i have to have faith in, you know, the american people. >> tune in tuesday evening to cnn's coverage of the first presidential debate between president donald trump and democratic nominee joe biden. thank you for spending your sunday morning and afternoon with us. the news continues next. this is "gps, the local public square." i'm fareed zakaria coming to you live. today on the show, president trump announces his nominee for the supreme court. >> judge amy coney barrett. >> what do we know about her? what does this mean for an america that will now have a decidedly conservative supreme court? i'll ask two distinguished

experts. and at u.n. on tuesday, the iranian president said his people were grappling with the hardest sanctions in history. then the u.s. laid on more sanctions on thursday. i interviewed iran's foreign minister this week about the effects of america's maximum pressure campaign, the fate of the nuclear agreement, and iran's recent execution of a local sports hero. but first here's my take. by declining to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, president trump has agitated many who fear he will refuse to leave office even if he loses the november election and may even resort to violence. but the terrifying reality is there are also mechanisms that are legal and constitutional that could enable trump to stay in office without actually winning the vote. the system of electing the

president is complicated because it was not designed to be dre directly democratic. the constitution calls for states to choose the presidential electors who in turn gather to elect the president. the states have vast laws that ensure their state's vote for the presidency would determine the electors. but those are laws, not a constitutional obligation. now, imagine the scenario during election week. trump is leading on november 3rd, but joe biden pulls ahead in the days following, republicans file objections to tens of thousands of mail-in ballots, democrats file countersuits. taking account of the confusion, legislators decide to choose the election themselves. here's the worry. out of nine swing states, eight have republican legislatures. if one or more decide that balloting is chaotic and marked by irregularitieirregularities,

make a vote and file lawsuits. they could send their own slate of people to washington. that might add to the confusion, but that may well be part of the republican plan. when congress resumes on november 6th to tally the votes, it's possible congressional republicans could decide that disputed states should simply not be counted. suppose in this scenario, michigan's votes are invalidated, that would ensure that neither candidate would get to 270 electoral votes. at that point the constitution clearly directs that the house of representatives vote to determine the presidential election. but it does so with each state casting a single ballot. if the current numbers hold, there would be 26 state delegations that are republican

and 23 democratic with one type. they could want to re-elect donald trump. trump doesn't need to do anything except simply accept this outcome, which is constitutional. thanks to tim wolf for his writings on this topic. trump clearly understands this chain of events. he's been casting doubt on mail-in voting, saying the total should be there on election night. there would be no worry about transfer of power, because there would simply be a continuation of his rule. >> i think it's 26-22 or something, because it's counted one vote per state. >> now, for this scenario to play out, state republican parties have to put their desire to win above concerns that all voices in their state are heard. unfortunately, recent history suggests that most will readily make this trade.

many state republican parties have been actively attempting to suppress votes. just a few examples. in 2011, texas passed a law requiring government i.d. for voting and allowed gun licenses but not student i.d.s from state universities. ostensibly this was to prevent voter fraud which several studies have shown is largely nonexistent. in 2017, georgia passed a law blocking voter registration with minor typos which mainliy affected black voters. in florida, they gutted a state initiative which restored voter rights to 100,000 voters, mostly black. the republican party believes its vast power lies in not only getting a majority of votes but by other means. republicans in wisconsin, having won about 45% of the vote, ended up with almost 65% of the seats

in the state assembly. they've become used to this kind of situation on the national stage. think about this. since 1992, the republican presidential candidate has won the popular vote only one time, in 2004, and that during the wake of the country's worst terrorist attack and a wartime rally around the flag. nevertheless, republicans have held the white house for almost half of those 28 years. america prides itself on the world's leading democracy. and yet because of a vague and creaky constitutional process, this november we might put on a display of democratic function that would rival any banana republic on the planet. go to cnn.com for my column this week and let's get started.

we'll get to president trump's nomination of amy coney barrett to be the next court justice on the supreme court in a moment, but first i want to ask the experts joining me about the scenario i just laid out. will fineman is a writer. emily is a fellow at the yale law school and a writer. the reason i laid out that scarce is scenario is because republicans don't need to do much more besides essentially run out the clock at the point of which the electors have to be appoint appointed. can courts somehow circumvent that process and say, no, you have to resolve these

differences so there are actual electors on the safe arbharbor ? >> if you read the constitution, just the words, there is no explicit role in the courts for the scenario you sketched out. but you should never say never. in that scenario, democrats would be sure to go to court in each of the states where the legislature was showing a different state of electors than the ones shown by the voters, in other words, where they were frankly openly undermining democracy. it's probable in some cases, some federal judges at the lower level would say, you can't do this, states. you've broken the rules. the democracy is operating and you're undercutting it. that would then work its way up through the courts, and it's possible the supreme court would hear such a case. they wouldn't have to. in the end it's always up to the supreme court to decide if they want to hear a case or not. >> emily, do you think that state legislatures face any

legal obstacle to choosing electors that won? assuming where there is some mail-in balloting, can electors say, this is our best sense of who is elected? >> no election is perfect, but what you're describing is a complete upending of american democracy, right? you're talking about state legislatures taking the right to choose president away from voters, away from the american people. so despite the creaky constitution that do on paper allow for this, i think the political price would be very high. i think people would not stand for this and should not stand for this. this is not really a partisan issue. this is about the kind of very foundation of our democracy and making sure that americans, not legislatur legislatures, get to choose the president. that's what we've done for a very long time. that's what needs to be in the election. i think in the end there would

also be pressure on the courts to make sure that happened, but i think it's important to go back. we want to make sure that this is a fair and accurate count and that people's ballots determine who is the president. >> noah, let me ask you about judge barrett soon to become justice barrett. you quoted her on the supreme court and you wrote an op-ed at bloomberg where you are a columnist and said she is extremely intelligent, probably one of the two most brilliant people in that group of law clerks, and she's a very decent person. but you disagree with her fundamentally on the law and on the constitution. isn't that worse in a sense for somebody? like shouldn't liberals be more terrified of a highly competent

justice who will be very conservative versus somebody, you know, a little bit less confident? how do you think about that problem? >> thank you for asking that, fareed. i think it's exactly the other way around. the whole reason we have a supreme court is that we care about the constitution and we resolve certain deep societal questions by asking the justices to interpret the constitution according to their own understanding of how to do so. you can have that done by a bunch of people who are unprincipled and don't have deep beliefs and they just vote. we have something called conscience where it's all supposed to be politics. but we need to try, even in our most contested issues, to debate and discuss it in light of what the constitution says and in late of what the constitution means. in order for us to lower the temperature a little bit in that context, i believe we need the smartest and best people, including the smartest and best people who we disagree with all

the way down the line. let me be clear, judge barrett and i disagree on just about every constitutional issue and every statutory issue, but i think she's the best we could have under the circumstances. that isn't the same thing as saying i think she's right. >> emily, let me ask you a political question deriving from that. if that's the case, are the democrats mishandling this? i know two democratic senators said they won't even meet with her. this is, of course, tit for tat, because republican senators didn't meet with merrick garland. if she is going to end up on the court, anyway, do you want to alienate her? the kavanaugh treatment presumably, cavanaugh is a human being, has driven him to be more partisan, more idealogical. in other words, are you trying to seduce these justices to be a little bit more like anthony kennedy and less like kavanaugh,

or were they going to vote the way they were going to vote, anyway? >> i think the notion that the democrats need with amy barrett is going to matter one whit when she's a supreme court justice is just wrong. with i talk with noah about clicking with her, i think of a fancy elite club rather than thinking about what amy barrett is actually going to do as a supreme court justice. to me the question is what impact is she going to have? we know a lot about her record. she has expressed interest in restricting reproductive rights, overturning the affordable care act. when you buy into the full conservative, quite radical, judicial agenda, you're talking about fundamentally changing the role of american government. i would be interested in noah's thoughts about why he disagrees with her, because i think outlining those constitutional issues is what's really crucial

here. >> so we will talk about exactly that when we come back. i'm going to ask both of you whether roe v. wade will be overturned and what the consequences of a 6-3 majority will be, when we come back. le'sr on iphone 11 pro is even better on our most powerful signal. switch and get two new lines of unlimited for only $90 and 2 iphone 11 pro's on us. only at t-mobile. ♪ bing crosby ("straight down the middle")

can it one up spaghetti night? cleaning power of liquid. it sure can. really? can it one up breakfast in bed? yeah, for sure. thanks, boys. what about that? uhh, yep! it can? yeah, even that! i would very much like to see that. me too. introducing tide power pods. one up the toughest stains with 50% more cleaning power than liquid detergent. any further questions? uh uh! nope! one up the power of liquid with tide power pods. who trust in our performance and comfortable, long-lasting protection. because your strength is supported by ours. depend. the only thing stronger than us, is you.

and mine's unlisted.. try boost® high protein... -with 20 grams of protein for muscle health- -versus only 16 grams in ensure® high protein. and now enjoy boost® high protein in new café mocha flavor. unlike ordinary memory wansupplements...ter? neuriva has clinically proven ingredients that fuel 5 indicators of brain performance. memory... focus... accuracy... learning and concentration. try it today with our money-back guarantee!

more now about what a fully conservative supreme court would look like. it's been sort of conservative, would now have a 6-3 majority. noah feldman and emily bazelon are back with us. the big question everyone wants to ask about is roe v. wade, but it raises the issue that emily was getting at earlier, which

there are huge consequences to a 6-3 majority and a very conservative judge. isn't that a hugely scary scenario and the fact she's a good lawyer doesn't matter? >> i think there is a dangerous misunderstanding of how the supreme court works and how the judges operate which is implicit in what emily said. if you think of chief justice roberts and a diehard conservative, he just voted to uphold planned parenthood, therefore not overturning roe v. wade. those things happen because the justices are holding themselves up to the plan, the goal, of interpreting the law without an eye to its consequences. does that always happen? no, of course not, and of course they have beliefs, and of course judge barrett has beliefs. they're not the same as my beliefs. i think it is wrong to the constitution. but would you rather have justices who are trying hard to reach fair, even-handed

decisions with something like the presidential election on the line, or would you rather have justices who say, no, i don't care about that sort of thing. we need to have a court devoted to the principle of doing justice under law equally, and without that principle, we are no longer in a world where the supreme court really helps. so am i worried about roe v. wade? of course i'm worried about roe v. wade, extremely worried about it. do i think judge barrett might vote to strike it down? yes. that is possible in light of her religious views which i think is wrong. but that's not the question in front of us. the question is do we want to have a court where justices argue, debate and try to debate conscientiously, or do we want a politicized world like we have in congress? to me the answer is clear and we have to accept that as our reality. >> i want to get to the real world consequences, though, that emily was laying out. emily, i want to ask you, wouldn't it be easier and less controversial for a court like this not to overturn roe v. wade but to simply gut it in ways that actually have already

happened, and in many southern states it's very hard for particularly poor women to get abortions anymore, and you go down that path where you kill it by a thousand cuts. couldn't you do the same with gun laws or campaign finance? isn't that the more likely outcome here? and how dramatically would it change america? >> yes. i think you're right. good lawyers know how to chip away at rights without making necessarily huge headlines, like roe v. wade overturned that could hurt their republican party politically in the polls. there is a connection between politics and law, especially when we're talking about provisions of the constitution that the justices determine the outcomes of the most important cases, the cases that we're talking about now. so when you erode rights over time, sometimes with very clever or smart, legal arguments, that is the kind of effect you can have. every study we have of the

supreme court over the last decade shows it moving to the right. yes, you can cite a few exceptional votes by chief justice john roberts, but he will no longer be the fulcrum of the court once judge barrett is confirmed. when you look at the overall trends of the court, the directions that it's going, yes, you see a greater erosion of reproductive rights, you see striking down of more gun control laws, and then you see this larger project of really changing the government and its ability to provide legislation like the affordable care act and the american people. this is really about the impact the supreme court has on the lives of regular people. >> i want to pick up on that last point emily made, noah, and make sure people understand it, because the court has become very conservative with regard to the ability of federal agencies to do things like regulate clean air, clean water and things like

that. and that seems to me likely to be perhaps the most -- in terms of the way it will change the lives of americans a more dramatic one than people realize. what is the conservative view there? >> what's going on is some of the conservatives, especially justice gorsuch, are skeptical that the epa and others should have the final say on what the law means. they think judges should have the final say, and especially when they have the majority of the court. so they're not trying to chip away bought attack the basic idea that when it comes to the reasonable interpretation of the law, we should listen to the agencies and not the courts. this is kind of a basic idea for lawyers, but it makes it harder for the epa to do its job or harder for the fda to do its job, and it's a genuine concern. we don't know where judge barrett is on that. justice scalia believed by

deferring to the agencies. but elections have consequences. it's an absolute disaster that justice ginsburg died during president trump's term in office while the republicans controlled the senate from the standpoint of democrats. it would have been much easier if she had died while president bid biden was in office. it's a terrible, terrible outcome that we all should be rightly upset about. but the question is, given that state of affairs, what's the right way to engage with justices from the other side? and the answer is i think through reason and logic, and lgbtq rights are not an outlying thing. they are a fundamental transformation and they were brought about by scalia and

gorsuch. >> emily, i would like you to leave us with a memory of justice ginsburg and this is an example of these things have consequences. your grandfather served on the court after peels with her. your grandfather was briefly on the bench with scalia and ginsburg. what is the one thing you remember go ginsburg from the prism of your grandfather's memories? >> when i went to interview justice ginsburg for the magazine, i brought three tape recorders with me because i'm so paranoid about catching her words. she is known for speaking with pauses. i was terrified that in my exuberance, i was going to interrupt her, because i really went in that interview to try and be as careful a listener as i could, and she was very kind and generous. >> emily bozelon and noah

feldman, fascinating discussion. a sports hero and much more, coming up. (gong rings) - this is joe. (combative yelling) he used to have bad breath. now, he uses a capful of therabreath fresh breath oral rinse to keep his breath smelling great, all day long. (combative yelling) therabreath, it's a better mouthwash. at walmart, target and other fine stores.

♪ take the good, with the bad ♪ live the life you want to have♪ ♪ send it off, with a bang ♪ ♪ whistling ♪ t-mobile's new offer on iphone 11 pro is even better on our most powerful signal. switch and get two new lines of unlimited for only $90

and 2 iphone 11 pro's on us. only at t-mobile.

iran's president, hassan rouhani, angrily denied the united states at the general assembly. he talked about the treatment to iran. i had a chance to speak to rouhani in a council host bid

foreign relations. i started out by asking him about iran's recent execution of a local sports hero. for minieign minister, welcome. >> good morning to you and to our friends joining us. good to be with you, fareed. >> for eign minister, the first thing i do have to ask you about is a topic that has raised an enormous amount of international outcry, which is the execution of the 27-year-old wrestler navid fakari. this is a 27-year-old young man who was engaged in protests against the government two years ago in shiraz. he was executed, he was hanged. as you know, this protest went far and wide, well beyond the usual places. the united states condemned it,

grassroots did, the international olympic committee, the world cares association, many of them saying that this was really an extraordinarily brutal act. i want you to respond to the international outcry against this execution. >> well, thank you for asking that question and moving forward. i think it is important to set the record straight. first of all, as you know, we have an unusual government. judges and judiciary have their own independence from the centers of authority of the judiciary. second, issues about capital punishment is a lively debate in the united states, in iran.

whether capital punishment is good or bad, whether it serves the purpose of deterring crime or whether it does not. and i don't think in the span of about one hour, even if we had more, we could have a live debate, everybody has their own views, but capital punishment is in the iran criminal court as well as in the united states. recently people have been executed in the united states. a gentleman was executed in texas who was an 18-year-old when he committed a crime. i don't think anyone would ask secretary pompeo to explain that. be that as it may, i think it's an important issue. i am not in a position to judge the decision of a court. court is a court. it makes its own decisions. obviously there are people who like the decisions of the court,

who like the ruling of the court, and there are people who do not like the ruling of the court. the first point that i have to make is that this gentleman, and i feel sorry for his family, as i feel sorry for the family of his victim, was executed not because of participating in demonstrations but because of a murder. he was accused of a murder, had been through a court proceeding. there were private claims against him by the family of the deceased who was killed. >> if candidate biden, vice president biden, were to win and become president biden, he has indicated that he would return the united states to adhering to the jcpoa, the iran nuclear deal, if iran abided by it as well, but he said he would use it as a starting point to begin

negotiations to strengthen the deal, to extend its duration and to deal with some other issues. are you willing to commit that if this were to happen, iran would engage in those negotiations? >> well, i think that iran as a participant in the jcpoa, which has observed the rules of jcpoa, which has exercised a lot of restraint and patience is in a position to say how we want to proceed. not the united states. the united states has an extremely bad record. i think it is the united states that has to show that it's committed to this deed, that it will not violate it again, that it will not make demands outside the scope of the deal, that it will compensate iran for the damages. the united states withdrew from

jcpoa for no reason. it incurred damages on the iranian people. today iran is not able to even buy vaccines for influenza because the united states does not allow us to transfer the money. right now, as we speak, our order to buy vaccines for influenza, not for covid, vaccines for influenza, is waiting for an authorization by the united states to pay our own money. not to pay their money, we're not asking anybody for donation. so the united states, whoever is the president, it is immaterial for us who sits in the white house. for us what is important is how they behave. and the united states has behaved extremely irresponsibly, dangerously in the international community, so it is up to the united states. the united states has to take into account it is up to the united states to prove to the rest of jcpoa participants,

particularly to iran, that it's going to act responsibly, that it's not going to make demands outside the scope of the jcpoa, and it's going to basically stop causing damage to iran and compensate us for all the damages. billions upon billions of dollars of damages they have put on iran because they didn't like the president of the united states. it's not my business that this president or the next president likes their predecessor or don't like their predecessor. it is the united states that has to act responsibly which, unfortunately, it hasn't. >> but as you point out, the damage caused by the united states by the resumption of sanctions has been very dramatic. i mean, your currency is down 50% this year. >> more than 50%. >> so if you want to try to get iran's economy back on track,

the question i'm asking is, if a president biden were to say, i will return to the deal, but i would also require that iran commit, as the united states would, to nuclear negotiations, follow on negotiations, to extend the deal to strengthen it, are you willing to enter those negotiations? >> as i said, the damages that have been invicted on iran have to be corrected. that is without condition. nobody is in a position to put conditions for making good on their own promise. so let's put that out of it. now, iran has never been hesitant to negotiate. but we do not renegotiate what we already negotiated. >> i just want to be clear, because this is important. because the deal was signed five

years ago. some of the provisions start to get sunset pretty soon. so you are saying you are open to renegotiating -- renegotiations as long as the u.s. abides by the jcpoa or not? >> absolutely not. parts of the deal, the united states accepted those. we spent more time negotiating those than anything else. those are parts of the deal. i accepted less commitment from the united states because i did not want to give them more. a deal is a process of give and take. the united states, secretary kerry, then vice president biden remember this very well. there was a give and take. any attempt to undermine those

gives and takes is a sign of bad faith. and as i said, the united states must first prove that it's worthy of the trust that is required for its re-entry into the deal before it sets conditions. for more of my questions about the execution of that wrestler and other topics, go to cnn.com/fareed for a link to the full interview to the council on foreign relations. we'll be back in a moment with more on the iranian foreign minister. you just heard him say iran doesn't care who america elects in november. i'm going to ask him, if that's true, why has his country reportedly tried to hack the election? detergent alone doesn't kill bacteria but adding

lysol laundry sanitizer kills 99.9% with 0% bleach. lysol. what it takes to protect. ® keeping your oysters busihas you swamped. you need to hire. i need indeed indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a resume data base claim your seventy-five-dollar credit when you post your first job at indeed.com/promo t-mobile's new offer on iphone 11 pro is even better on our most powerful signal. switch and get two new lines of unlimited for only $90 and 2 iphone 11 pro's on us. only at t-mobile. since your ancestors served in world war two. many of their stories remain untold. find and honor the veterans in your family. their stories live on at ancestry.

is now even more powerful. the stronger, lasts-longer energizer max. everylet's skip the rinse. waste up to 20 gallons.lasts-longer finish quantum with activeblu technology, cleans without pre-rinsing. switch to finish and skip the rinse to save water. for as little as $5, now anyone can own companies in the s&p 500, even if their shares cost more. at $5 a slice, you could own ten companies for $50 instead of paying thousands. all commission free online. schwab stock slices: an easy way to start investing

or to give the gift of stock ownership. schwab. own your tomorrow. schwab. tonight, i'll be eating a veggie cheeseburger on ciabatta, no tomatoes.. [hard a] tonight... i'll be eating four cheese tortellini with extra tomatoes. [full emphasis on the soft a] so its come to this? [doorbell chimes] thank you. [doorbell chimes] bravo. careful, hamill. daddy's not here to save you. oh i am my daddy. wait, what? what are you talking about? back now with more of my interview with foreign minister javad zanif. just a few days ago, mike pompeo, the secretary of state,

announced that the united states government had found evidence that iran was engaging in escalating cyberattacks against the united states. this is a claim that is also corroborated in part by microsoft, which has identified certain iranian actors apparently sponsored by the government. why is iran escalating cyber warfare against the united states? >> first of all, it is the united states that had acknowledged engaging in cyber warfare against iran, even to the point of destroying very sensitive nuclear structures that could have ramifications with the death of hundreds of thousands of people. if you don't believe me, just watch "zero days."

there was a documentary made about those attempts, there were articles written. it is a record of acknowledgment by the u.s. government. there are allegations that iran is trying to infiltrate the u.s. electoral system. this is nonsense. for us it doesn't matter who goes in the white house. if we had an interest in victory of one candidate for another, that argument could be made, but it seems president trump is using every opportunity to basically question the results of the u.s. election, which is something of news for all of us, for a president to question his own country's election. >> you really don't care whether trump or biden wins? >> not at all. it's not about business. for us the behavior of the u.s. government is important. for us it's not important who sits in the white house.

as a foreign government, we cannot bank on something we do not control. >> later in the session, the foreign minister took questions from others. journal list and cnn analyst kim dozier asked about the killing of cassam sulenon. here is what the foreign minister said in reply. >> it's made a grave mistake of assassinating someone who was the number one enemy of isis. general soleimani was murdered. the president put on his twitter a clip of people dancing in

iraq, showing that people of iraq were celebrating the death of soleimani. we saw the next morning that hundreds of thousands of iraqis came to the streets of various iraqi streets mourning the killing of soleimani. so he has a lot of people seeking revenge for his murder. >> can i just follow, are you saying the iranian government is still considering the possibility of some kind of reat that time t-- retaliation, or ae the books closed on that? >> no, the books are not closed. president trump ordered the assassination of a national hero for iran and a hero for the region. so the books are not closed. i'm not in the business of making threats, but the book is not closed. an ominous note to end on from iran's foreign minister javad zanif.

our appreciation for them hosting this kind of conversation. next, europe's covid cases are spiking again. can we learn something from the nations across the atlantic? that story in a moment. t-mobile's new offer on iphone 11 pro is even better on our most powerful signal. switch and get two new lines of unlimited for only $90 and 2 iphone 11 pro's on us. only at t-mobile.

i do motivational speakingld. in addition to the substitute teaching. i honestly feel that that's my calling-- to give back to younger people. i think most adults will start realizing that they don't recall things as quickly as they used to or they don't remember things as vividly as they once did. i've been taking prevagen for about three years now. people say to me periodically, "man, you've got a memory like an elephant." it's really, really helped me tremendously. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. here are a couple answers... chances are you have some questions right now lysol disinfectant spray and lysol disinfecting wipes

together can be used on over 100 surfaces. and kill up to 99.9% of germs. lysol. what it takes to protect. sarah: for a while i've negative self image. there was like this contrast between like the way that i was thinking about my personality and the way that i was thinking about my body. with noom, i was able to learn how to interrupt those habits and create new ones. so my goal was 35 pounds and i've lost about 30 pounds now. so.. i've never been this confident in my body. my name is sara and i changed my life with noom. visit noom.com and lose the weight for good.

the unfair money bail system. he, accused of rape. while he, accused of stealing $5. the stanford rapist could afford bail; got out the same day. the senior citizen could not; forced to wait in jail nearly a year. voting yes on prop 25 ends this failed system, replacing it with one based on public safety. because the size of your wallet shouldn't determine whether or not you're in jail. vote yes on prop 25 to end money bail.

now for the last look. reopening schools is a crucial step to jumpstarting the economy because so many parents can't go back to work until their children are out of the house and back physically at school. many european and east asian countries have reopened schools across the board. they did so with common sense precautions. and systems are in place to deploy effective contact tracing.

now, europe is seeing a alarming surge in cases, 65% higher than the peak in april but it does not seem to be emanating from schools. governments there are relying on policies and practices to keep kids in school and parents at work. but the u.s., parts of which have much lower infection rates than europe now, is struggling to even get students into school, let alone keep them there. take new york city, for example. its infection rate clocks in at a stunningly low 30 per 100,000 and yet schools there continue to favor hybrid models. compare that to madrid where the infection rate sits at 400 per 100,000 and kids are in classrooms. while states have issued plans for reopening schools, only four have mandated plans for part or full-time in-person instruction due to inconsistent federal guidelines, the rest linger indecisively. therein lies america's weakness.

chaos and doubt have dominated america's initial response to the pandemic. the lack of leadership and clear, consistent messaging is disrupting its recovery. as schools were reopening this month with weak safety plans, teachers' unions demanded more precautions and many parents were reluctant to send their kids to school. "the new york times" says the lack in confidence might lead to remote learning for the remainder of the fall semester. in the meantime, parts of america are seeing literacy rates and math proficiencies decline. donald trump wanted schools to reopen, but his undermining of public health authorities, inconsistent messaging and questioning scientific evidence created mistrust and division. the result now is that even when there is good news in parts of america, people don't quite believe it and will not act on it. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. fuel 5 indicators of brain performance.

memory... focus... accuracy... learning and concentration. try it today with our money-back guarantee! [bir♪ chirping] [female announcer] food delivery just got more rewarding. now that grubhub gives you rewards when you order your fav foods. [dog barks] want a hamburger, some fries, a drink, nuggets? then, boom! rewarded, with a wendy's '4 for $4' perk. [talking sounds] ordering chipotle for the family? voila! rewarded, with guacamole and a side of quiet.

grubhub gives you rewards for rewarding yourself.. with food! [doorbell rings] - [all] grubhub! [motorcycle beeps] t-mobile's new offer on iphone 11 pro is even better on our most powerful signal. switch and get two new lines of unlimited for only $90 and 2 iphone 11 pro's on us. only at t-mobile. we'll look back and remember the moment that things, for one strange time in our lives, got very quiet. some lost work and invented new ways to get by. others were busier than ever, and found strength they never knew they had. we sheltered with the people who matter most, sometimes finding how far apart we'd drifted. we worried over loved ones, over money, over our planet. and over take-out.

and we found a voice one the noise out there had kept quiet. when the world starts spinning again, let's remember this time where none of us felt secure, and fight for a future where everyone can. because when the world seems like it's standing still... that's the perfect time for us to change it. rakuten is free to sign up and it's in over 3,000 stores. i use it to buy makeup... travel... ...clothes, electronics to me, rakuten is a great way to get cash back on anything you buy. sign up today and get cash back with rakuten. if sweat is your body's natural way of cooling itself down, then condensation is a beer's natural way of saying "drink me."

hello, everyone. thank you so much for joining me this sunday. the battle lines are being drawn. one day after president trump announced his new pick in the u.s. supreme court, his 2020 rival joe biden and top democratic lawmakers began making their case against the come nation of amy coney barrett. earlier today in a speech from his home toutown of wilmington, delaware, joe biden said the nomination is equivalent to destroying the obamacare. o and today biden appealing to the