hello, everybody. welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king in washington. thank you for sharing your monday with us. we'll go live in the white house in just moments, the press secretary about to brief reporters. it is the beginning of a big week in washington, and a strange one. critical work on the biden agenda competing for time and attention with the second trump impeachment trial. the house starts work on the second covid relief package. we know that republican support is unlikely, so the test at the moment is if the democrats stick together, if minimum wage is in that package and who should or

should not receive stimulus checks. both the prosecution and defense filing their case briefs. sources say chuck schumer and mitch mcconnell are up for debates this week. the trump team dismissing the impeachment as a constitutional sham, motivated, it says, by democratic, quote, hunger for political theater. president biden was asked this morning on his rureturn to the white house if mr. trump should be barred from running again. >> he got an offer to come and testify. he decided not to. we'll let the senate work that out. >> the impeachment trial will swallow all other senate business and much of washington's oxygen. but the event, of course, does not press pause on the pandemic. reminder this morning of the cost. texas congressman ron wright passed away sunday, passed away yesterday, a little more than two weeks after testing positive for the virus. a briefing last hour for the new

biden coronavirus team. sunday's case number was the lowest since early november. but listen to the cdc director here say, yes, there is progress, that progress is real, but -- >> we are continuing to watch these data closely, and although hospital admissions and cases are consistently dropping, i'm asking everyone to please keep your guard up. the continued proliferation of variants remains of great concern and is a threat that could reverse the recent positive trends we are seeing. >> with us to share her reporting and important insights, senior medical correspondent, elizabeth cohen. elizabeth, it's interesting listening to these briefings. the case count is down, hospitalizations are down. yet you can sense they're afraid of getting optimistic because they're still getting a handle on the variants. >> and, john, they are afraid with good reason, and it's not just the variants. i want to talk about that, but

saying these numbers will go back to where they were in early november, it's still not great. november and december is when things really started to go off the rails. even if you go back before then, you're still talking about hundreds of americans dying every day or often thousands of americans dying every day. so it's not like we can all sort of get our pom-poms and start cheering, it is still really bad. and then secondly, when we talk about the variants, the variants are worrisome. when you have these variants come out that seem to be spreading more easily, there is some evidence that at least the one from the united kingdom might, in fact, be more deadly. we know the south african one, the vaccine might not work as well against it. there is every reason to still keep our guard up. and that's why, when dr. walensky, the director of the cdc, was asked about easing mask restrictions, this is what she had to say. >> i think we have yet to control this pandemic. we still have this emerging

threat of variants, and i would just simply discourage any of those activities. we really need to keep all of the mitigation measures at play here if we're really going to get control of this pandemic. if we want to get our schools open and our schools open safely and well, the best way to do that is to decrease the community spread. so i would say we need to keep up our social distancing and masking and all of our other mitigation measures. >> so the administration here kind of in a little bit of a tricky spot. these numbers are getting better, that is good, but we are still in a terrible situation in the united states. we are still seeing hundreds or even thousands of people dying a day, hence, still need to wear masks, still need to do social distancing, and if you can get a vaccine, get one. john? >> elizabeth cohen, grateful for the reporting and the insights. you're right, we're in a better place but by no means a good

place. it will be fascinating to watch this play out in the days ahead. the impeachment trial starts tomorrow, 1:00 p.m. what we expect to hear throughout the week. the president's lawyers in their brief argue that the trial, in their view, is constitutionally questionable. the democrats say that question of constitutionality is simply absurd. they plan to link the president's words directly to the january 6 violence mayhem on capitol hill. with us, manu raju, kaitlan collins and legal analyst jennifer rogers. manu, let me start with you. when you look at the brief from the trump legal team, you can understand it's a political brief more than anything. we know right now they don't have enough republican votes to convict, let's keep it that way. the important thing is those who rioted the capitol did of their own accord and they are being criminally prosecuted. the democratic leadership is

incapable of understanding that everything can't be blamed on the republicans. >> it's all hard to rebut the key article going forward that donald trump intentionally riled up his supporters, engaged in the months-long campaign to suggest that votes were fraudulent, and after november 3rd, continued to stoke the idea that this is a fraudulent campaign, used his power in office to try to subvert the will of voters by pressuring local officials to overturn the results of the election, promoted the so-called save the steel rally on january 6. ultimately went to the steps of the white house and told supporters to go to the capitol and fight, and that's what they did. that's how the democrats are going to make their case. what we saw from the trump team today was them saying, look, this was just a political speech the president had given. he did not intend for them to break down the doors of the capitol. the rioters did it on their own

accord to separate the two, but the key argument, the constitutionality argument is what most republicans will ultimately settle on saying this is not constitutional. what is interesting tomorrow, john, tomorrow will be the first test to see if any changes have happened on the republican side of the aisle, because we know five republican senators -- >> i need to take you straight to the white house, i'm sorry, press secretary jen psaki. >> t.j. has an alarm going on. excited about the briefing. just a couple things for you at the top. the president and his entire administration are continuing to engage closely with leaders on capitol hill about the need to act quickly on the american rescue plan so we can finish the job of getting $2,000 checks out to americans, so we can get more vaccines in the arms of americans, so we can get economic relief to families facing eviction or food insecurity, and so we can help reopen schools safely. we're encouraged that both speaker pelosi and majority leader schumer are in full agreement about the need to move swiftly on the president's

proposal, and the committee markups we'll see throughout the week are evidence of congress acting on that expeditiously. our expectation are this week's house markups will track closely with what the president has proposed, but there will, of course, be adjustments to strengthen the bill and tweaks as a result of the legislative process, which he's quite aware of having served there 36 years, which is how the process supposed to work. we're also going to continue to make the case directly to the american people about the urgency of getting this package across the finish line, including through national and local tv and radio interviews, engagement with hundreds of mayors and county elected officials, consultations with stakeholders across the political spectrum, from labor and world leaders to the faith community. here's a quick overview, a number of you have asked about this, about the scope of our efforts. over a dozen senior administration officials have conducted over 100 national tv and podcast interviews to discuss the plan.

we've done over 30 local tv interviews in states ranging from nevada to louisiana to pennsylvania. in the last week alone, our legislative affairs team had done more than 300 calls with members and staff on the hill, including 40 calls with republicans or bipartisan groups. and you can expect that the president will engage throughout the course of this week with a range of stakeholders, including business leaders, mayors and governors, and as we've discussed before, this message is resonating. poll after poll show a bipartisan majority of the american people in support of the president's plan. a couple other quick updates for all of you. many folks likely noticed, if you watched the super bowl, the president and the first lady yesterday appeared in a psa that aired during the pre-game show, thanking health care workers and addressing the importance of continuing to wear masks and getting vaccinations when it's your turn. this is a good example of how you can expect the white house in the coming months to reach out with critical public health

messaging as part of an education campaign, meeting americans where they are, on their couches, watching the super bowl for yesterday, and communicating about the important mitigation steps people can take. as many of you also know, last night during the super bowl, president biden called service members to thank them for their courage, dedication and service to our nation. he first called troops with resolute support mission in kabul and then the u.s.s. nimitz. he then shared ship broadcasts and messages to the nearly 5,000 sales and marines who comprise the u.s.s. nimitz crew. with that, we'll go to your questions. >> reporter: the first is your favorite topic. did does t does the president plan to watch any of the trial this week, and does he prefer a speedy trial, or would he prefer a full airing

of the capitol riot? >> the president would tell you we keep him pretty busy, and he has a full schedule this week which he will continue to keep you abreast of as soon as we have more details. we've already announced his plans to go visit the nih, to go visit the department of defense. as i noted, he will be engaging with mayors and governors, and, of course, continuing to make the case and have conversations with democrats and republicans directly about his hopes and plans for the american rescue plan moving forward as quickly as possible. i think it's clear from his schedule and from his intention he will not spend too much time watching the proceedings, if any time, over the course of this week. he will remain closely in touch with speaker pelosi, leader schumer, arrange with officials on the hill about his plan, and that's exactly what they want him to do, is to remain focused on that. and he will leave the pace and the process and the mechanics of the impeachment proceedings up to members of congress.

>> reporter: president biden said there is no need for trump to receive intelligence briefings. has trump requested any, has he received any? that was an executive decision or whose decision was that left up to? >> well, the president said when asked that there was no need for him to receive them. any reference, of course, is erratic behavior, which i think many americans would agree with him on. he was expressing his concern about former president trump receiving access to sensitive intelligence. but he also has deep trust in his own intelligence team to make a determination about how to provide intelligence information, if at any point the former president requests a briefing. so that's not currently applicable, but if he should request a briefing, he leaves it to them to make a determination. go ahead. >> reporter: i've been meaning to go to reuters next, so we'll go to you next. >> reporter: you mentioned there

could be adjustments to the plan. one thing that was important to bernie sanders was the $15 minimum wage. the president already said that may not make it into the full package. how important is that measure still to the white house and how we get it done? also the other thing that came up this weekend is looking at the tweaking the level of who gets the stimulus checks. janet yellen mentioned 60,000. who gets left out, right? who is between the 60,000 and the 75,000? >> sure. the first question, the president remains firmly committed to raising the minimum wage to $15. that's why he put it in his first legislative proposal and he believes any american who is working a full-time job trying to make ends meet should not be at the poverty level. it's important to him that the minimum wage is raised. he was referring this weekend to, as you noted in your question, the parliamentary process. obviously it's the most likely path at this point is through a

reconciliation process. there is a parliamentarian who will make decisions about what can end up in a final package, and that was certainly what he was referencing in his comments. in terms of what the options are, we'll see what the pa parliamentarian decides, and then we'll see what additional options are, but we're getting a little ahead of where we are at this point in the process. i'm sure we can continue to have a discussion about it in here, and then your second question one more time? >> the 60,000? >> sure. one of the pieces the president has talked about is his openness in engaging and having a discussion of what is unofficially called, i guess, the scale up, right? so his proposal, as you know, had proposed $1400 to make the $2,000 whole. he had proposed a threshold. there is a discussion right now about what that threshold will look like. the conclusion hasn't been

finalized. that will work through congress. his bottom line is families making $200,000, $300,000 a year might not be in need of those checks at this time, but there will be a scale up. a nurse, a teacher, a firefighter making $60,000 shouldn't be left without any support or relief, either. it's just a question of what the scale up looks like in a final package, but it's still being negotiated at this point in time. >> if i can just ask you, on the $15, doesn't it make it much harder to get it through if you don't attach it to this covid relief bill? and the cbo is saying if you did go through with it, it would lead to a 0.9% reduction in the number of jobs. >> i heard about the cbo score as i was walking out here, so i haven't talked to our economic team about that specifically. and at this point in time, it's still working its way through the process in congress, and the

parliamentarian still has to make a determination about what will be in the final package. i promised i would go to you next. >> reporter: thank you. i have a couple questions on covid, but i'd like to strart with iran. the president of iran said they would not reach sanctions first before negotiations could resume, but the supreme leader said the u.s. has to act first and roll back sanctions in order to re-engage. is this a non-negotiable point for president biden, and if so, how do you get out of this stalemate? >> just to be clear, the president never said that. it was stated by norah o'donnell who did the interview and he didn't respond to the question. the president's position is if iran comes back into -- >> reporter: i think he nodded. >> i think if we were doing a

policy change, it would be more than a head nod, but his position is what it's been. if iran comes into full compliance with its obligations under the gpa, the united states would do the same and use it as a platform to build a larger and stronger agreement that also addresses other areas of concern. that, of course, would be done with our p5-s1 partners as it was done with the gpa in the first place. >> reporter: so what was said that it was the u.s.'s burden to re-engage? >> those were actions of the former administration, as you know, and president biden, of course, was a part of the administration that were advocating for the plan to be put together to begin with. but i think his position, the position of our national security team, and the position that he's been in discussion with our partners about, or i should say conveying to our partners, is that it's really up to iran to come back into full compliance with its obligations under the jcpoa, and at that

point, we could move the discussion forward. >> reporter: can you talk about the concrete steps the administration is doing to target and stop the spread of the variants we keep hearing about? does that include surging vaccines to areas impacted like south florida or california with the b117 strain? >> i know we had a lot of briefings today, and those of you who had the opportunity to participate in the briefing with some of our medical and health experts, they talked about the importance of not only vaccination, getting the vaccine when you're eligible, that that is a protective step, and also abiding by a number of the mitigation steps that our health experts have recommended. but beyond that, i'm not going to go beyond the advice of our health and medical experts at this point in time. go ahead, kaitlan. >> two questions for you, one on the minimum wage. you're saying it's up to the parliamentarian to make a decision whether that can be

included in here. we know senator sanders said they're still waiting on that. but temperchnically the vice president could overrule the parliamentarian on this. it hasn't happened for a long time, but is that something the administration is continuing, would president biden want the vice president to override this package? >> i'm not aware of that being allowed. i would certainly take you at your word. i think our view is the parliamentarian is who is chosen typically to make a decision in a non-partisan manner in terms of what can be included in a package that goes through reconciliation as the proper package to journey through. >> reporter: so when the president said he did not think it would survive, who told him it wouldn't make it through, likely? >> the president was in congress for -- in the senate for 36 years. again, it still has not worked its way through the process, and that can take a bit of time, and we certainly defer to the

parliamentarian and members of the house, of the senate, i should say, to give you a better assessment of what the timeline looks like. >> reporter: i have another question on impeachment, just to be clear. if the parliamentarian says no $15 minimum wage, that's the decision the white house is going with? >> let's wait to see what they say. the president remains committed to raising the minimum wage. it's something he talked about on the campaign trail, it's something he firmly believes in as a person and as a leader, but there hasn't been a determination made at this point in time. >> reporter: on impeachment, the president and the white house hasn't said if he believes president trump should be convicted by the senate in this trial, but if he doesn't believe he should get access to intelligence briefings, why can't he say whether or not he should be convicted by the senate? >> he's no longer in the senate. he's retired from the senate and he's president of the united states, and his focus is on getting relief to the american people. that's exactly what he's conveyed publicly, of course, and privately as well, and he'll leave it to his former colleagues in the senate or

members of the senate to determine the path forward. >> reporter: but doesn't he think if he believes his behavior is too erratic to get access to intelligence, doesn't he believe he should be barred from holding office again? >> he ran against him because he felt he was unfit for office, and he defeated him. and that's why he's no longer -- trump is no longer president of the united states. so i think his views of the former president are pretty clear, but he's going to leave it to the senate to see this impeachment proceedings through. go ahead. >> reporter: just to follow up on that question, will the president commit to giving his view once all the evidence is heard in the impeachment trial? and secondly, a question on myanmar. what is the u.s. doing to perhaps accelerate some of the actions we're seeing over the weekend with protests, and secondly, how concerned is the u.s. about china which has not stepped in forcefully and is not calling it a coup? >> our national security team has been in touch with a number

of our partners and allies. we were outspoken quite quickly in the days following the coup, and we named it, designated it a coup very quickly. in terms of what actions we're taking, there are considerations that are underway, or policy processes that are underway on our national security team as we speak. i don't have an update on that today, but when we do, we'll certainly make you all abreast of that and certainly we are concerned about china's absence from the conversation and lack of a vocal role here. on the first question, the president was asked about this this morning, and he made it pretty clear he wasn't planning to speak to it, so, again, he's no longer in the senate, and we put out a statement at the conclusion of the house proceedings. certainly we would consider doing that at the conclusion of the senate, but i don't expect that he's going to be, you know, posturing or commenting on this through the course of the week.

go ahead. >> reporter: thank you, jen. the first question is on energy. when is it the biden administration is going to let the thousands of fossil fuel industry workers, whether it's pipeline workers or construction workers, who are either out of work or will soon be out of work bec where and when it is they can go for their green job. that is something the administration promised and there is now a gap. i'm just wondering when they can count on that. >> i certainly invite you to present the data of the thousands and thousands of people who won't be getting a green job. maybe next time you can present that. >> reporter: but you said they would be getting a green job. i'm just wondering when that would happen. a friend of biden said about that day one keystone ban, said,

i wish he would tell us about it because he said, here's where we're creating the jobs. >> you didn't include all of his interview. would you like to include the rest? >> reporter: the national labor union of north america said the keystone decision will cost 1,000 existing union jobs and 10,000 projected construction jobs. >> what mr. trump also indicated in the same interview was that president biden has proposed a climate plan with infrastructure and laid out a plan that will not only create millions of good union jobs but also help tackle the climate crisis. as the president has indicated when he gave his prime time address to talk about the american rescue plan, he talked about his plans to also put forward a jobs plan in the weeks or months following. he has every plan to do exactly that. >> reporter: but there are people living paycheck to paycheck. there are now people out of jobs once the keystone pipeline stops construction.

it's been 12 days since john kerry was here and it's been 19 days since that executive order. so when do people get their green jobs? >> the president and many people in congress believe building infrastructure that's international interests creates good-paying union jobs here in america, and clean climate goals are something we can do together, and he has more plans to share his details of that plan in the weeks ahead. >> reporter: there is also word that the house will come out with $3,000 per child for families. is that something that would be a permanent benefit? >> the president talked about this a little bit on the campaign trail and the importance of child tax credits to help working families, making sure they could make ends meet. this proposal is emergency

funding, as i understand it. it's a central priority of his first legislative proposal to cut child poverty in half in the first year, and that's why he included a tax credit in the american rescue plan. that's, again, emergency funding that will help people get through this period of time of go ahead. >> reporter: a follow-up to peter's question. what does this mean for the government giving out regular checks on a routine basis to americans who might need it? >> i know that's been proposed by a number of people, including the president on the campaign trail. i don't have anything more for you. i'm happy to check with our economic team if that's something they're looking at at all. >> reporter: do you agree with the need that many on the hill and not just democrats are expressing that there ought to be these enormous -- i won't say enormous -- but $3,000 to $4,000 checks for families right now? >> as i tried to just indicate, the president supports the

proposal that representative neal and others have put forward and otherto ensure there is mon a package that brings help to american families. that is something he would support. go ahead. >> reporter: thanks, jen. i have two questions. one of the other things secretary yellen said yesterday is that the president is open to a mandate on family leave and child care. is there a timetable on that? >> i don't have any more details or a timetable for you. certainly as a father himself, this is an issue that he has spoken about in the past, but i don't have any more details at this point in time. >> reporter: also, yesterday did the president or the white house have any concern about what we all saw on tv from tampa about the thousands of people out celebrating and without masks? any concern there? >> certainly. i mean, the president -- i

haven't spoken with him specifically about the events of this weekend, but he did a psa yesterday with dr. biden making clear that social distancing, that mask wearing, that getting the vaccine when you have the opportunity to get the vaccine are vital steps to keeping more americans safe and saving more lives. and certainly we know the super bowl looked different from what it has in the past, and he also conveyed that he's hopeful that next year will be a moment where everybody can celebrate and party. but he is, of course, concerned when there are pictures and photos, we all are, that show many, many people without masks in close distance with one another at the height of a pandemic. go ahead. >> reporter: i have two questions. president biden said in the cbs interview that he hadn't spoken to president xi yet because he

hasn't had a reason to talk to him, there's not a reason to call him. is it actually part of the strategy to not call him yet and to hold off on that in hopes of kind of sending a message to china that, you know, president biden is not going to, you know, try to work really hard to curry favor. is there something happening there? >> well, part of our strategy is to consult closely with our partners and allies, and you saw we did readouts of these calls over the past week or so, that the president spoke with the prime minister of japan, he spoke with the prime minister of south korea, he spoke with the prime minister of australia, and china was, of course, an important topic of conversation during those conversations. he also discussed china with -- in calls with his european allies thus far. so part of our strategy is certainly engaging with partners in the region and allies, and doing those calls and engagements first, and also

having consultations with democrats and republicans on capitol hill. i know i can't say this forever, but we've only been here two and a half weeks. he has not called every global leader yet, he has not had engagements with all of them, and i'm sure he'll do more of that in the weeks ahead. >> reporter: but he has spoken to president putin who is somebody that is not an ally. >> certainly not. >> reporter: and that was more than a week ago at this point. >> yes, but he had that conversation in part because there was a timeline for a new start, and the deadline that was approaching with new start, and during that conversation he made very clear that there are significant concerns he has, the administration has, about the reported actions of the russian government. but for the most part, his other calls have been with partners and allies in the region in asia and europe as well at this point in time. >> reporter: something else. ron klain said on january 21st that the administration was going to try to build what he described as a national

clearinghouse for information about the covid vaccine. is something like that being built in the administration, and if so, how long do you think that's going to take? i think people are really struggling to find information about their state, their county, and, you know, there's so much difficulty in the vaccination process. >> you're right, there is a great deal of confusion, and one of the focuses we have had is trying to alleviate that confusion. part of that has been through working with governors and local elected officials. one of their biggest requests has been to have more of a heads up on how much vaccine supply there would be. of course, to increase vaccine supply, we are working to ensure there is planning time for vaccine allocation, increases in

a alottments as they allow. we're concentrating on getting 1 million vaccines in arms of people in 100 days. the president has directed his team to use whatever tools and resources necessary to get the job done. there are a range of operations open for consideration, but i don't have an update on that proposal. certainly a lot of people would love that, but we're looking to prioritize how we can be most impactful as quick as possible and working with states and governors to make those determinations. >> reporter: back on impeachment, you mentioned that the president will be in close contact with senator schumer. do you expect that to be daily? for example, have they spoken since he's gotten back from delaware? like, will that be a regular way that the president is briefed on the progress of the impeachment trial? >> i don't expect that would be

a primary topic. i actually expect it would be more about the american rescue plan and progress being made on that front. there, of course, are markups happening this week more on the house side, and the president has remained in close touch with speak pelosi and leader schumer very regularly over the course of the last few weeks, and i expect that would continue. >> reporter: do you expect they will have any strategy discussions at all as the trial is unfolding? >> i don't expect that would be a primary point of discussion of their conversations. >> reporter: you said he's busy and he's not going to be spending moment by moment attention to it this week, but will he get a daily update or perhaps more frequently than that from white house staff? >> i don't expect that will be a primary focus for him this week or of his senior staff, either. >> reporter: i have another foreign policy following the question about iran. when the president rolled out

dropping u.s. sanctions, immediately he didn't then go on and talk about some of the other strategies that are out there, including, for example, that the united states might drop its objections to iran receiving an imf loan, covid-related imf loan, a couple other ideas that would allow iran to get some economic benefit that would not be sanctions, and maybe grease the wheel for negotiations. does the president have a view on those strategies, and were they part of the discussion at the principals' meeting on friday? >> i read out a principals' meeting which primarily was on issues in the mideast. iran was a topic of discussion or expected to be a topic of discussion. i think during the interview the president was asked about whether he would roll back sanctions and he conveyed, no,

that the ball is in iran's court. it wasn't a more extensive conversation than that during the interview, and that's long been his position. so that really is the next step in terms of engagement with iran from here. >> reporter: so that is not ruling it out, necessarily, that there might be other ways to help iran get back to the table that would be short of dropping u.s. sanctions? >> well, again, i think his view is that the ball is in iran's court to come back into full compliance with the jcpoa, and that that would be the basis for the united states doing the same, and then using that as a platform to build a longer and stronger agreement. but that is really the next step in his view in the process. >> reporter: i have one more quickly on post office if i could. on-time first class mail delivery dropped to 38% in december of this year, from 92% the year before. does the president have a view

on whether the postmaster general should keep his job and if he would like to see the postmaster general removed, would he move to change the makeup of the governing board that could make that happen? >> well, as i understand it, there are a number of openings right now on the governing board of the post office, or vacancies, i should say, that would, of course, work their way through a personnel process. i don't think i have anything more on this for you, but i can follow up with our team and see what more we can report out. go ahead. >> reporter: back on the subject of the covid checks, bernie sanders said it would be absurd to lower the threshold, the income threshold, and some other democrats have raised the prospect that doing so could lead to a political backlash given voters in georgia were explicitly promised this aid by the president, and they didn't really have any reason to believe that fewer people would qualify for that aid under the democrats' plan. i'm wondering if that's something you guys are concerned about and how you would address

that criticism. >> well, the president proposed the $1400 checks plus 600, of course, is $2,000, because he felt it was important and vital to get that direct relief to as many americans as possible and target that relief to the americans who need help the most. and that's how his original plan and proposal was designed. he's also said, and i have said many times from here, that the final plan will look different from what the plan he proposed in his joint session address. it's still working its way through congress, and i don't think a conclusion has been made yet on the exact level of targeting, and when it does, we're happy to have a conversation about that. but part of this is an opportunity for members of both parties and members who are across the political spectrum, of course, even in the democratic party to weigh in on what the path forward should look like. go ahead in the back. >> reporter: thank you, jen. a little bit of follow-up on the

iran and china question. what does president biden consider the biggest threat to the u.s. national security? >> overall in the world? >> reporter: yes. >> well, i'm not sure i'm going to define that for you in this moment. there are a range of threats that he's talked about in the past, and i'm sure he'll have more to say on his national security approach and strategy in the weeks ahead. >> reporter: one more question. last week a report made by ngo universities is recommending that the united states have conversations on trade orders with brazil over climate. democrats have expressed the same opposition to expand economic partnership with brazil. is the white house paying attention to those reports and to what's happening in brazil? >> we certainly are paying close attention to what is happening

in brazil. obviously we share a vibrant partnership that spans two centuries of mutual interests and shared values, and we, you know, have even announced in recent days, you know, on february 5th, the united states government through usaid announced it has delivered an additional $1.5 million in emergency covid response in brazil, and we, of course, remain, you know, closely engaged in what is a significant economic relationship. we are by far the largest investor in brazil, including in many of brazil's engrossed companies, and we'll continue to strengthen our economic ties and enlarge our trade relationship in the months ahead. >> reporter: the brazilian president and president biden talk about many issues. climate, rights and other things. they're very different.

how can they work together? >> as is true in many of our relationships, we look for opportunities to work together on issues where there is joint national interest, and obviously there is a significant economic relationship, and we will not hold back on areas where we disagree, whether it's climate or human rights or otherwise. and so that will be the path forward in our relationship with brazil as well. go ahead, amish. >> reporter: what should americans take away when president biden talked about unity. he got into office about two weeks in and has already decided to go with a process where democrats can pass a $1.9 trillion plan without the support of republicans? i know there are republicans across the country that the white house is pointing to that they say they support this bill. but there is the fact that democrats don't have to have republican support in congress for this bill, and the president is seemingly supporting that

process. so i'm wondering what people should take away from that. will that definition of bipartisanship be the one going forward with this white house? >> well, the president ran on unifying the country, not on creating one political party, but i will note that 16 of the last 21 reconciliation bills that have gone through congress have been bipartisan. and certainly there is opportunity for republicans to not only offer amendments as it's going through the house committee process and then will go through the senate committee process following that, but they will have the opportunity, of course, to vote for a package that the vast majority of the american people support. so, you know, the president, his first priority is getting relief to the american people. but the vast majority of the republicans and independents are with him on that effort. there is a long history of bipartisan support for re reconciliation bills. i don't think the american people are particularly worried about how the direct relief gets

into their hands, and, you know, if that's the process that it moves forward through, which seems likely at this point, the president would certainly support that. >> reporter: also on impeachment, i know you say the president isn't going to be watching it, but there will be millions of americans who will be watching it. i wonder what the president's message is to americans, especially the ones mourning the loss of people who died in the capitol, are still wondering whether former president trump will be possibly acquitted in this trial, even if president biden doesn't want to say whether or not president trump should be convicted, i just wonder if the white house has any message to americans who are gearing up for what could be a tumultuous and traumatic two weeks? >> well, the president's focus is on delivering what those millions and millions and millions of americans care deeply about, which is getting the pandemic under control, putting 10 million -- you know, putting millions of americans back to work, getting vaccines in the arms of americans,

reopening schools. and he has been clear that he views the events of january 6 as a horrific attack on our democracy. he put out a statement, we put out a statement on him, i should say, when the house voted, but he's going to leave the senate to determine the path forward here. in his view he was elected to deliver on the promises he made on the campaign trail, so that's what he's going to keep his focus on in the weeks ahead. go ahead, amish. >> reporter: the gop can offer amendments. it doesn't mean he has to listen to them, but i wonder if republicans have to accept what the democrats have approved. i wonder if you could talk a little more about the definition of bipartisanship. i know you say democrats are giving republicans the opportunity, but there is still this idea that democrats two weeks in are going it alone. >> again, 16 of 21 reconciliation bills in the past

have received bipartisan support. and the ideas in this package, the proposals in this package have broad support from democrats, republicans and independents across the country. so i would pose the question back to republicans. why aren't you supporting what the vast majority of the public supports? i'll leave it at that. go ahead. >> reporter: can i ask about military support? a completely different topic which is defense secretary lloyd austin wrote his first memo on january 23rd that the president had ordered a 90-day commission to produce solutions for sexual assault in the military. i wonder if you could talk about whether that's a white house commission, a defense commission, who picks the commissioners, anything more you can say about that commission looking at sexual assault in the military? >> i believe it's a commission at the department of defense. it's certainly an initiative the president of the united states supports, but i would send you to the department of defense for more spifecifics about the timeline and membership. go ahead. >> reporter: some of the crises

that the nation has faced in recent months, you got covid, more than 400,000 americans dead. january 6th, the attack on american democracy. there have been calls for a 9/11 style commission to write the history of those events. is that something the president would support? >> of the covid commission? >> reporter: or 9/11. i'm sorry, or january 6, rather. >> reporter: that would be decided by congress, and his focus at this time is addressing the crisis at this moment, right, which is ensuring that more americans get shots in their arms, that we are getting the pandemic under control. there has been a report by hhs looking at the prior administrations handling of the covid crisis, and we have also not held back in areas where we felt that it was handled in a way that impacted the lives of millions. at this point in time, our focus is really on getting the pandemic under control and we'll leave that decision up to

congress. go ahead. >> reporter: two quick ones. has president biden reached out to anybody from the tampa bay buccaneers, and if not, is that something that's going to happen today? >> it's very exciting the outcome of the super bowl, i guess, if you're a fan of the buccaneers. we will be inviting -- i don't have an update if it's happened yet, but i do have an update that we look forward to inviting the buccaneers as well as the 2020 nba champions, the lakers, to the white house when it's covid safe, but i don't know when that will take place yet. >> reporter: and this new reporting that i.c.e. is going to get some new guidance to no longer focus on deporting illegal immigrants who have been convicted of dui, drug solicited crimes, and i wonder how that's in the interest of public safety. >> it's guidelines that would be put out by the department of homeland security. they have a secretary now, but the priority for the enforcement

of immigration laws will be on those who are posing a national security threat, of course, a public safety threat, and on recent arrivals. nobody is saying that duis or assault are acceptable behavior and those arrested for such activities should be tried and sentenced as appropriate by local law enforcement. but we're talking about the prior prioritization of who is going to be deported from the country. >> reporter: more broadly, would this be what biden was talking about in the debate where he said in the obama administration they didn't do enough to reform the immigration system because he was just vice president, but if he was president, things would change. is this the kind of change that he was talking about? >> i think the kind of change he was talking about was putting forward an immigration bill at a time where modernization of immigration is long overdue that addresses not only a path way to citizenship but puts in place smart security measures and addresses the root causes of these issues in the countries in

central america. i think that's primarily what he was referring to, but also prioritization which, again, would be up to the department of homeland security to ensure that our focus is on the individuals who pose the greatest national security threat is also something he's long supported. go ahead, kaitlan. >> reporter: you seem to be saying, just to be clear, that former president trump has not requested any intelligence briefings, right? >> not that i'm aware of, but i would point you to the intelligence community and the odi for more specifics. >> reporter: is there a reason overseeing the in-person briefings? >> which is a very important role to play and very labor intensive, but i would point you to them for more specifics on the briefings and who would be

providing the briefings. >> reporter: i have two questions. one is a quick follow-up on impeachment. in spite of the particulars in this case, does president biden think it's constitutional to impeach and convict a former president who is no longer in office? >> i'm just not going to have any more for you on weighing in on impeachment. i appreciate -- it's a big story, but our focus is on the american rescue plan and delivering for the american people. >> reporter: i do have a covid crisis related question, because the attacks on the asian-american community continue to rise, and over the weekend, there are some videos that went viral because elderly asian-americans were really attacked in a way that is difficult to watch, and i wonder, other than the presidential memorandum, is president biden going to take any further actions to address this problem and has he seen the videos? >> i'm not aware that he's seen the videos, but he is concerned

about the discrimination against, the actions against the asian-american community, which is why he signed the executive order and why he has been outspoken in making clear that, you know, attacks, verbal attacks, any attacks of any form are unacceptable and we need to work together to address them. but obviously the executive order is something he did very early in his administration, it's still early, but even earlier, because he felt it was so important to put a marker down. >> reporter: is there anything more that can be done, like offer doj or fbi assistance to local law authorities? >> we would support, of course, additional action on a local level or federal level, but i would send you to doj or fbi for any spfurther specifics on that. thank you, everyone. see you tomorrow. the white house press secretary jen psaki ending a 43-minute briefing at the white house, day 20 of the biden

administration and still a lot of topics covered because there are so many compass points being reset in the biden administration in washington. questions about getting iran back in the nuclear agreement, questions about priority number 1 for the new president and his covid relief package on capitol hill. questions about the new president's views this week will be dominated and probably next weekend as well by his predecessor, jen psaki ducking questions about the senate and impeachment. important questions regarding negotiations. negotiations will continue on the house side this week even as the senate impeachment trial begins on this. let me bring in manu raju and kaitlan collins, who will join us shortly. a family credit of $3,000. there is still debate about whether they can have a $15 minimum wage in this. the president said in an interview he thought it would get thrown out of the bill, but

progressives still want to keep it in there. the details of stimulus checks, the question of who gets those according to income level. they asked jen questions about it, and she said, no, we're going to listen to people around the country, we're not going to get bogged down in a washington debate. >> that's been clear for weeks, that this was the direction democrats were heading, that they would move on their own without republican support. the white house suggested there could be some republican support. last week biden suggested that wasn't going to be the route. it's pretty clear that the white house is on the same path. rhetorically, they were going for it strategically. what is also notable here is jen walking back questions about biden on the question of $15 an hour. he said very clearly he believes the federal minimum wage hike would violate senate rules in

doing it through this budget process that could allow them to pass it on a party line vote. he said that. he is a senator of 36 years, he knows the rules of the senate. but she said let's not get ahead of the process here. there is a process that co puld play out. it was very surprising he said that on friday, because that is an internal, inside the senate debate that needs to happen, has not happened yet with the senate parliamentarian who makes the rules about -- essentially interprets the rules and decides what can be in this package. joe biden seemed to be pulling the plug on that early. psaki saying we still have to discuss that going forward. that's going to be one of the key questions here about whether they can keep the key progressives on board and not anger them. >> let's dig in on this point because it's important both in terms of the substance of the bill. it's also important that you're watching a new president with his democratic party. if you assume on this first big

package they may get no republican votes. bernie sanders, even as you were listening to jen psaki, issued a statement saying we're never going to get ten republicans to increase the minimum wage through regular order. the only way to increase the minimum wage to 15 th$15 an hou to pass it with 51 votes through budget reconciliation. they asked jen psaki about that interview, and progressives are not thrilled about the new president. their argument, leave that to us. don't do this too quickly. >> reporter: when the president said he did not think it was going to survive, who had told him it wasn't going to make it through, likely? >> the president was in congress for -- in the senate for 36 years. again, it still has not worked its way through the process and that can take a bit of time, and we certainly defer to the

parliamentarian. >> kaitlan collins is outside the briefing. she joins us now from the white house. we defer to the parliamentarian. look, they're 20 days into this. that was the press secretary saying, essentially, my translation, we wish the president had answered that question like a senator. we wish he had left it to go, because joe biden is absolutely right. it is a question about senate rules. the parliamentarian may throw it out, but progressives wish he had stayed silent on the subject and let them fight it out on the hill. >> reporter: the process is still happening on the hill. that's what's so surprising about the answer is the parliam parliamentarian had not weighed in on this yet. even bernie sanders, who is chairing the budget committee, when he was asked about this yesterday, he noted that first. he was saying the senate partiliamentarian is still workg on that. he said he has a roomful of attorneys who are working on this very question and pushing the parliamentarian to actually get this included in that. that's why it was so surprising what president biden's answer was. you saw jen psaki simply citing

his time in the senate, not explaining there was someone who got to the president in recent days and indicated that it's unlikely that $15 federal minimum wage would survive in this covid relief package. so it still seems to be an open question on how this is going to go forward, but biden seemed to dash a lot of hopes that it could still make it in there with this answer that he gave to cbs. that is still something that remains to be seen, whether or not they're going to do this. of course, the other question has been about something that hasn't happened, i believe, since the 1970s, which is that a vice president could potentially overrule a parliamentarian. the white house seemed to be unaware of any of that potentially happening, and it doesn't seem to be a conversation they are having behind the scenes, john. >> they're trying to stay out of these senate and process decisions but they may not have a choice once the trial gets underway. at the top of the hour we told you about this. this is the trump team's final trial briefing of the impeachment, and during the

briefing, the democrats filed a much smaller response. they filed a briefing last week, and manu raju, the trump team says this is unconstitutional. the trump team says the democrats are personally prosecuting the president. they responded with a brief during the hour and this is one piece of it. when president trump demanded the armed angry crowd fight like hell or you won't have a country anymore, he wasn't urging them to form political action committees about election security in general. this is not a case about protected speech. the house did not impeach president trump because he expressed an unpopular political opinion. it impeached him because he willfully incited violent insurrection against the government. the former defense argument is largely more political. >> they're trying to push back on the specific factual comments that the president's legal team made last week, suggesting that his comments were protected speech when he went to the rally

and he said things like, if you don't fight licke hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. that's political speech. there is nothing wrong with that. they're saying this is not a case about protective speech, so they're trying to dispute that. they're also making it pretty clear here, as we've been hearing, subpoenaing trump does not seem to be the way they're going in this. donald trump, we know, has declined to come and testify before this despite the invitation from the house democrats, but they say they're going to use his decision not to testify against him in this trial. me tha they make that clear in this new briefing today. we're looking at a speedier trial than the one in 2020. >> you say more speedy than the 21 days. we don't know whether it takes the whole week or not. what is the significance of waiting? we expect word today on this leader schumer and republican leader mcconnell briefing on the rules. they say it's procedural but necessary to go forward.

>> that will really specify how long this will go. we know that we're going to begin the debate tomorrow over whether this is a constitutional process or not. there is going to be actual vote in the senate to affirm its constitutionality. that will be interesting to see if there are any more republicans who believe it's constitutional. we know that five do right now. will any more agree to do that? that would move forward at that point, then we expect to be up to 16 hours each side will have to make their case. so that takes it towards the end of the week early next week, and then senators have time to ask questions, and then we'll see senators make speeches on the floor, ultimately the conviction vote. but the big question, they did not say whether or not they would get witnesses yet. they say that is an open option for them and a vote would happen if they were to go that route. at the moment it does not seem likely, though, they'll go with a witness trial. >> it does not seem likely. so 24 hours from now plus 30 seconds or so begins the debate about constitutionality. then we go forward with the trial presentation. still waiting for the rules of

agreement there. fascinating to watch that white house briefing where jen psaki is trying to keep the president out of this debate of the former president. we'll see if that's able to stay out when the senate has to make key decisions. don't go anywhere. brianna keilar picks up our coverage right now. i'm brianna keilar and i want to welcome viewers here in the united states and around the world. on this day before just the fourth impeachment trial of a u.s. president in history, the two sides are laying out their cases. in pre-trial briefings announced just minutes ago. the democrats are laying out their case as they accuse president trump of inciting an insurrection at the capitol, making him the first president to be impeached twice.