so the president traveled to kenosha, a city torn over the police shooting of a plaqblack and never once mentioned that man, jacob blake, by name. the president travels around america, a nation torn by a pandemic, and lately, never mentions it, at all. for the president, it's like the voldemort of realities. john berman in for anderson. and there is breaking news on just that front. a major new sign on how soon a vaccine might be available. but given the president's track record on the virus, there is also reason to wonder if the timing of a vaccine rollout might have more to do with electoral politics, than sound, public health. late, new details on that, in just a moment. first, though, the president's effort, as in kenosha, to talk about anything but the matter, at hand. more than 185,000 lives, lost, to the pandemic.

the one that shall not be named. the case count is, at best, plateauing at a shockingly high level. and at worst, it is spiking in yet another, new region. this time, the midwest. here is the governor of iowa, one of the president's staunchest supporters, by the way, doing what the president, apparently, could not. >> as you may have seen, in the news headlines in recent days, iowa had the highest rate of increase in covid-19 cases, nationally, last week. and the fifth highest positivity rate increase in the country. growth of new cases has accelerated, especially as social activity among young adults and -- and on college campuses. >> now, she won't issue a mask mandate but at least she admits the positivity rate around the university of iowa has tripled in the last three weeks, and is now at a staggering 29.7%. that is what iowa and other states, mainly in the midwest, are now facing. nationwide, more than a thousand

new deaths reported yesterday, and more than 40,000 new cases. and though, both figures are declining, somewhat, the outbreak appears to be plateauing at nearly twice the level it did back around memorial day. so, at a moment when, just as back then, things could go in either direction. with schools reopening and another holiday weekend approaching. the president could be telling americans to keep up the mask wearing and social distancing. for that matter, he could actually be doing those things, himself. but as you can see, from his trip to north carolina today, he's not. not doing and not talking. so what is he talking about? well, for starters, about the election. the 2016 election. >> i think i did win the popular vote, in a true sense. i think there was tremendous cheating in california. >> all right. he didn't and there wasn't. that's from a taped interview which aired on fox last night. there's also this smear of his current opponent. >> he's on some kind of an enhancement, in my opinion, and i say we should both. i should take a drug test.

so should he. because we don't want to have a situation where a guy is taking some kind of -- >> like athletes? >> no. no. i'll take one. he'll take one. we should both take a drug test. >> so much for practice being the way to get to carnegie hill. now, we know, it's drugs. look. keeping them honest. what the president of the united states said there is pure bs. what's even worse, it has nothing to do with the reality facing tens of millions of parents, wondering how to safely educate their children. or the millions now looking for jobs or the millions who knew and loved 185,000 people who have lost their lives, in the last six months. what he is saying and doing has nothing to do with the pandemic. the one that shall not be named. now, to be fair, he did talk about it a tiny bit on fox, the other night. but that was only to lie about it. >> by the way, i saw a statistic come out the other day.

talking about only 6% of the people actually died from covid, which is very interest -- that they died -- >> well, they had comorbidities. but the covid might, ultimately, have been the key morbidity to hit them. >> but it's an interesting statistic. >> mr. president, you still having fun? >> he answered, quote, i'm having a good time. as for his theory that most k e coronavirus deaths weren't really coronavirus deaths, the cdc debunked that today. his own cdc. dr. anthony fauci debunked it yesterday. the 185,000 people who died from coronavirus died from coronavirus. a pandemic that does have a name. so this is just part of the backdrop to the breaking news, tonight, that the cdc has told state public health officials to prepare to distribute a vaccine as early as the end of next month. it has also sent out planning documents offering details on distribution and who should get inoculated, first. putting emphasis on healthcare professionals, essential

workers, and long-term care residents and staff. and in the past week, dr. anthony fauci and fda head steven hahn have said certain groups may get a vaccine before those trials are complete, if the data is overwhelmingly positive. now, our next guest has her doubts. saski is an epidemiologist. professor, we appreciate you being with us. what do you make of this new guidance and the timeline that it implies? >> it's extremely concerning. i think it's very premature. the concern is that we're going to be rolling out vaccines to healthcare workers very, very early on, in phase three, well before we have the data to support it. >> so, you say it's hard to see this as anything other than a pre-election vaccine push. so you're concerned it's politicized. what do you mean? >> it's hard not to see that. if the vaccines are supposed to be pushed out november 1st and the election is november 3rd. it's very concerning that,

suddenly, we're pushing through very, many safety protocols for vaccines for safety, which could have very serious ramifications. and an effort for president trump to push this election piece, which is very concerning from a public-health standpoint, but also a trust and science standpoint. >> have said that a vaccine may be available for certain groups before clinical trials have been completed, if -- if the data, overwhelmingly, indicates it's safe and effective. what about that? what about if the data says this is overwhelmingly safe and effective? would it be worth trying to get it to certain people, earlier? >> i think the biggest piece is that overwhelmingly effective and safe notion. and the truth is that many of these haven't even hit phase three until late july. so that means 30,000 people. in many cases, you have to have two vaccines. so how are you really enrolling that many people and collecting enough data, at that point, to

roll this out safely and say it is okay for healthcare workers? because the truth is, you know, we don't want to be pushing this and we're just not there, yet. a lot of this phase three takes years in the making. and even if we do have that overwhelmingly good data, which we simply don't have right now, that would be an entirely different ball game. and frankly, we're just not seeing that from a tempor temporal standpoint. >> in your mind, what needs to happen? >> i think we need to have, again, as dr. fauci mentioned, overwhelmingly positive data. not just that it's efficacious. you know, we need to make sure it's working 50% of the time. that it's really protecting 50% of those vaccinated. but also, that we're not having any negative safety outcomes or negative vaccine events. because right now, in the u.s., we do unfortunate sli haly have of vaccine hesitancy. and the last thing we want to do is further drive that vaccine hesitancy. >> professor saskia, we

appreciate you for being with us. thanks for joining us. joining us now, cnn chief medical correspondent, dr. sanjay gupta. also, william haseltine, former harvard professor, and now prolific author of books including "a family guide to covid." so, sanjay, you just heard the professor. what do you make of the guidance from the cdc? and are you concerned that this has the whiff of political interference? >> well, i mean, you know, we have to take these things in context. there's been, you know, the fda with this whole hydroxychloroquine thing where they issued this eua for that, with very little evidence. i mean, that i think is something that has made people question some of this decision-making. the same sort of thing with the convalescent plasma. the data was exaggerated around that eua. so, what i would say is, we've got to be very vigilant about this -- this vaccine. the idea that places are getting prepared. i mean, that makes sense. i mean, you -- you do want to be prepared. some of these vaccines may need

to be stored at certain temperatures. all of that. but that shouldn't be the signal that the vaccine is ready to go. and also, as we have talked about, john, a vaccine should have a different bar than -- than a therapeutic medicine for somebody who's, you know, sick in a hospital, versus a vaccine given to healthy people has to have a higher bar. and if you look at the language, carefully, around why a -- an authorization would occur, it's usually because there is no viable alternative. right? well, i hate to say it. i know people don't like to hear this. but the alternative to a vaccine could be that, you know, we wear masks and distance longer. give us enough time to actually make sure this thing's really nailed down. >> so, professor haseltine, your take. how smart is it for the government, perhaps, to rush a vaccine, potentially before the election, to first responders, healthcare workers, at-risk populations, before phase three trials are done? >> it's a very unwise move. what they are hoping, and i've

read the documents pretty carefully, they are hoping that there's a safety monitoring board that will look at the data, in the middle of the testing process, and determine that it's really worked well. that is a pretty tough determination. data safety monitoring boards almost never give a green light, at that stage. and that's what they would have to do. i think the previous speakers discussed how difficult that would be. this is a political hail mary, in my view. it's sort of like a buzzer beater. it's a desperate move, by an administration that has failed to control this epidemic using tools that we know work. that's the problem. we have an enormous epidemic that we needn't have had, because of the failures. and they are hoping to redeem this, at the very last minute, with a hail mary. i actually watched doug flutey

with his hail mary. sometimes, they work. we should all hope that they work. but you can't count on it in a football game, a basketball game, and you certainly can't count on it playing with people's lives. >> yeah. beating miami is one thing. beating a pandemic is something else. sanjay, you heard dr. fauci and we've heard from stephen hahn, also, say that they are in favor of it, if the data is overwhelming. so what data? how much data? will we see the data? what do we know of what the science will actually show? and how much will be revealed? >> well, i -- you know, as dr. haseltine was saying, this data safety monitoring board. they -- they don't actually authorize this -- this -- an emergency-use authorization. but they do look at the data, first. the scientific data. and, you know, could it be that they say that people are getting the first dose because it's going to be two doses, right? if they get the first dose and

it's just so overwhelmingly favorable that they say, hey, look, we're sending this, now, to the fda. and they are going to make the decision about eua or not. that -- that would be the sort of data that we're talking about here. but it -- it just -- that -- that's going to take time. i mean, that takes time. and that -- that board is a independent board. but, you know, they have to be able to have the time to look at this data. probably, have to look at the two doses that are given. and then, follow these patients along for some time to see if this is effective and to see if it's safe. so the basic thing they're trying to find scientifically is the same. but you need the time. the passage of time is important to actually be able to evaluate that data. >> so, professor haseltine, i want to play what the president has said about a vaccine timeline, in recent months. let's listen. >> i'm rushing it. i am. i'm pushing everybody. if you had another president, other than me, you wouldn't be talking vaccines for two years. >> the earliest we could see that. a vaccine.

>> sooner than the end of the year. could be much sooner. >> sooner than november 3rd? >> oh, i think -- i think, in some cases, yeah, it's possible before. but right around that time. >> we're balancing speed and safety, and we're on pace to have a vaccine available this year. maybe, far in advance of the end of the year. >> we'll, likely, have a therapeutic and/or vaccine solution, long before the end of the year. >> we are delivering lifesaving therapies, and will produce a vaccine before the end of the year. or, maybe, even sooner. >> so the president's flat out stating or, at least implying, a vaccine might be available before the end of the year. is it even possible, professor haseltine? >> it is extremely difficult. you know, we, in science, learn to say nothing is impossible. but we can say things are extremely difficult and highly

improbable. and that is the case, here. i can tell you one thing, for sure. in the amount of time that we have, between now and the end of the year, we are not going to know how effective this vaccine can be. and we're certainly not going to know if it's safe because we certainly won't have more than six months or a year. usually, you need more than a year to see if a vaccine is safe. people have asked me the question. doctor, would you take this vaccine in november? and my answer is absolutely not. i will not be convinced that it's either effective or safe, no matter what a data safety monitoring board saiys or no matter what the fda says, at this point. they've said two things. one of which is not safe has already had emergency-use authorization. i think they've seriously compromised their credibility, to the detriment of the nation's

health. >> talk more about that, sanjay. because that's something you're focused on. whether it be hydroxychloroquine or convalescent plasma, the fda commissioner's had to admit that he, you know, mangled the data, at best. lied about it, at worst. how can these agencies be trusted now? >> i know. this is really -- i mean, this is just really disappointing. i mean, and i think, you know, viewers, people who are watching, they must just have a lot of confusion, lot of whiplash over this because, usually, you know, not always but, usually, the scientific agencies do speak with a unified voice. and it's been back and forth. i mean, you know, those two examples of hydroxy and convalescent plasma are -- aare, i think, important to look at. we can't look at these things in isolation, anymore. we have to see what the track history has been around this pandemic with this fda. i am curious, though. i mean, you know, dr. haseltine, i am curious, if this -- these things had not happened, the hydroxychloroquine and the -- and the convalescent plasma decisions.

the way they went. would you, then, consider taking a vaccine in november if the fda approved it? >> no, i wouldn't. i wouldn't simply because there's not enough time. also, the two vaccines that appear to be the ones that are moving forward fastest have a couple of big question marks. they are using technologies that have never been used before. that's not, necessarily, bad. but it's not good. the second thing is there are very peculiar requirements. one requires a really deep freeze, like minus 70 degrees or more to keep it stable. the other one, minus 20 degrees. i have talked to a lot of pharmacies. friends of mine run big pharmacy chains. they don't even have those facilities. so there are big questions of how you would roll this out. not only that. when you actually look at the wording of who is going to be eligible to get these vaccines, there's a lot of big questions there. who is essential to the economy? is it a billionaire?

or is it a guy who keeps the -- the sewage running? who is essential? i don't know who's going to make that decision. but they are going to make those decisions. so there are a lot of questions about what's going to happen, how it's going to happen, and exactly what it is they're going to push forward and on what basic they'll do it. >> sanjay, turnabout is fair game here. what would it take for you to be comfortable in november to take this? >> i -- i -- i -- yeah. no, i agree with this. but i look at it like this. i mean, you know, the idea of what is the alternative? people are balancing this against getting the country up and running again. and what i would say is that, you know, there are places around the world that are, you know, have returned to some sense of normalcy again, without a vaccine obviously. they don't have a vaccine. so the idea that we could wait, make sure this is really nailed down, like i said. that it's, you know, safe, effective, and that we have the data to show that. and in the meantime, we just --

we do have to adopt these public-health practices. it doesn't mean that we have to be shut down. but i think that's the tradeoff. and i think that's going to increasingly become the discussion point, john, around this. do we want to rush it because we just simply can't wear masks and physically distance? i just don't think that's a good idea. >> sanjay, professor haseltine, thanks, both, for being with us. i appreciate it. >> welcome. thank you. >> thank you. >> next, attorney general barr making news on two fronts. with the allegation he's making about jacob blake being armed. and the evidence, or lack of it, he provided. we'll show you that and get a live report from kenosha on mr. blake's condition. also, what the attorney general had to say and what he didn't say about the president's conspiracy theory about thugs on a plane. i have an idea for a trade.

oh yeah, you going to place it? not until i'm sure. why don't you call td ameritrade for a strategy gut check? what's that? you run it by an expert, you talk about the risk and potential profit and loss. could've used that before i hired my interior decorator. voila!

maybe a couple throw pillows would help. get a strategy gut check from our trade desk. ♪ ♪ you know limu,g after all these years it's the ones that got away that haunt me the most. [ squawks ] 'cause you're not like everybody else. that's why liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. what? oh, i said... uh, this is my floor. nooo! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ look at that. rakuten's app is super helpful, i open the app, find the store i want to use, start buying and it gets me tons of cash back. i'm an on the go kind of rakuten user for sure. i love the rakuten app, it has all my favorite stores at the top. i use rakuten for almost everything i buy.

i just got paid to shop. my favorite thing about rakuten is just getting money back in the mail. i mean, who wouldn't want cash back. you should sign up using my referral code because then we both get money. shop. get cash back. repeat. sign up today and get cash back with rakuten. breaking news. attorney general william barr claimed tonight, without citing specific evidence, that jacob blake was armed when a kenosha police officer shot him seven times. barr made the assertion while comparing the incident to the death of george floyd in an interview with wolf blitzer, earlier this evening. >> floyd was already subdued, incapacitated, in handcuffs, and was not armed. in the -- in the jacob case, he was in the midst of committing a felony, and he was armed. so that's a big difference. >> his family says he wasn't armed. >> well -- >> there may have been a knife in the car. but he wasn't armed, when he was

shot. that's what his family and his lawyer said. >> so barr added, by the way, that he did not believe there was systemic racism in america's justice system. cnn's sara sidner is in kenosha tonight to bring us up to date on the ongoing investigation. sara, you just spoke to the blake family. what's their reaction to the assertion from the attorney general? >> we spoke -- yeah, john, we spoke to justin blake, who is the uncle of jacob blake. and also, jacob blake's father, it is his brother. and he said, look, he feels that barr is misinformed. and he says that there are definitely two justice systems. and he points to what happened here. he talked about that all you have to do is sort of look at the videos that came from here. the 17-year-old, who was -- is accused of killing two people in the streets. he says, look, he is a 17-year-old, white teenager, who had a huge, long gun, after the shooting. after those shots went off, the second time, he was able to walk right past several police vehicles.

and make his way all the way home, which was in illinois. so he was able to go home, from -- from one state, to the next, and wasn't even stopped. and he says you juxtapose that, with seeing his nephew, jacob blake, shot in the back by officers. and he says, look. if he can't see two justice systems, then he is blind to what is happening in america. he says there is systemic racism. and -- and we have also heard from the family, over and over and over again, and their family attorney, benjamin crump, and others, that jacob blake was not armed. they are sticking with that. they say there is no evidence he was armed and they have definitively said he was not armed. and so, the blake family, upset hearing from barr. they also feel he is doing trump's bidding. those are his words. and that he is not representing the american people, which is the job that he is supposed to be doing. that they feel he is speaking to donald trump, as opposed to the country, as a whole. john. >> sara sidner, thanks so much for your reporting.

for perspective now, i want to bring in democratic congresswoman, sheila jackson lee. congresswoman, we did hear from attorney general william barr in the interview with wolf blitzer, saying without providing evidence, that jacob blake was in the midst of committing a felony, and that he was armed when the police shot him seven times. you just heard what sara sidner report -- reported. that the blake family and the attorneys have denied that. but what do you make of barr saying that? >> it's good to be with you this evening. sometimes, the nation needs a commander in chief of healing. obviously, the trump administration has failed, badly, in healing and unifying the nation. i am very happy to know that dr. jill and joe biden will be in kenosha tomorrow. but as a member of the house judiciary committee, who's dealt with attorney generals for a very long time, from republican and democratic administrations, i am sad to say that the people's lawyer is no more.

what attorney general would make a non-factually-based statement to add more fuel to the fire of dissent and discourse and the pain that, not only the family is feeling, deeply, for a young man, who is now paralyzed. was a vibrant, young father. and to the entire community. as a lawyer, what i would say is that, i would never represent, to anyone, the facts of a case that had not been played out. we don't have testimony from mr. blake. we don't have testimony from the officers, including the shooter. and all he has is, possibly, someone whispering in his ear or maybe there was a meeting of law enforcement that gave him information. if that was the case, they violated their duty.

to provide him with information that has not been given to the family or the family's lawyers. everybody knows that there had been a weapon, a knife, in the floorboard. but we, also, know that there are gradations in the kind of weapons one might have. as the video shows, as everyone saw, as the nation saw, it is very clear that we could not see any movement by mr. blake that would put the officers in fear of their life. that's the relevant point. >> the part of it that's interesting to me. look. there is an investigation, ongoing. we talk to representatives from wisconsin every day and consistently ask them, on tv, give us the latest on the investigation. what do you know about jacob blake? was he armed? and they refuse to tell us. they're not going to tell us anything, until the investigation is complete. but the attorney general just went on tv, definitively, and said he was armed.

so what does it tell you that he's willing to? what does it do to the investigation when the attorney general does that? >> he is the highest law enforcement officer in the nation. when he speaks, when other attorney generals have spoken, that have been under, as i said, republican and democratic presidents, all of whom, have appeared before me as a member of the judiciary committee. we have looked to them to be factual and truthful. what it says is that he has skewed this case, he has tainted this case, he's tainted the jury. we've asked for these officers to be fired. that he have due process rights. and those rights will play out. but there is a visual of an individual citizen, not threatening the officer in question, not turning, not moving, not lifting an arm. that is not visible. and i think the video was pretty clear. >> we will -- >> and what they're saying is,

now, that that individual was armed. but if that individual was armed, what threat did he pose to the existing community? why wasn't there deescalation? >> we are waiting for the investigation. as i said, we are waiting for the investigation, even if the attorney general is not. i want to play you one more bit of sound from the attorney general, when he was asked about the issue of systemic racism. listen. >> i don't think there are two justice systems. let's -- you know, i -- i think the narrative that there's -- that the police are on some, you know, epidemic of shooting unarmed, black men is simply a false narrative. and also, the narrative that that's based on race. >> your response? >> well, he and the president are both living in another world, another era, and another time. they can't even counter the question of black lives matter in the positive intent that it had and, in fact, the majority of americans, through this process, were committed to understanding and supported

the -- the concept black lives matter. but to that point, john, i will say to you. i asked that same question, the judiciary committee. he gave the same feeble answer. it's a hurting answer. it lacks understanding of history. does he understand lynching? does he understand the terrible divide in the criminal justice system or mass incarceration? the dominance of african-americans and people of color incarcerated, both in state prisons and federal prisons? does he understand the litany of african-americanmen, in particular, and women, that have fallen to the hands of officers and they were unarmed? abdu diabolo. walter scott. ahmaud e ahma ahmaud arbery was under civilian patrol, allegedly. george floyd, unarmed. michael brown, unarmed. eric garner, unarmed.

now, one would say they were enforcing the law. and i just say to you that they have an obligation to protect and serve. and most americans understand that. that what we are speaking of is reimagining and focusing on reimagining public safety and focusing on stopping violence and producing police-community relationships. and as you well know, i'm a strong proponent of george floyd justice and policing act. that is simply what these protestors are asking for. nonviolent protests. we don't support violence or violent protestors. but that is what they're asking. could the president have spoken to that when he was there, in kenosha? could he have spoken to the sympathy and empathy that was needed, not only by the family of mr. blake but, by the whole community? they needed a hug, if you will. they needed a healer. and what we got was an attorney general, who, in essence, undermined the investigation, tainted the jury, tainted the public opinion, and had no

facts. and he gave facts out that, as you have so aptly said, local law enforcement has never told us. i am extremely disappointed. it is a dual system of justice. >> i appreciate you being with us. we got to go because we do have some breaking news. we learned, just now, what appears to be the makings of presidential action to withhold federal funds from cities recently beset by protests and violence, all run by democratic mayors. joining us now, by phone, is cnn kaitlan collins. so what's going on here, kaitlan? what cities are being targeted by the president? and a memo, that i understand, was just released. >> yeah. this is a memo that the president just signed. and he specifically calls out several cities in here. seattle. portland. new york. washington, d.c. and basically, what he is saying in this memo is that he is threatening to cut off federal funding into these cities because he says they, quote, allow themselves to deteriorate into lawless zones. it's this memo threatening to

restrict federal funding. they're calling them anarchist jurisdictions. and in this memo, he says he is instructing the justice department to determine which ones are considered anarchist jurisdictions. and then, he is telling the budget office basically to look at federal funds that they get, and find a way to potentially redirect them. now, there are going to be a lot of questions about this and just how serious this threat is because if the president did move forward with this, of course, trying to cut off federal funding from these cities. of course, a lot of these cities, he's talked about recently, saying they're run by democrats. that's likely going to be immediately challenged in court. and we've seen the president threaten to do something, of this manner, before. you'll recall when he threatened to cut off funding to sanctuary cities. this is definitely in the president's playbook. so that is all important to keep in mind, as the president is saying, in this memo, basically, they want to make sure that federal funds aren't being wasted or spent in a manner, he says, that quote, directly

violate our government's promise to protect life, liberty, and property. you have got to consider what's going on on the backdrop of this. though, we've seen polls that is not really something that's resonated with voters, yet. he is definitely trying to push that message, john. >> look, the president's threatened a lot of things he doesn't follow through on. this has a little bit of the whiff of trying to keep this in the news as long as he possibly can. kaitlan collins, thanks very much for being with us tonight. we have more breaking news, ahead. wolf blitzer asked the attorney general for any proof of the specific flight the president keeps talking about, that was allegedly filled with thugs. wait until you hear the evidence the attorney general did not provide, when 360 continues.

welcome, today's discussion will be around sliced meat. moms want healthy... and affordable.

land o' frost premium!!! no added hormones either. it's the only protein i've really melted with. land o' frost premium. fresh look. same great taste.

we live with at&t and we are well past the honeocupado tom. at&t, what's this i hear about you advertising a 100% fiber network? only like a fraction of my customers can get that. that's it?!? you have such a glass half-empty attitude. the glass is more than half-empty! you need to relax tom. oh! tom, you need a little tom time. a little tt. stop living with at&t. xfinity delivers gig speeds to more homes than anyone.

the president, as you know, has been spreading a conspiracy theory about a terror plane, in his words, almost completely loaded with thugs wearing these dark uniforms. black uniforms with gear and this and that. he, first, said the plane was heading from some place to washington. targeting the republican convention. then, he said it was leaving washington. when pressed for details, he said it was, quote, under investigation. which made attorney general william barr the natural person to talk to. so cnn's wolf blitzer did. he asked him about the specific incident the president keeps referring to. the attorney general, first, said he knew of many reports of many people in black coming from many cities to, in his words, cause a riot in washington. but when pressed on the president's specific story or pair of stories, he said this. >> i don't know what the president was referring to. but i will say that we are trying to follow these things.

and we received numerous reports of people coming from other cities into washington. as we receive many reports of people going into kenosha, from various states. >> but you're not -- you're saying you don't know, specifically, what the president was referring to? >> no, i don't know what the president was -- >> when he spoke about this. >> he seems to be talking in general terms. >> okay. he was not speaking in general terms, at all. he was speaking of specific flights, specific numbers of people wearing black. there was nothing general about it, at all. joining us now, democratic congressman, ted lieu. congressman, thanks for being with us. what, exactly, do you want from the fbi here? >> thank you, john, for your question. there are always going to be people who believe in conspiracy theories. but the president of the nieds should not be one of them. he is supposed to rely on the facts and the evidence. instead, donald trump has been spewing conspiracy theories that have made the coronavirus

pandemic worse. and now, he is spewing conspiracy theories that are making the chaos and violence under his watch even worse. and congressman hakeem jeffries and i wrote a letter to the fbi because we want to know is the president, also, using official resources to investigate his worries? because if he is, that needs to stop. >> what do you make of the attorney general saying, oh, i just think the president was speaking in general terms, providing cover for the president? >> attorney general bill barr was, once again, making stuff up because the president was very specific. he talked about a plane, loaded with thugs. he talked about them being dressed in black. that they were going to do some big damage in washington, d.c. all that was false. that didn't happen. while, it's true that people have gone to these various cities, both right wing and other groups. for example, we know that kyle rittenhouse traffick rittenhouse traveled across state lines to go to kenosha, and he murdered two protestors. it's, also, true that people just fly on planes. and they dress however they want

to. so there's no evidence that any of this fantastical stuff happened, that the president's talking about. >> kyle rittenhouse is charged in the death of two people in kenosha. have you received any response from the fbi? what have they told you? >> we have not, yet. we did just send it today. so we'll likely give them a few days to look into it. but the fbi has much better things to do than chase down wild, conspiracy theories. they should be, for example, investigating why did the department of homeland security withhold evidence about the russians spreading lies about joe biden's health? that should be investigated. they should, also, investigate the postmaster general for sabotaging the post office. there are much better things for the fbi to be doing. >> one of the things that wolf also talked to the attorney general about was the election. and the repeated claim, from the attorney general, that he keeps on making, that foreign countries will interfere with mail-in voting. now, wolf pressed him and said, what evidence? what evidence do you have that foreign countries are trying to meddle in mail-in voting?

and the attorney general said, i don't have evidence. he produced no evidence. he said it's logic that tells us -- tells us and tells him that it's going to happen. what did you make of that argument? >> i'm a former prosecutor. if i walked into court and told a judge and jury that i have no evidence, just logic, i would be halved out laughed out of court. and attorney general is now just making stuff up. he has no evidence that mail-in voting is more prone to fraud, in fact, it's the opposite. and there are states that have done mail-in balloting for years, including the state of florida. donald trump has said that mail-in balloting in florida is good to go. well, if it's good to go in florida, then it's good in other states. you can't just make these random distinctions, simply because donald trump likes florida. so again, attorney general is just making stuff up, without any factual basis. >> i will say, ballot fraud, in general, is very, very small,

infinitesmal. the effort to me, should be it's safe and reliable. not complaining and spreading conspiracy theories about it. congressman lieu, i appreciate your time. thank you so much. >> thank you, john. >> straight ahead, we are going to take you to houston and the story of a family hit hard by coronavirus, being evicted, and the deputies being ordered to uphold the order. this, as the cdc moves to temporarily halt some of the evictions caused by the pandemic. was that your grandfather, leading armies to battle? was that your great-aunt, keeping armies alive? drafting the plans. taking the pictures. was it your family members? who flew. who fixed. who fought. who rose to the occasion. when the world needed them most.

(♪) find and honor your ancestors who servered in world war ii. their stories live on at ancestry. a lot goes through your mind. with fidelity wealth management, your dedicated adviser can give you straightforward advice and tailored recommendations. that's the clarity you get with fidelity wealth management.

book two separate qualifying stays and earn a free night. the open road is open again. and wherever you're headed, choice hotels is there. book direct at choicehotels.com. actually, you're really and thahelping actors.ingd, chrestaurants right now. uh, no. most actors got started at restaurants, like me. same here! uh... so, keep your orders coming to help actors. you're really helping restaurants, and we're partnering with the national restaurant association to lend a hand.

- ( phone ringing )es offers - big button,lized phones... and volume-enhanced phones.nes. get details on this state program. visit right now or call during business hours. my only job is to take great care of my patients.? i'm empowered to do what's right for you. our digital records mean your medical history is in one place, so i can give you great care. your primary care doctor, your specialists... it's great! we all work together as one team. our integrated approach to health care helps my patients

live longer, healthier lives. i don't just practice here, i'm a patient, too. i wouldn't trust my family's health care to anyone else. and accessoriesphones for your mobile phone. like this device to increase volume on your cell phone. - ( phone ringing ) - get details on this state program visit right now or call during business hours. the centers for disease control says it is moving to temporarily halt evictions for americans who can't pay their rent because of the effects of coronavirus. it's unclear, tonight, how, exactly, that will be done. but the administration says the order will apply to americans, who qualify for payments under the trillion-dollar stimulus bill passed earlier this year. and they would, also, have to prove they cannot pay rent due to covid-19. still, there's no question, some

affected by the pandemic are going through severe, very severe, financial hardship. including, the people cnn's kyung lah found in houston. >> hello? >> reporter: from one houston home, to the next. deputy benny with the harris county constable's office execute's judge's orders to evict. israel rodriguez is the tenant at this apartment but he's not alone. 20-month-old israel, his brother, 4-year-old fabian, and their mother, are some of the estimated 40 million americans facing eviction, in the downward spiral of the covid economy. >> they didn't rush us but they was like get everything you need. >> reporter: rodriguez admits he hasn't been paying rent. behind thousands of dollars. >> it's my fault on the eviction. when it hit, i lost my job. so it took me like a month to get another job. this is my check but i ain't

making it with $300. it's literally $300. >> reporter: their stroller, now carries their possessions. >> it's mainly the kids' clothes because me and her just wear the same clothes almost every day. make sure we got, you know, toilet paper and little bit of snacks for the kids. >> what are you going to do with all of your stuff? >> that's trash. they can throw it in the trash because we don't have a car. we don't have help. we don't have nobody that can come help us right now. nobody. we got ourself. me, the kids, and her. that's it. >> how do you, as law eight evictions are on his list. at each stop, people behind on

rents or ordered to leave. >> where are you guys going to go? >> go to a hotel. we get 200 eviction orders came into the harold court this week. >> 200 on monday. >> what does it say to you? >> well, what it means is they ready to start having people to move. >> it is a backlog. >> i don't want to put her out but i have to under this schedule's order. >> the tenant is an elderly woman who can no longer afford the rent. >> the landlord mover, he does

not want to. mid way through the eviction, deputy gant decides it is too dangerous to evict her in the summer heat and will call social services instead. >> a one day reprieve with an uncertain tomorrow. >> you have a situation where people are not working. >> kevin is joining us now, that's heartbreaking to see what these people going through. i know there is a cdc announcement today and you have been reporting on it. is it clear? >> absolutely not.

municipalities trying to figure out what it means. are there going to be challenges in court. what does it mean if there is a state authority that steps in like an attorney general. they don't know at this point. what about the right of landl d landlord. that day when we followed the constable office -- we have tens of thousands we have to pay up. it is a question of who do you evict. some people won't be evictable if they make a certain income or if they have or have not pay up the right paper work. what tenants are saying hey, this is nice and all but there is no rent forgiveness. this is kicking the can down the road on january 1st. if they have not kept up there will be a tremendous bill due for a lot of people. the same people you heard about in this story.

>> what a story, what an important piece of reporting there. thank you so much. painful but thank you very much for shining a light on it. >> the house speaker walks into a hair salon and walks out. questions about what she broke quarantine rules but it is about what she said about what she did that turned the storm to something even more.

the video shows nancy pelosi inside a hair salon inside san francisco and nancy pelosi was seen without wearing a mask. her staffer says she did wear one but just not while getting her hair washed. in response pelosi blames the hair salon releasing that video. >> i have been to the hair salon many times. when they said we are able to accommodate people -- one person as a time. i trusted that. as it turns out, it was not set up. i take responsibility for falling for a set up. >> you would think the house speaker would know the rules in

san francisco herself. the owner responded, the set up was totally false. president trump commented, crowds of unmasked and audience of the member -- the state's own guidelines stated masks should be worn in doors and outdoors. # the news continues. i will hand it over to chris cuomo for "primetime." >> maybe she was listening to the president, who says masks is a weakness. maybe pelosi is falling under the influence. >> j.b., good to see