they asked him do you believe this holds up constitutionally, right, the president's point that only he -- he and only he can call the shots for the states, pence said that, yes, he believes that's true because of this national emergency declaration situation we're under. does that hold any water with you, governor cuomo? >> legally, no. you don't become king because there's a national emergency. now, you could argue that a federal government has enhanced power because of a federal emergency, but again, erin, that's not what they did.

the tough decisions were the closing down of the economy, the sort of reopening is an artful science based process. but the closing down, which is where the president could have exercised this theory of total control, he didn't do it. he left it all to the states, i think frankly if we had a clear or national direction earlier on, we probably would have had a more orderly shutdown. but, no, even in a federal emergency it doesn't aggregate the constitution, and that's what you'd have to say here. the constitution of the united states goes out the window because we have a federal emergency. and that is not -- it's not the law of the land, period. >> so what are you prepared to do if he comes out with -- and, you know, he refused to give a date today, but a much more

aggressive opening. i know today at your press conference you laid out, for example, how you wanted to work with nearby states one wanted to open bars and the others doesn't, but if the president of the united states comes out and lays out a plan you think is not responsible and not right for new york, would you tell new yorkers to ignore what he's saying and overrule it and say, listen to me as a governor this is what we will do? >> if they came out with if, a hypothetical -- if the president came out with a plan that i believe was irresponsible and could jeopardize the public health of the people of the state of new york i would oppose it legally, period. the coalition we put together is not all democrats. i know they -- i know the washington way is to quiet -- >> he just said that. >> that's not true. in the state of massachusetts last time i checked they have a great governor in massachusetts, governor baker who happens to be a republican. so it's not partisan.

it's not politics. we've all stayed away from that. the president should stay away from that. don't start that divisiveness with the partisanship. that would do himself a disservice. right, he likes to say i work with democratic governors, republican governors. keep it there and don't get partisan. and, look, the governors would like nothing more than engaged federal government where we know what the federal government does and what the states do. and then, by the way, the federal government has to do its role, too. and on this issue of testing i'm telling you that's going to become a major issue. the states do not have the capacity to do rarj scale tests. you can't get large scale diagnostic tests, and that's going to be key to any reopening plan. >> so he also said, you know, that he sent the ship to new

york harbor and he said he did everything with the javits center. his words i believe were the javists center is empty. that's not quite true, but what's your response to him, it's pretty clear he's saying you ask for things you do not need. >> facts matter. i i don't think the president should be defensive on this. the truth is the cdc's original estimate had -- was in the millions of people infected, the cdc. that's him. the white house coronavirus task force said in the millions of people. that's him. that did not come to be. but as a governor you prepare for the worst, hope for the best. if you read the cdc guidelines, if you read the white house coronavirus task force in the

state of new york you could need over 100,000 beds. those were also the projections of the organization funded by gates and cornel university and columbia university and mackenzie. they were all projecting in the state of new york up to 140,000 beds needed. we only have 50,000 beds. so, yes, to prepare for the numbers that both the federal government and the experts said it could be, we needed additional beds. and the president is also right that the army corps of engineers did a great job in building emergency facilities. and i did call him and ask him for expedited assistance with the carmy corps of engineers, and he did provide it. he shouldn't be defensive about that. and the government initiatives and paolicies did reduce the number of people infected,

caveat, so far. we just have to make sure we don't go backwards. so he's right there, and he did work cooperatively with this state and other states, and that's why i don't understand why you would pivot at this point to this aggressive, hostile suggestion of a total authority of the federal government and abandon the partnership cooperation he started by praising. >> governor cuomo, i appreciate your time. good to talk to you again. >> thanks for having me, erin. >> all right, thank you, governor. i want to go now straight to dr. sanjay gupta. sanjay, when you hear all this i guess let's start with the president says he was right on everything. he always points to that china ban of course he did do but obviously he followed up with nothing that would indicate he did that because he was worried about a pandemic killing hundreds of thousands of americans. nothing he did in a month and a half after that seemed to back

that up at all. when he says he was early on anything ahead of, you know, the health officials, do you agree? >> well, no. i think the buying of time -- i think one of the reporters asked that question. i think the idea of the travel ban i think made a lot of sense. and i think it was probably a tough decision at that time. the idea was never this virus was not going to come to the united states. we knew it was going to come. it's a virus. it's going to travel across borders, and we knew that was going to happen. the question was as governor cuomo was saying, there were projections at that point how many hospital beds, how many ventilators, how many icu beds would be necessary. let me show you a time line i put together over the weekend to make this point. and as you look at this time line one thing to keep in mind is that as more information is gathered about this virus in terms of how it's behaving, it does continue to raise additional levels of concerns.

on january 7th they confirm there's a novel coronavirus. that's a concern because this is a virus that hasn't been seen in human beings. we don't know how it's going to behabe. if you go through that calendar you realize january 31st you realize we now have evidence of human to human transmission in the united states. that's a significant point there. if you have human to human transmission, that has raised the level of concern, right? and if you go a couple of weeks after that, erin, you find you have evidence for sure of asymptomatic spread in the united states. why do i present it like that? because it's not to say from the very beginning it was the same level of concern from a week later, two weeks later. as you got information the level of concern went up. keep in mind, erin, that sars was also a novel coronavirus at that time, 2003. and i think a lot of people were

asking is this going to be more like sars which ultimately 8,000 people in the entire world and 800 people died in the entire world. was it going to be like h1n1, we didn't know was the point. once you found there was human to human transmission, once you found there was asymptomatic transmission i think what surprised me is that things were done more aggressively at that point. but as more information came in, i think as we've talked about, erin, for a couple of months now on this program why are we talking about ventilators now, why aren't we talking about icu beds not in the middle of march but even in february? >> in the context of this and obviously now this big debate between the president and governors. the governors obviously taking charge today, groups on the west coast, on the east coast in what

they're going to do, how they're going to respond and when they're going to reopen. i know we made the point models are only as good as the data that goes into them. their calculations are if you lift the stay at home order there right now 95% of the county will get infected. and we can all imagine how gruesome and horrific that would be. this is the crucial follow point, if the guidelines stay in effect still 30% of people will be affected. stronger measures could drop that number to 5%. the reason i raise this is want to get your point of view on it the number of people we've seen worldwide all except in spain and italy, and that is with the mitigation we've been doing so far. they're saying if we continue to do the mitigation we've been doing so far, you could still end up with 30% of the people infected just by the amount of commerce and interaction happening right now. that is pretty stunning and frankly incredibly frightening.

>> it is frightening, and it's a reminder, erin, that no matter what this is still a very contagious virus. the physiology, the pathology of the virus, that doesn't change based on these social distancing stay at home measures. the stay at home measures influence how easily the virus can spread from person to person because we're simply not in close proximity. someone said to me over the weekend, erin, it looks like the risk now to any given individual in the united states is pretty low in contracting this and getting sick from it. that's true because we have these measures in place, erin. what's we relax these measures, and i don't say this in any way to frighten people, but once we relax these measures there will be people who become infected who would not otherwise get

infected. until we have a vaccine we can't promise people aren't going to get sick. at some point there's going to be this inflection point. okay, we are willing to tolerate a certain number of illnesses and infections in order to reopen the economy. if you look at the university of washington their models they would say that's 0.03%. that means 90 people a day will still be dying of this virus at the time as the nation would start to reopen. this is sort of the situation that we're in. and as you mentioned at the beginning there's still models. some are useful and some are instructive like this one. >> it certainly makes us think long and hard what life will be like here perhaps a very extended period of time, when we talk about normal and what normal means. sanjay, thank you very much. and also in tonight's briefing we mentioned dr. anthony fauci was there, and he did walk back remarks he made here on cnn.

what he said is more could have been done in february to prevent the spread of coronavirus. and what he told our jake tapper, quote, there was a lot of push back at the time. fauci admitted had they put these mitigation efforts into effect weeks earlier many lives would have been saved. well, tonight at the briefing with the president fauci clarified his remarks. here's what he said. >> that was the wrong choice of words. wh you know what it was when people discuss not necessarily in front of the president, when people discuss this is maybe going to have a harmful effect on this or that, so it was a poor choice of words. >> are you doing this voluntarily or did the president -- >> everything i do is voluntarily, please. don't even imply that. >> out front now, dr. johnathan rhiner. he's currently the director of the cardiac catheter organization project at george washington university hospital. what's your reaction to dr.

fauci, you know, walking back, clarifying those remarks. i interpret it as him saying, yeah, there were obviously mistakes made. they wish they'd done it earlier, but he made it clear that finger should be pointed at multiple people. he didn't it point it at the president directly. >> well, dr. fauci yesterday spoke the truth. he when asked whether earlier mitigation efforts would have resulted in more lives saved he responded the only way he could which was to say, sure, if we had closed down elements of our economy and got people to social distance sooner, the virus would have not spread as widely, so that's absolutely true. but the broader truth is that multiple mistakes were made very early on, and i put them really into three categories. number one, whatever time we gained from the china ban was wasted in our very, very slow efforts to widely test. from the first patient until the

20th -- the 20,000th test took almost two months. so it took too long to test. number two, and number three, we didn't have any plan to protect the public, in terms of to really sit people at home, or to get them to wear masks when they're out in public. there were multiple mistakes made all along the way. the overwhelming effect is now 23,000 deaths in the united states. >> so asp dr. fauci made that comment on cnn yesterday, president trump then retweet add post. in the post he retweeted, you can see the #firefauci. the president was asked about that tonight. here's what he said. >> i retweeted somebody. i don't know. they said fire -- it doesn't matter. >> did you notice that? >> i notice everything. >> you retweeted it even though

it said time to fire fauci. >> no, all that is is an opinion. look, the fact he would retweet something like that, this is supposed to be the person running his entire response is appalling, but many of his allying, even rep congressmen have begun attacking fauci. how dangerous is it that the president has opened the door to allow people to doubt fauci, which he knew perfectly well he was doing something when he retweeted something that said "fire fauci." >> it's super dangerous. the president needs advisers who are willing to tell him what he does not want to hear. tony fauci is that person. he's willing to tell the president what he doesn't want to hear. that's what every leaders should get, someone who speaks truth to power. >> the white house tells us trump has calling his friends

and say why isn't fauci saying nice things about me? ivan in this position before, because you were advising a white house for many years, but we've seen how this president works, right? things start like this, and then he says the person is fine, and the person's position becoming tenuous, insecure and the person ends up getting kicked out. you heard how fauci said i wasn't put this up by somebody. he did seem genuinely angry about that. how hard is his position right now? >> it's really hard. the best thing that an adviser like dr. fauci or anyone else who you trying to give particularly medical advice to the president can do is to give unvarnished advice, not to tell them what they want to hear. years ago i told the vice president at the time that if i ever thought he was somehow unfit or incapable of performing his duties, he wouldn't have to

ask me, i would tell him. the president should want people around him who are willing to do that, willing to tell them what they might not want to hear. . >> dr. reiner, thank you very much, sir. >> my pleasure. all right. i want to go now to boston, where cases of coronavirus have doubled in just the past week. that is according to the city's mayor who are slamming the president's talk of reopening the country on may 1st. mayor, tonight the president demured if when asked if he was standing by that specific date. obviously you have spoke out with strong words on this. why do you think it's completely irresponsible to even begin talking about opening the economy in just a couple weeks? >> because the numbers don't reflect that. if we shut the cut down in february, we probably would be in a different position, and now

we're talking about the economy running again, but if we do that, there's a potential second surge and second curve we have to worry about. i get concerned we're taking attention off of what is in front of us, and we have a surge in the northeast part of the country and over on the west coast, and in the middle of the country, so far they haven't seen it that direct, but these are very dangerous conversations to be head when we don't have medical equipment, gowns, masks, all that we need to get to our first responders, doctors and nurses and nursing homes throughout the country. >> when you hear that study out of los angeles county, when they say if we continue doing what we are doing right now -- and obviously they're until a very similar order in los angeles and california, that you could still have 30% of the population exposed. any now reasonable comparisons to other countries would indicate that the number in the united states is a fraction of

that. much, much -- way below that. that would imply a long period of time until these sorts of measures and imply a lot of death what have you seen? >> i think one he hit the curve, and we start to see it going down a bit. we can make -- what par part do we bring back, that they are more vulnerable to the virus, and we have to think about how do we bring those folks back. i don't want to give certainly in boston i don't want to give anyone that well le up in mid may or even the -- maybe june.

i think we have to be very careful to keep people safe, keep people alive, and keep people from getting exposed to the coronavirus. a friend of mine just texted me a few minutes ago, talking about the economy needs to start soon, because we weren't build that way. i don't disagree, but my question is, we're choosing life over the economy. if we stay ahead of it and we're able to put the procedures in place, maybe we can have this conversation in a few weeks, but right now the governors and mayors in country should be focused to keep people safe and keep people alive. you have a republican governor in your state. the president referenced this group of states in the northeast, you know, and on the west coast, as a bunch of democrats, but are you completely in lock step with your governor? >> we might have some

disagreements behind the scenes on how to do it, but it's not a fight. it's just how to handle the situation. we have to be in lockstep here. you can't have space between you, because everyone's life is at stake here. again, i wouldn't say we would have disagreements as all, but i think it's important to support once another, and i will support the state, and the state should support us as well. mayor walsh, good to talk with you again, sir. >> thank you. also tonight the world's biggest pork processor working of severe, perhaps disastrous repercussions after it closed a plant that produces nearly 130 million servings of food a week. that's due to a coronavirus. dianne gallagher is out front. >> reporter: roughly 5% of pork

production happens here at the smithfield plant at sioux falls, south dakota. the state's governor recommended it shut down this weekend after nearly 250 of its workers tested positive for the virus. in a sobering statement, the companially ceo pointing out that large plants shutting down are, quote, pushing our country perilously close to the edge in terms of our meat supply. it is impossible to keep our grocery stores stocked if our plants are not running. experts caution there's not an emergency yet, but -- >> the question is whether or not you'll have more and more plants with sick workers and basically the decision to shut down those production facilities. >> still it's not just south dakota. there's a possible cluster in tennessee, and in colorado a plant in greeley is temporarily closed after two workers died from the virus, and at least 50 tested positive for coronavirus, according to the union. in iowa, and in pennsylvania, where multiple meat packing plants have shut down due to the

pandemic. >> our members members are right there on the front lines. >> wendell young, whose union represents more than 8,000 food processing workers says keeping the food chain going is important, but the people actually doing it need protection. that there was a difference between being essential and sacrificial. >> if they have the right to open, run them responsibly. they have the right to make sure the people in those buildings are safe, so when they go home to their families, they keep the community safe. in every employees, now medical experts say that while the increase in sick plant workers could disrupt the food supply chain, it isn't making the food you eat unsafe. >> you will not catch this from your food products. again, cooking foods, washing them will minimize that risk dramatically.

>> reporter: look, this is scary to hear, but the key according to every expert is not to panic when it comes to consumers. don't go to the grocery store and hoard auld meat in your freezer. all that will do is accelerate the problems. they're simply trying to sound the alarm before it's too late. >> thanks, diane, and thanks for all of you for joining us. anderson continues the coverage now. good evening, a day that began with the director of the cdc expressing cautious hope, the coronavirus outbreak, well, it ended in a very different play, one that revolves around the president, with more than 23,000 people in this country now dead and many hundreds still dying every single day. we certainly focus on the hope for the ways