you'll see jared kushner and ivanka trump smiling down at you. but the couple isn't happy about that. the billboards featuring them are the work of the lincoln project, a group of republicans fiercely opposed to donald trump and his re-election. the billboards went up just days before election day. >> if you're going to mess with the generals and the opposing army, do so on the eve of battle. >> reporter: that's how the lincoln project sees this, as warfare. the image of ivanka was taken from a tweet she posted back in july posting the goya brand. but instead of a can of beans, the billboard shows her smiling next to the growing death count of new yorkers and those around the country from coronavirus. kushner's adjacent billboard includes what looks like body bags under a quote that reads "new yorkers are going to suffer, and that's their problem." that quote is from a september "vanity fair" article citing an unnamed person who claimed kushner said it while criticizing new york's governor for his response to the pandemic.

cnn has not independently verified "vanity fair's" reporting. jared kushner and ivanka trump are apparently so enraged by the billboards they're threatening to sue. their attorney sent a letter to the lincoln project, calling the billboards false, malicious, and defamatory. the letter goes on to say, mr. kushner never made any such statement. ms. trump never made any such gesture. and the lincoln project's representations that they did are an outrageous and shameful libel. in response to kushner's denial of the quote -- >> he's a lying liar who lies. that's my assessment of it. so if they want to go and make this case that he never said such a thing, then they've never tried to get the "vanity fair" article taken down until this date. they never tried to go out and contest the quotes about that. >> reporter: the couple's lawyer is threatening to sue for enormous compensatory and punitive damages. cnn reached out to their lawyer but still no response. the lincoln project meanwhile

has no plans to take down the billboards. >> this is all bluster. it's all performative. it's all hollow. we will continue to have those billboards up as long as we can keep them up, and we will continue to prosecute this line of attack as long as we can because donald trump's daughter and his son-in-law are public figures. this is protected political speech of the highest order. >> reporter: the lincoln project plans to keep the billboards up until november 5th, two days after the election. randi kaye, cnn, riviera beach, florida. >> well, election day just eight days away, a week from tomorrow. join us for all-day reporting from the first vote to the critic critical count. our election night in america special coverage will start at 4:00 p.m. eastern next tuesday. the news continues. i want to hand it over to chris for "cuomo prime time." >> thank you, my friend. i am chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." brothers and sisters, we're living history once again and it's going to happen on our

watch tonight. the supreme court is about to be reshaped for years to come, decades to come maybe. a 6-3 conservative majority. trump's nominee, amy coney barrett, just confirmed by the senate. one republican didn't vote, the maine senator susan collins. however, 52-48, obviously the nomination a shoo-in and now the justice will be sworn in at the white house one month to the day of her nomination gathering that ultimately turned the white house into a cluster and despite the fact that once again there is an outbreak of cases within the white house ranks that they intentionally tried to keep you from knowing about. so are they doubling down on dumb by having yet another event like this? well, they seem to be aware of that mistake, and tonight masks are required. so maybe there is a learning curve, and in that move, you

must ask yourself if they know enough -- and obviously they do. they generate the messaging about masks and the science behind them and social distancing. if they know enough politically to make this time different than the last time, why hasn't the president's messaging changed at any of his rallies? why is he okay with so many people still not having masks, still not social distancing? think about that. tonight when this happens at least five members of the vice president's team will have tested positive. right now they're positive, and they are a reflection of what's happening in this country. covid has never been worse than it is tonight. the daily case counts are at their highest levels ever, and this white house has chosen, even if they're doing it differently and better than the last time, and it's fair to say they are.

but to have an event at all in the middle of a pandemic, to crowd together once again -- because you can see the seating. they're smart not to light it by the way, but we'll show it to you. what message does it send? the president's chief of staff told us coronavirus will not be controlled. think about that. they are admitting to you that they don't think they can do anything about coronavirus. now, that tells you two things at once. first, it explains why they're not doing anything, why there is no wall mentality, why they're not throwing everything at it, putting their arms around it. trump doesn't think he can win against covid, so he doesn't want to have the fight. he wants to pretend the fight doesn't exist. secondly, it shows you what their preference is. they'd rather get the judge done. mcconnell would rather get the judge done, and we understand why politically in terms of the

impact. that will last decades. so mcconnell says no relief bill. it's not going to happen, white house. i'm going to get this done. think about the preference. i'm not saying one matters and one doesn't. but in terms of the emergency, they could have gotten this judge passed. they think they're going to do fine, right? they think they're going to keep the senate. but what about your relief? what about all the pain? what about the people in food lines? what about the closed businesses? think about it. instead, this was the priority, and tonight justice clarence thomas will deliver the constitutional oath of office to soon-to-be justice barrett eight days before an election that the supreme court could decide if contested. they're still getting ready. a little scene setter from kaitlan collins live at the white house. i am correct that masks are required this time. what does it look like because they didn't light the seats. are people closely seated? are they observing the mask

rule? what's the deal, kaitlan? >> reporter: most people are wearing masks, chris. it's actually something we have not seen on the south lawn in this way before. you think of the republican convention when there were hundreds of people, over 1,000 people out here in chairs that were tightly packed together. and these chairs are actually distanced. you are seeing most people wearing masks though we've seen a few people not wearing them. and who's here? you know, several republican senators, members of this administration, allies of this administration, cabinet officials as well who are here on the front row that we just saw come in, people like elaine chao. so you are seeing different measures taken than were taken exactly one month ago today at that event in the rose garden when the president was announcing that he was picking amy coney barrett, where chairs were not distanced. that was about 150 at that event, and very few people were wearing a mask. you saw chris christie, mike lee, people like that. mike lee is here tonight. it does look different but we should note there are still hundreds of people out here on

the south lawn, at least over 200 chairs that we counted earlier in addition to a band on the other side of the south lawn from where i'm standing right now. one question we do still have about attendance is whether or not the vice president mike pence is going to be here. >> here they come. >> reporter: now here comes everyone else for this swearing in. >> the vice president should be quarantining. he's been in close contact with people who have tested positive. there was the question he would still be campaigning. the optics are terrible. the science is terrible. it's bad practice. so we'll see. we just saw the first lady come out. obviously the applause are for her, and the guess is this will be taking place now shortly thereafter. we didn't get any kind of indication, kaitlan -- oh, let's listen. ♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states accompanied by -- >> as we go through the

ceremony, we will take you through it. i just want you to listen to what's going on. now we have another introduction. let's see who comes through the door here. ♪ okay. here is judge barrett and the president of the united states and justice clarence thomas, who will do the swearing in. [ applause ] now, a very unusual occasion that we're having here right now. it's not unusual for the justice to be sworn in at the white house, but with this kind of pageantry is this just about trump's flair for the dramatic and reality tv presence, or is this about an overt policesizatipolic politicization, the making political of this judge position, because that's the way the president has played it even though she was duly nominated and voted on and will now be sworn in. let's listen to what's happening. still applause. okay. so he's going to make some comments. let's listen to a couple of seconds of it. >> this is a momentous day for

america, for the united states constitution, and for the fair and impartial rule of law. the constitution is the ultimate defense of american liberty, the faithful application of the law is the cornerstone of our republic. that is why as president, i have no more solemn obligation and no greater honor than to appoint supreme court justices. on this october evening -- and it is so beautiful -- the first lady and i welcome you to the white house to bear witness to history. in a few moments, we will proudly swear in the newest member of the united states supreme court, justice amy coney barrett. [ applause ]

she is one of our nation's most brilliant legal scholars, and she will make an outstanding justice on the highest court in our land. justice barrett's oath will be administered by the court's longest-serving member currently on the bench, a man whose allegiance to the law has earned him the respect and gratitude of all americans, justice clarence thomas. [ applause ] our country owes a great debt of thanks to senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. we appreciate it very much, mitch. thank you. [ applause ] and we are grateful as well to the senate judiciary chairman, lindsey graham. thank you, lindsey.

[ applause ] >> when the swearing in happens, we'll come back to it. let's bring in our panel, dr. sanjay gupta. why? because we're in the middle of a pandemic and the numbers are worse than ever, and this is what we're watching. absolutely no attention to the crisis. dana bash. david axelrod. why? because we have to talk about the politics at play here and why this was a power move. we also have npr legal affairs correspondent nina totenberg. nobody understands the history of the supreme court better, more thoroughly, certainly in the context of what barrett will represent on this bench going forward. 6-3 conservative majority could last have a generation if nothing is done by democrats to change that. now, dana, on the reporting side, why this was the right play and to do it this way. we know the words that the president was just reading are not his own, all right? he's tied to the teleprompter because the sentiment is as

artificial as the color of his pallor. he is not a constitutionalist. he's not somebody who embraces it. but he does embrace a power move, and that's what this was. what are you being told? >> it's what you said earlier. he's embracing power. he's embracing pageantry, and he's doing it because he can. and coronavirus be damned. that's the way that this president has operated for the most part over the past ten months. it hurt him and his inner circle tremendously to the point that many of them got this deadly virus. but he -- that's not how he operates. you know this, chris. you've known him for longer than most of us have. he wants to take this moment and seize it because he understands that this is something that plays well for the people that he has visited just today in pennsylvania and other swing states. the issue, though, is i will tell you, chris, before coming on with you i checked in with a republican pollster who is in the field in battleground states

all over the country, who said just politically speaking, he's not sure how much this is going to help because the base is already really excited about him. it's not a kavanaugh situation. it's quite different. >> axe is nodding his head in agreement, but this is a big deliverable. if you got the relief check done, sure, that has more acute application to people's lives. but, you know, those checks come and go. this judge is for decades. >> yeah, well you're raising two different points. one is the historical meaning of it, and this is going to be a big part of trump's legacy -- three supreme court justices who have turned the court far to the right. nina knows far better than i about that. but as a matter of pure politics, i agree with what dana said. i don't think it's going to have much impact on the election. frankly, chris, passioningng a stimulus might have. it is the story that everyone is talking about now. i think the president welcomed the opportunity to change the subject tonight because the story is not going well for him.

but on the major story, which is this raging pandemic, this doesn't have any relevance right now. >> nina totenberg, thank you very much for being with us. the legacy for the president, true. the legacy for the court and for the country may have much longer roots. what could a judge barrett mean to jurisprudence going forward? >> well, i think you're about to look at a court that is more conservative than any court has been in 80 or 90 years dating back to the 1930s. and what that means is that there's going to be a 6-3 majority. that means that even if one of the conservatives flakes off, which they do from time to time. they don't go in lockstep on every issue. but if one of them flakes off, there's still a five-justice majority. it also means that chief justice roberts, who is, i think it's fair to say, painfully aware of

the danger to the courts if the supreme court is viewed as just a partisan institution, it means that he no longer has the kind of control he had in the last term when he was the fifth vote and could occasionally modify things somewhat. so on questions frthat range fr the right to privacy -- and that includes not just abortion but contraception, questions about a death, you know, what kind of right to privacy do you have in terms of, for example, deciding that you're not going to have any extraordinary measures to keep you alive? it means questions of i.v. fertilization. all of those issues will be, i think, on the table in front of

the supreme court eventually. certainly roe v. wade but many others that most people don't think of as somehow connected to roe v. wade. in addition, there are questions of presidential power. can -- can president trump keep his finances secret from the congress, from a grand jury investigation? so far the answer has been no, but there are more of those c e cases the president keeps appealing back to the supreme court on these very issues. then there are countless other issues that are part of americans' everyday lives that they don't think of as liberal or conservative but may end up very much controlled by a conservative majority on the supreme court. >> and now we deal with what we're not discussing. sanjay, as you know, you and i work a lot of the same sources. everybody is baffled that the case explosion has happened this

quickly, this early in the season despite what a lot of states have been doing, best efforts to keep it down. and absolutely no response from this white house or the broader administration other than the chief of staff saying, we can't control it. your reaction. >> well, you know, when they say that we can't control it, that, you know, sort of waving the white flag, i think it's worse than that, chris, because it's not even so much surrendering to the virus, saying we can't control it. i think all along, as we've talked about, there has been, even though it's not explicit, there has been this sort of -- this idea that herd immunity is sort of the strategy to adopt here, which is not even saying, i surrender. it's like saying, here's the door. i'm opening it. virus, come on in and run amok through the country, which is a terrible strategy. i think most of your viewers know that by now, abobut that cd lead to the death of 1.2 million

to 1.5 million people. hospitals would become overrun. >> sanjay, let's go to the swearing in. i'll come back to you. here we are, history in the making. >> i, amy coney barrett, do solemnly swear that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states. >> against all enemies foreign and domestic -- faith and allegiance to the same. >> that i will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. >> that i take this obligation freely. >> that i take this obligation freely. >> without any mental reservation. >> without any mental reservation. >> or purpose of evasion. >> or purpose of evasion. >> and that i will well and faithfully discharge. >> and that i will well and faithfully discharge. >> the duties of the office on

which i'm about to enter. >> the duties of the office on which i'm about to enter. >> so help me god. >> so help me god. [ applause ] >> there it is. we have a new supreme court justice. the court power structure now goes 6-3 in favor of conservatives, meaning that chief justice roberts, even if he wanted to have influence, better make a friend because even if he doesn't vote with conservatives, they still have a 5-4 majority. nina totenberg was talking about what this could mean. the justice is now making remarks. >> thank you all for being here tonight and thank you, president trump, for selecting me to serve as an associate justice of the united states supreme court. it's a privilege to be asked to serve my country in this office, and i stand here tonight truly honored and humbled.

thanks also to the senate for giving its consent to my appointment. i am grateful for the confidence you have expressed in me, and i pledge to you and to the american people that i will discharge my duties to the very best of my ability. this was a rigorous confirmation process, and i thank all of you, especially leader mcconnell and chairman graham, for helping me to navigate it. my heartfelt thanks go to the members of the white house staff and department of justice, who worked tirelessly to support me through this process. your stamina is remarkable, and i have been the beneficiary of it. jesse and i are so grateful to the many people who have supported our family through the

last three weeks. through ways both tangible and intangib intangible, you have made this day possible. jesse and i have been awestruck by your generosity. i have spent a good time over the last month at the senate, both in meetings with individual senators and in days of hearings before the senate judiciary committee. the confirmation process has made ever clearer to me one of the fundamental differences between the federal judiciary and the united states senate, and perhaps the most acute is the role of policy preferences. it is the job of a senator to pursue her policy preferences. in fact, it would be a dereliction of duty for her to put policy goals aside. by contrast, it is the job of a judge to resist her policy

preferences. it would be a dereliction of duty for her to give into them. federal judges don't stand for election. thus, they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the people. this separation of duty from political preference is what makes the judiciary distinct among the three branches of government. a judge declares independence not only from congress and the president but also from the private beliefs that might otherwise move her. the judicial oath captures the essence of the judicial duty. the rule of law must always control. my fellow americans, even though we judges don't face elections, we still work for you.

it is your constitution that establishes the rule of law and the judicial independence that is so central to it. the oath that i have solemnly taken tonight means at its core that i will do my job without any fear or favor and that i will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences. i love the constitution and the democratic republic that it establishes, and i will devote myself to preserving it. thank you. [ applause ] >> okay. let's bring back the panel. nina totenberg, those comments are the correct and perfunctory ones to be made by an arbiter of the constitution. what do we know about this judge that gives confidence or lack thereof in her ability to keep policy preferences, which all too often seem to conform with

the party that puts a judge on the bench, from being any different than what we've seen in the past? >> well, i guess, you know, there is no supreme court justice, no judge who has a completely unified ideology that always results in uncontradictory answers. so you just heard the newest justice talk about how important it is for congress to make policy choices. well, congress made policy choices in the aca, obamacare, and she has indicated in her writings that she disapproves of the supreme court's analysis of those policy choices and would reach a different conclusion and would strike down at least some aspects of the law. so she's about to, in all likelihood, unless she recuses

herself, which i highly doubt, be the perhaps deciding vote in the latest case, the third challenge to obamacare. >> right. >> even the lawyer who represented the challengers to obamacare thinks it's a bit of a stretch. >> nina, let me ask you something quickly before i get to sanjay. do you think justice barrett now made a mistake allowing herself to become part of a political spectacle like this? >> listen, you know, let's get real here. you don't get an offer to be a supreme court justice more than once, and she couldn't very well control the timetable. she conceivably, let's say just for the sake of argument that there is a big dispute about the election returns and the case ends up in the supreme court. i suppose she could recuse herself, but then the court might be evenly divided, and that's not good either.

>> no. i mean this. she didn't have to be sworn in this way. this is not what we're used to seeing, let alone in the middle of a pandemic. >> and you don't see the chief justice there either. >> right. what does that mean? >> i think that means that, a, he doesn't want to be at a super-spreader event or an event that is quite overtly political. and so my assumption is that he will administer the judicial oath at the court, either in public or in private, in the coming day or days as has happened in the past with other nominees to the court. but having said that, i don't think that when the president has just selected you, his white house has fought tooth and nail along with mitch mcconnell to get you confirmed, that realistically you get to say, no, i'm not going to show up for this. >> right. it's just we've never seen a justice be more of a political player in the pageantry of their confirmation -- not confirmation

but the swearing in as we did tonight. i want to go to sanjay. they got their justice. it's done. what does this administration need to do tomorrow morning to deal with what's happening in this country which, again, sanjay, i know you're hearing it. i'm hearing it. coast to coast, north to south, east to west, people are worried they don't have what they need. they don't have community buy-in. they don't have capacity and funding to do what they need to do to stave off the caseload and hospitalizations even before the flu hits. >> right. i think it's really important, chris, and the thing is that at some point i don't know that the sort of prophylactic or preventative decisions are really going to be in our hands anymore. what i mean by that is you're starting to see situations where hospitals are becoming increasingly overrun. you see this in el paso. they're looking at a convention center? wisconsin. they've got these field hospitals in utah. you know, the governor's tweeting out last week it's not

sustainable what's happening here right now. i mean they've got to break this cycle of transmission, chris. you know, the virus is spreading too rapidly, and we're going into exponential growth, which means we're going to look at a line in a few days, maybe a week, which is going to look like it's going straight up, kind of like we're seeing in the european union right now, and it's going to become overwhelming. what do we need to do? to your question, chris, it's the same strategies we've been talking about for some time. it's the universal wearing of masks. i mean when we look at -- >> you know what they'll say, sanjay. they'll say, sanjay just said it. it's going straight up in europe also. it's not us. we're not doing anything wrong. this is what the virus does. look at europe. >> and there's plenty of cases around the world where that's not the case. are you going to compare yourself to the worst places or aspire to be the best? i find it hard to believe that the best we can do in this country was be the worst in the world. i really do.

that aside, we saw what does work. in arizona after they lifted the stay-at-home orders, they got into trouble. they had a 150% increase in cases and they basically said we're going to do mask mandates. we're going to limit large outdoor gatherings, kind of like the one you're seeing here at the white house. and certain businesses like bars in particular, we're not going to happen. and what happened within three weeks? a 75% decrease in new cases. it's a hyper local example of a strategy that works, and i bring up a u.s. example because everyone always says, well, that's a different country. you can't do that here. it was three basic things, and it made a huge difference. >> and a republican governor. >> and a republican governor. >> and a republican governor. >> dana's right. dana, thank you for that. the idea that you are a week out and your intention as the incumbent is to not discuss that you are at the worst point in the most pressing crisis in a generation, how does that work? >> it doesn't. it doesn't work unless your

strategy is what the president's strategy is, which is just to turn out every single possible human being who's eligible to vote, who likes hearing that we've turned the corner even though it's not true, who likes hearing the other guy is going to shut down the country again, which is not true. and, you know, the idea that he's going to change minds right now, nobody believes that in his own party. so he's doubling, tripling down on the way that he governed for four years, which is really going straight at the people who like him and trying to make sure every one of them vote. and it's very much an open question about whether or not that's enough. >> hey, axe, if you guys had come out in the obama administration and said, yeah, we didn't want you to know this guy got sick, and, look, we're not going to be able to control this thing that's devouring the country, you would have been run out of town on a rail by the media, let alone anybody else.

>> we don't have time to discuss the things that if -- >> i'm saying you're a week away from the election, and this is their play? ignore a pandemic? >> let me just say that the math does not work, and that's their problem. there aren't enough people who support that. sure, there's turnout to the rallies and there are his supporters who support that. but most americans, 72% of americans support requiring masks. you know, he is on the wrong side of history here, and i guarantee you that every rational republican who you talk to, who i talk to, who dana talks to will say this is not how we want to finish this race. but this is what he chooses to talk about. he has spun things for his whole life, and what he's finding is what we've said so many times. you cannot spin a pandemic. and i think he's going to learn that come -- >> you can't even spin it to the stock market today either. >> yeah, exactly. the markets are down, which of

course is his barometer of how things are going in the country. so i think the die is cast. this is the way he's going to play his hand, and i think he's already laying the groundwork for alibiing for an excuse. you know, the vote is fixed, the vote is rigged. >> right. >> and so on. >> well, look, the stock market is highly reactionary to fear, and, sanjay, there's a lot of fear to go around right now. interestingly, i actually think the president is benefiting from collective fatigue here. the numbers of increase across the country are really frightening, but people have been afraid for a long time, sanjay. what kinds of things do you think you're going to hear from around the country in just the next week in terms of case growth pretty much everywhere? >> well, i'm pretty focused on hospitals, chris. i think that -- >> hospitalization rates. >> i think it's a true measure of just how significant this is. the numbers are going up.

but as you say, people are sort of inured to that a bit. what is it? 86,000 people becoming infected versus 60,000. you know, these are all crazy numbers. i mean the same number of people were infected in the white house, arguably the most secure house in the country, as were infected in the entire country of new zealand over the last 24 hours. so just to give you an idea of how significant that is, the numbers. but you're right. i don't know that people pay attention to it. they will pay attention to hospitals because when you get into a situation, which i hope we don't get into, we saw some of this in new york early on where there may just not be enough hospital beds. i mean you're calling because your loved one is having a hard time breathing and they're saying we're going to have to take you outside the region to get you a hospital bed, i think that's going to be very alarming, as it should be, to people. we can still avoid that situation, but as you just mentioned it's already happening in some cities across the

country. so the hospital numbers, i think, are going to force the issue a bit. i mean you're going to have hospital directors who are calling their local leaders saying, hey, we're in trouble here. we're talking about not enough beds, no the enough personnel, not enough of basic resources. we don't know that we can take basic care of the citizens if they start to get sick from this disease. again, most people won't get sick. but if the numbers are as long as they are, chris, then the absolute number of people who get sick is going to obviously increase as well. >> sanjay, thank you very much. dana bash, david axelrod, and nina totenberg, we are living history. we have never seen anything play out the way this election is. now, the president had said to you earlier, handling the pandemic, i deserve an a-plus for the handling of it. fright new englan frightening.

we're failing all across this country. why not take on a crisis head-on when you say you are a wartime president and the war is against covid? we have a key player from the trump re-election team. the messaging man, communications director tim murtaugh, next. let's get after it. tual. they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. wow. that will save me lots of money. this game's boring. only pay for what you need. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. 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 we try to soothe it with this. cool it with this. and relieve it with this. but new preparation h soothing relief is the 21st century way to do all three. everyday.

preparation h. get comfortable with it. we're all finding ways to keep moving. but how do we make sure the direction we're headed is forward? at fidelity, you'll get the planning and advice to prepare you for the future, without sacrificing the things that are important to you today. we'll help you plan for healthcare costs, taxes and any other uncertainties along the way. because with fidelity, you can feel confident that the only direction you're moving is forward. now every bath fitter bathbath fis installed quickly, because with fidelity, you can feel confident safely, and beautifully, with a lifetime warranty. go from old to new. from worn to wow.

the beautiful bath you've always wanted, done right, installed by one expert technician, all in one day. we've been creating moments like these for 35 years, and we're here to help you get started. book your free virtual or in-home design consultation today. such as high blood pressure,ve pdiabetes, and asthma.s this administration and senate republicans want to overturn laws requiring insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions. they're rushing a lifetime appointment to the supreme court to change the law through the courts. 70% of americans want to keep protections for pre-existing conditions in place. tell our leaders in washingtn to stop playing games with our healthcare. ♪ i see you looking (uh) ♪ i see you looking (na, na, na) ♪ ♪ i see you looking (uh) ♪ i see you looking ♪ watch what i do

(camera clicks) ♪ watch what i do ♪ i see you looking ♪ watch what i do! (camera clicks) ♪ watch what i do ♪ i see you looking ♪ watch what i ... do! it would be for me to discover all of these things that i found through ancestry. i discovered my great aunt ruth signed up as a nursing cadet for world war ii. you see this scanned-in, handwritten document. the most striking detail is her age. she was only 17. knowing that she saw this thing happening and was brave enough to get involved and do something- that was eye opening. bring your family history to life like never before. get started for free at ancestry.com i cannot show you a piece of data or what we look at as a metric for analysis to prove

that the pandemic is not getting worse. this goes beyond just raw case counts. you want to look at positivity rate? no good. what's positivity? what it sounds like, how many cases as a percentage come back positive. it's climbing, which undermines the idea of, well, we only have a lot of cases because we test a lot. that would be true if the rate of positivity stayed the same no matter how much you tested, but it doesn't. it increases, which means the testing isn't the problem. the virus is the problem. hospitalizations, very lagging indicator. why? first you get sick. you get tested. then if it gets bad, god forbid, you go into the hospital. record-level hospitalization, 15 states. and despite what we've heard from the president about a cure, we are nowhere near one, and we see that reflected horribly in the mortality rate. our mortality rate in the united

states is worse than peru, spain, and ecuador. only ten countries on the planet are worse. this is the truth a week out from the election, yet you have a white house chief of staff saying, covid, can't control it. have we ever heard an administration quit on a problem let alone in the heat of crisis? literally trying to hide a second outbreak, this time centered around the vice president? and we wish him and his family well. an outbreak so bad that the vp wasn't at his actual job today presiding over the senate for the vote to confirm a new supreme court justice like he did for both kavanaugh and gorsuch. but he was essential enough to be on the campaign hustings. do you see the problem here? is it obvious enough what's being valued here in the middle

of a pandemic? sure, they took care of all their vips at the white house tonight. they had masks on. not at these rallies. why do the rank and file, who are literally putting their health on the line, not deserve the same messaging? if now is the time, now that you got the judge, now that the numbers are at their worst, will we hear something from the trump campaign about a plan to help us get through a generational crisis? campaign communications director tim murtaugh, welcome to "prime time." you saw the judge be sworn in just moments ago by justice clarence thomas, not by the chief justice. why? well, obviously there was something about the event, whether it was a health concern or otherwise, he didn't go there. so we'll wait for the installment oath to be given when she's at the court. justice amy coney barrett. so now that that's done, will

the campaign take on the worst situation with coronavirus that we've had to date? >> well, i don't know what you've been paying attention to, chris, but the president has been taking this problem head-on since the very first week of january. that's when the cdc began issuing travel warnings to china and then screenings at major american airports. and it was by the end of january when the president restricted travel from china, which i would point out again that is something that we know that joe biden would not have done because he called it xenophobic and fearmongering. so if joe biden had been president at that time, we know we would be in a worse situation today in this country as a resultf at