thank you for the opportunity, it is now time for the big show, "don lemon tonight," with its star, d. lemon. >> you got that right, sir. how are you? >> i'm doing well. and you? >> i'm doing very well. what do you think of this whole bipartisanship? >> i heard a goofy man once say that bipartisanship for the sake of itself is meaningless. >> bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship is empty is what the goofy man said, which is me. i know you're talking about me. >> no, i wasn't. continue. >> do you think i was right? >> first of all, it's like if you said two plus two equals four, do i think you're right? yes, i think you're right.

it's no secret that going along with a process because you think the process is right no matter what it yields is almost the clinical definition of insanity. i think there's probably a good faith element to biden's concerns and his beliefs about the senate, but a man's got to meet the moment. where you are right now. they just proved to you again today they will not do a deal with you because they win if you do nothing. >> right. >> and there is no upside to them to having more people vote in this country. and that's what it is. >> yeah. >> how do you convince him? what i don't like is that the democrats only talk about joe manchin and that, like, you know, it's him. if he doesn't want to do it, i guess we'll have to go find 60 votes. i think they need to have more desperation. i think they have to have more tools in the box. and i know there are all of

these talks going behind the scenes. but he met with the naacp today. he walks out and he says no, my position is the same. i don't know what can be going on behind the scenes that can make him change, unless you convince him, you don't have to blow up the filibuster forever. >> right. you can do a carve-out. if you're concerned as most people are in this country, and -- i mean what i said, because most people don't feel the way that the people who are trying to restrict voting rights feel, because if they did, they wouldn't be trying to restrict the voting rights, you know what i'm saying? >> west virginia, 81% in favor of the for the people act. 81%. in his own state, it's very popular. i don't think he's antivoting rights. i do, though -- eric holder is a much better mind on this stuff than i am. i do believe you're making it a little easy on the for the people act. d.c. statehood, presidential tax returns, campaign finance, take it all out. gerrymandering matters more than all of it. >> it certainly does.

>> take away the excuses. >> if i ever agree with anything that you said, that was it. gerrymandering matter morse than anything. listen, these restrictive voting laws around the country, they matter too. >> that's the john lewis act. >> yes. that's the john lewis act. do you see these districts and -- >> they're all like that. 95% of gop or p.o.t. held districts in the house are white majority places. and, look, again, for too many people when they hear anything like that, they're saying, there it is, they're antiwhite again. i am white. i'm not antiwhite. i have no problem with there being white majority districts. we're over 50% of the country. i'm saying a reason that 95% of those districts are white majority is because of how they're engineered. it's a mistake. it's not why america is about. >> why is it engineered that way? >> advantage. >> yes. you're selling something to the american people that the majority of the american people aren't buying.

you have to restructure it in your favor to figure out where the people who support you are because the majority of the people don't support you. >> this is the only way to stop it. mitch mcconnell said a clever thing that was true. >> what? >> it is against the law to discriminate in voting on the basis of color. absolutely true. >> and that's what gerrymandering does. >> gerrymandering is an end around, but it is not inherently about color. and these state laws are not inherently about color. here's his play. he happens to be right. so what happens? now we have election cycles. now people predominantly poor, predominantly poor minorities don't get to vote the way they should have. they sue, they're found to have standing, the court says its right. they go through the system. what happened? you got one for free. at least. and you'll have to do that state by state. >> guess what, in this environment, what's happening in the country, what's happening in the local legislatures, you only need one.

because one and the country changes forever. >> that's right. >> these people are in place, the judges, on and on and on. >> and then you got a judiciary that's changing. >> there you go. >> mcconnell has been flooding the courts have a very specific type of jurist. who knows if they win the suit. >> there you go. if i ever agreed with you on anything, it's tonight. mark your calendars, people. >> then i quit. this is as good as it gets. off to be a house painter. my dream. >> march 35th, 1875, i agree. >> cuomo fishing charters open for business starting tomorrow. >> don't laugh. >> don't catch, don't pay. [ laughter ] >> get out of here. >> i love you, d. lemon. >> you're crazy. i love you too, sir. this is "don lemon tonight" and what we learned today about the january 6th insurrection is chilling. it tells you just how bad the peril to democracy is in this country, even now.

five months after those insurrectionists stormed the capitol. i'm going to keep talking about it. intelligence failures, warnings ignored. police sent to the front lines without the protection they needed, some without helmets or shields in the face of blood-thirsty trump-supporting rioters. we all saw what happened. there it is. in case you need some reminding. there it is. there it is. there it is. we all saw those brave police officers. american heroes. paying the price for all the failures and now, the new senate report on what happened that day is revealing just how bad those security failures were. the main intel unit of the capital police, quote, was aware of the potential for violence. they knew. they knew it before it happened.

it was all over social media. all over. and while some definitely saw the warnings, others were in the dark leaving those poor officers unprepared. but what is not in this report is even worse. republicans refusing to allow any mention of why those insurrectionists were there. imagine that? isn't that what the report is all about? no mention of the role of the disgraced then-president who incited the insurrection in the first place and how what he said motivated that mob. they stormed the capitol. they were carrying trump flags and signs. but a senate aide told reporter, quote, the report did not attempt to look at the origins and the developments of the groups or individuals who participated in the attack on the capitol. okay.

as i said, what good is a report with no mention of why the insurrection happened? a report with no mention of the word "insurrection" outside of witness quotes and footnotes. sources telling cnn the language had to be carefully crafted or republicans wouldn't have signed on to it. they refused to admit the truth of what happened. even now. >> do you define january 6th as an insurrection? >> look, i've said a lot about that already. i said it on january 6th. i said it again february 13th. i've covered that comprehensively and i really don't think there's anything i can add. >> yeah, you can add a lot. you can say, actually, what it was. i mean, he may not want to use the word insurrection now, but he sure did on the night of january 6th when they were still cleaning up the capitol. i guess what happened was fresh in his mind.

>> they failed to attempt to obstruct the congress. this failed insurrection only underscores how crucial the task before us is for our republic. >> the minority leader may not think that there's anything that he can add about the insurrection now, but he made his position pretty clear on february 13th after he voted to acquit the former president. >> there's no question, none, that president trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. no question about it. the people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president. and having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the

growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet earth. >> but now mitch mcconnell is all insurrection. what insurrection? what? insurrection, what are you talking about? just sweeping it all under the rug. is that the price of bipartisanship? bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship. empty. no mention of insurrection. no mention of what the then-president did to incite it. no mention of his big lie and the right-wing media that promoted it. the former president, barack obama, telling cnn republicans caved to the big lie and the liars who spread it. >> the degree to which we did

not see that republican establishment say, hold on, time-out, that's not acceptable. that's not who we are. but rather be cowed into accepting it and then finally culminating in january 6th which originally was, don't worry, this isn't going anywhere. we're just letting trump and others vent and then suddenly you now have large portions of an elected congress going along with the falsehood that there were problems with the election -- >> and the leadership of the gop briefly, for a -- one night when they still had the sort of sense of fear in them, going against the president -- >> and then poof. suddenly everybody was back in line. now what that -- the reason for that is because the base

believed it. the base believed it because this had been told to them not just by the president, but by the media that they watch and all those congressmen started looking around and they said, you know what, i'll lose my job. i'll get voted out of office. another way of saying this is, didn't expect that there would be so few people who would say, well, i don't mind losing my office. because this is too important. america is too important. >> so how can you expect bipartisanship -- seriously? how can you expect bipartisanship when republicans are playing see no evil. over the insurrection that could have literally killed them. and the failures of that day put hundreds of brave officers in danger, officers who deserved to know the truth about what happened that day and why it happened. officers like michael. fanone. i'm going to talk to him in just a few minutes.

like i said, how can you expect bipartisanship from these republicans. they are perfectly capable of bipartisanship when it suits them, like passing the bill today aimed at countering china's growing economic influence. but they whitewash the senate report on january 6th. and now they're digging in their heels and installing joe biden's agenda at every turn. the president pulling the plug tonight on infrastructure talks after he agreed to cut more than a trillion dollars from his initial package and republicans came back with just $150 billion as a counter offer. now it looks like the last hope is a small bipartisan group of senators trying to work out a deal. you got to wonder, whether all this is just smoke and mirrors. republicans running out the clock until they were sure that joe manchin wouldn't budge. on the filibuster or reconciliation. it looks like mitch mcconnell who said 100% of his focus is on

blocking president biden's agenda, looks like he's getting exactly what he wants. >> as you look to -- what the majority leader has in mind for june, it's clear the era of bipartisanship is over. >> the era of bipartisanship is over. when was the era of bipartisanship under the majority leader, mcconnell? i must have missed it. you know what maya anglo said, when someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. and mitch mcconnell and the gop have shown us who they are and what they're all about, stalling the biden agenda at every turn, from voting rights to the policing bill. the party of no. the senate report on the insurrection revealing just how bad the security failures were. failures that put the lives of so many brave officers at risk. up next, i'm going to speak with

senator amy klobuchar who chairs the rules committee and officer michael fanone who fought to defend our capitol on one of the darkest days in american history. a big deal. now, at healthcare.gov, millions more people can afford health coverage. due to the covid relief law, you can pay less with financial help. in fact, 4 out of 5 customers can get a plan for under $10 a month. from doctor visits to preventive services to prescription drugs-- these are quality plans. you can do this. you can have coverage as soon as july 1st if you sign up now at healthcare.gov meet jeff. in his life, he's been to the bottom of the ocean. the tops of mountains. the er... twice. and all the places this guy runs off to. like jeff's, a life well lived should continue at home. home instead offers customized services from personal care to memory care,

so older adults can stay home, stay safe, and stay happy. home instead. to us, it's personal. good boy! [laughs] ♪ hold my pouch. ♪ trust us, us kids are ready to take things into our own hands. don't think so? hold my pouch. ♪ welcome to allstate, ♪ ♪are you down, d-d-down, d-d-down, d-d-down♪ where we're driving down the cost of insurance. ♪ ♪ are you down, down♪ ♪d-down, down? are you♪ drivers who switched saved over $700. ♪ allstate. here, better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands. click or call for a lower rate today.

no, he's not in his room. ♪ dad, why didn't you answer your phone? your mother loved this park. ♪ she did. some guys go through life thinking, do i smell right now? so, harry's makes a range of deodorants

in three levels of protection for every kind of sweater. because we all deserve to go through life with our wings up. introducing the range of deodorants from harry's. not the same. so the first major report on the deadly capital insurrection is out revealing critical security failures in the lead up to the attack. but it's also shocking what the 127-page report leaves out. it doesn't use the word insurrection or even address

president trump's role in inciting the violence on january 6th. joining me now, two people with very important perspectives on this. democratic senator of amy klobuchar of minnesota. she's the chair of one of the committees that put out this report on january 6th. and d.c. police officer michael fanone who risked his life defending the capitol on that day. so glad to have both of you on. so i'm going to ask you, i'm going to start with you, senator. i'm going to have you the political questions. michael is not a political guy. i'll get the politics out of the way and we'll talk about michael's feelings on the report. thank you for joining us. >> thanks, don. >> i'm going to get to the security failures in a moment. but i want to start with the concerns about what this report left out. there's no analysis of what led to the attack or any mention of president trump's role in inciting the rioters. it doesn't call january 6th what it was, an insurrection. in your view, is this any sort of a substitute for the bipartisan commission? >> not in any way, don, nor did we believe it ever would be.

our focus was on officer fanone and the other officers who risked their lives for us. i've already thanked him personally and i'll do that again. they didn't have the right equipment. 75% of them were in plainclothes. equipment was locked in a bus that they couldn't even access for one of the platoons. only 10% had been trained. it's not their fault. it was the fault of leadership at the top, a lack of planning. as one of the officers said in haunting words on the radio, he said, does anyone have a plan? so that was the focus of this report, investigating the security breakdowns both on the intelligence side and what happened at the capitol and what we must do immediately to fix it. it was no substitute for something i know the officer stood with the sicknick family along with many of us to try to get done and that is a full, independent, 9/11-style commission to get to the bottom of the causes of this, president

trump's role in this and we do mention, by the way, in this report, i think him 44 times, but we do make a point that he did send those rioters, those insurrectionists down the mall to the capitol and in the lead-in to this, we do discuss the fact that he had made these claims over and over again. and obviously this would not have happened if it was not for donald trump. but that aside, we still have to fix the problems at the capitol with the police leadership, we're going to get a new police chief. we have to put new policies in place and we have to immediately pass a law to give the police chief the authority to call in the national guard and not make three calls before he can get it done. >> listen, you know, there's a lot going on in this report about, you know, who was there, who incited it, urging people to confront members of congress and bring firearms to the protests on january 6th.

there's a lot in there. but still, it doesn't address the why and you said it was never meant to. what does this mean for the possibility of some sort of commission going forward? >> well, as you call it, this was the first report. and i think we should call up this for vote again. i cannot believe that some of my colleagues -- by the way, senator portman who is -- along with senator peters and i all did vote to have this independent commission. and i think we should push it again and do whatever we can to get to the bottom of the facts. >> okay. thank you, senator. i want to bring in the officer now. mike, we've had many conversations about this, about the insurrection that almost took your life and sadly caused one officer -- officer sicknick, i should say, to lose his life. i know you have strong feelings about this report, especially what it doesn't address. talk to me. >> well, like i said before, i think it was a good start.

like the senator said, it addresses some of the most immediate concerns, training for capitol police officers, equipment and security, intelligence gathering and dissemination, which was clearly lacking within u.s. capitol police. but again, it doesn't get to the root causes of the january 6th insurrection. and it doesn't address things like which groups were involved, you know, which organized groups were involved, who were those groups in communication with, if anyone within our government, where is the funding? as a narcotics investigator, our rule of thumb was always to follow the money. where were these groups receiving funds? >> so, you -- something stood out to me.

who were they involved, who were they in communications with. any of -- anyone within our government, you said. why did you say that, michael? >> i mean, just in seeing reporting and interactions between members of these groups and, you know, having supported individuals within the government, seen together with members in the government, to me, that's incredibly troubling. >> on that day, look, mike, you were there. do you have any feelings about the preparation that is not in this report, about -- on your own, about the preparation or lack of preparation? >> i mean, as someone who was there personally, again, like i'm not here to disparage another law enforcement agency. but coming from the outside looking in as an officer whose leadership that day was exemplary from the top, all the way down to the lowest guy,

being me, i think there's a need for a real change in the culture of leadership at the u.s. capitol police. >> yeah. how so? >> well, i mean, there's a big difference between being in charge and being a leader. clearly there was no plan put in place and if there was one, there wasn't anyone who had the fortitude to enact that plan. >> senator klobuchar, would you like to respond to what officer fanone just said? >> i agree with what he said. we must have a change in policies with the capitol police. it's the officers who have been putting themselves at the front line and yet they didn't have the right equipment, and they didn't even know where most of them were in terms of telling them where to go. there was no communications with many of them. we got 50 officers -- and i know

that officer fanone knows some of these officers, to give us statements and sworn statements about what happened. we interviewed many, many people about what went wrong and our goal here is also to enhance the information that the capitol police get. they have three different intelligence units that were saying different things. the information from the fbi wasn't what it should have been. there wasn't an official bulletin that came from the fbi. there was a report from the norfolk office and they themselves in our interviews acknowledged that they had down played some of the social media like the posts about maps of the tunnels under the capitol, homeland security has to do more. and then the department of defense, there's still more investigations, much more, that must take place. again, i truly believe in my heart that to get to the bottom of everything that mike mentioned here, we need an independent commission. we have done our duty because our duty on this very narrow report was to look at what has

to be done at the capitol to immediately improve security. so officers like himself and the staff members in the closets holding forks to protect themselves. that happened to some of my own staff members, that this never happens again. >> mike, i have to ask you if there's anything -- listen, i know you're a straight shooter and you've been holding everyone accountable and really speaking your mind on this. is there anything to say to the senator while we have her. lawmakers are really going to make the difference in all of this. >> i'm appreciative of the report itself. i think that's an important step in the right direction. again, securing the physical security of the capitol complex is incredibly important. however, to prevent an insurrection like we had from occurring again, we really need to get to the bottom of the -- you know, the root causes of that day in addressing some of the concerns that i mentioned earlier. i mean, i'm thankful for all the

senators who supported the independent commission and i couldn't -- i'm extremely disappointed in those who did not support the commission. >> i think you both agree on that. senator, i want to thank you for appearing. we'll see you soon. >> thank you. >> mike, stay with us. i have a lot more to talk about with you in just a moment including your reaction to what former president barack obama said about the state of our democracy. we'll be right back. >> this experiment in democracy is not self-executing. it doesn't happen just automatically. tex-mex. tex-mex. ♪ termites. ♪ don't mess up your deck with tex-mex. terminix. here to help.

ugh, these balls are moist. or is that the damp weight of self-awareness you now hold in your hand? yeah-h-h. (laugh) keep your downstairs dry with gold bond body powder. - [narrator] as you get ready for what's next, custom gear from custom ink keep your downstairs dry can help make the most of these moments. we've developed new tools to make it easy for you. custom ink has hundreds of products to help you feel connected. upload your logo or start your design today at customink.com

what do we want for dinner? burger... i want a sugar cookie... wait... i want a bucket of chicken... i want...

♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win.

i am back now with d.c. metropolitan police officer michael fanone who was assaulted defending the capitol during the insurrection. mike, i just want to play some of anderson's interview with the former president barack obama. this is what he said about all republicans who are pushing trump's big lie even after the insurrection. watch this. >> i didn't expect that there

would be so few people who would say, well, i don't mind losing my office. because this is too important. america is too important. >> some things are more -- >> our democracy is too important. we didn't see that. now, you know, i'm still the hope and change guy. and so my hope is, is that the tides will turn. but that does require each of us to understand that this experiment in democracy is not self-executing. it doesn't happen just automatically. >> and the reason i think this question is pertinent to you, no one -- you were involved in the insurrection, it's very personal to you. i know you're very concerned about our democracy. what's your reaction to the former president's comments? >> i watched the interview last night and that was, like -- i

think the most significant part of the interview to me, just the fact that, you know, when the former president said that our democracy is not self-executing, it's not automatic, it's going to take all of us as americans to change the direction, you know, of our country, both politically and, you know, within our own interactions amongst one another. >> the metropolitan police department announcing today that it created a new position to support the well-being of officers after responding to the insurrection. you've talked a lot about ptsd, the importance of focusing on mental health. will this give your colleagues the support -- you and your colleagues the support that you need? >> i'm hopeful. this is something i think new to

the law enforcement discussion in this country. something that is certainly relatively new within my department. but i think it's incredibly important. not just, you know, for those of us who participated in the defense of the capitol on january 6th, but, you know, it really goes into kind of the greater discussion that we're having right now about law enforcement and the interactions that we have within the -- with the communities that we are charged with keeping safe. you know, mental health of those officers in which, you know, they are involved in some very traumatic experiences day in and day out, they interact with people who are experiencing the worst moments of their lives over and over again, having officers who are, you know, well taken care of can only make those interactions more positive. >> so whenever you're on, mike, i hear from people and they say,

you know, the first time he's really -- he seems like he's really having a tough time, understandably. and then each time you appear, people are concerned about your well-being. some say, oh, he appears to be better. how are you doing? >> i mean, i would say that compared to six months ago, i'm doing much better. but, you know, with the passing of time, like new challenges present themselves, but i also feel like i'm better equipped to deal with those issues as they come up. i've got a hell of a support system now. not just the doctors that i've been working with over the past several months, but, you know, a lot of the media exposure that i've had has garnered some unlikely friendships, people like joan baez who has become a

close confidante of mine, and lots of other people. justin laskit. there's quite a few people now that i can lean on when i'm having a difficult time. >> we're hearing that the justice department is preparing to offer a plea deal to the capitol rioters accused of brutally assaulting you. thomas sibick, kyle young in albuquerque are accused of beating you on the capitol steps. how are you feeling about getting justice for this personally? >> to be honest with you, as a police officer, i think i've kind of, like, divested or detached myself from kind of the end result of criminal prosecutions. that's not something that i've done specifically regarding the individuals charged with assaulting me on january 6th. that was just part of, you know, i think how i compartmentalized

my law enforcement career prior to that and it's carried over. i have complete confidence in the prosecutors who were charged with overseeing these cases with the department of justice. in general. i've always had a positive relationship with them. i'm confident in the handling of their cases. >> michael fanone, thank you, sir. >> thanks, buddy. >> thank you. president biden's agenda running into all kinds of roadblocks with many democrats frustrated at senator manchin for refusing to ditch the filibuster. here he is, john kasich, and he says, good for him. the governor is with me. he's next.

the harry's razor is not the same. our razors have five german engineered blades designed to stay sharp, so your eighth shave is as smooth as your first. and we never upcharge you for high quality. harry's. available in store and at harrys.com. at carvana, we treat every customer like we would treat our own moms, with care and respect. to us, the little things are the big things. which is why we do everything in our power to make buying a car an unforgettable experience. happy birthday. thank you. we treat every customer like we would treat our own moms. because that's what they deserve.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

monitor, check and lock down you money with security from chase. control feels good. chase. make more of what's yours. so tonight democrats really butting up against the limits of their slim majority in congress.

and as frustrations boil over with stalled legislation, democratic senator joe manchin is taking heat from his own party for refusing to buck the filibuster. but my next guest says manchin is right to stand up to his own party. joining me now senior cnn political commentator and former ohio governor, john kasich. john, thanks for joining. >> thank you. >> i read your op-ed. that's what we're going to talk about. it's out in "the wall street journal," and it's titled "i tip my cap to joe manchin." so tell us why you're tipping your cap to him. >> well, don, we always say that we want politicians to follow their own conscious, and a lot of times when they do, if it goes against the grain of what people expect of them, they get criticized. he has been demeaned by a number of people since he wrote that piece that he wasn't going to support getting rid of the filibuster and a couple other things. today i've got a lot of people commenting about what i wrote. but i've had republicans attacking me.

so i mean, we always want people to stand up and take charge. but then a lot of times when they do, if we don't happen to like it, we attack them. and it's happened to me a number of times when i took positions different than my party, expanding medicaid, trying to write my own budget, to balance the budget. the list goes on and on. not endorsing trump. going to the democratic convention. criticism comes with it. and i wrote in there, you know, i didn't judge whether -- what i was trying to say about him is, good, somebody stood up, they're taking the heat. instead of criticizing them, why don't you think about what he's doing and say maybe he's a special guy. >> do you think he's taking the heat? because he's doing what his -- what he believes will keep him in office and what his constituents believe is right. he's actually not -- he's saying the exact opposite of his constituents. he's saying that we should -- that there should be

bipartisanship. that there should be -- that our democracy in some ways is in peril. he is saying that the capitol insurrection is real. the constituents don't want that. is he actually standing up to criticism or is he doing what will keep him in office and what will keep him loved so he's not bucking anyone. the democrats have no power against him right now. >> don, they're pounding him like crazy. i've been in that pressure cooker. i know what it's like. when your party comes to you and pounds on you. think about what happened with liz cheney, the way she was pounded on. and then we were praising her because she was attacking the republicans. but i praised her because i said i'd even campaign for her because i thought she was charting her own course. it seems, don, that every time a politician does -- somebody in elected office does something, we just attribute to them, well, it's their own political good.

>> i get what you're saying. what i'm saying to you, i don't think the arguments are the same when it comes to liz cheney and joe manchin, because liz cheney is standing up for what is right, she is bucking her party. she has the possibility of not being voted in again, and her party doesn't like her. joe manchin is doing what he needs to do in order to stay in office. the two are not equal. >> i don't agree with that. look, the guy has been a two-term senator. he was a very popular governor of the state, could be governor again of the state. i don't think that's the way that joe manchin operates. look, i'm not a friend of his. i don't know joe manchin. but i've been observing him and i can tell you the minute i saw on sunday that he wrote that piece, that was the minute that the light went on in my mind, wait a minute, this is a guy who is standing up, he's going to take a lot of trap from people in his own party. they're going to demean him, put him down, but yet he's going to take the heat.

but i'm not sure that that's -- he did it because he wants to get re-elected. the guy has been re-elected so many times. so i'm not sure i buy that, don. i don't buy it. i think he actually did this because he happens to believe that this is better to have bipartisanship for the good of the country. that's my sense. >> okay, so then you -- for you and him, you said that it's better to have bipartisanship for the country. i've been saying bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship is empty. i'm not quite sure of why he's against what's in these bills, why he's against the filibuster or the voting rights bill. i haven't figured out from what he wrote and what you wrote why -- what is wrong with the bill. no one has pointed out what is wrong and what should be better. i want my partisanship. >> he said one party shouldn't do these things. one party shouldn't get rid of the filibuster and he criticized

the fact that the old harry reid from nevada got rid of the filibuster and all of these judges got in there who democrats didn't like. >> what about a cutout for the filibuster? >> pardon? >> what about a cutout for the filibuster? >> what do you mean a cutout? he's not for getting rid of it and i'm not either. i think it's one thing that keeps the parties negotiating together. and, in fact -- >> i'm not saying get rid of it. i'm not saying get rid of it, john. don't miss what i'm saying. if he believes it, that's fine. what about a cutout for voting rights, is what i'm saying? i think the republicans -- mitch mcconnell has done that for republicans. >> look, i don't agree with what mitch mcconnell did because i think what he was doing was nefarious. i think what joe manchin is saying -- look, i'm not here to argue his case. i'm here to argue a bigger principle. highways saying in his mind, in his conscience pushing through hr-1 is not going to help the

country. getting rid of the filibuster in a partisan way is not going to help the country. that's what he's saying -- >> i grant you that. i grant you that. i'm not arguing with you on that. what i'm trying to figure out is why is getting -- why is not pa passing hr-1 -- why is hr-1 bad. i haven't heard why it's bad and what's bad about the filibuster? the filibuster, getting rid of it is bad, not why. passing h.r. 1 is bhad, not why it's bad. just we need bipartisanship. >> i told you last time why getting rid of the filibuster is bad because what will happen is another party will come in and they'll just jam everything through the way they want to. there will be no procedure, no reason to compromise. and i think it will be -- it is a crucial part for how the senate operates in terms of the voting rights act. i'm not here to take -- and i even said in the piece, it's a

tangle. there's issues on both sides. some people think when you go to vote, you should have some form of identification. in that bill, there is no requirement. you just show up, and you say who you are, and they let you vote. i don't think that makes sense, don. but that's not the issue here. what he's saying is, i don't think you jam through a voting rights act, a major voting rights act with just one party. that's all he's saying. and he's saying, i don't think one party should jam through the filibuster. we all want them to work together, but when a guy stands up and says we need to work together and it's painful and it may take a long time, that's the way you get to bipartisanship ultimately. i think he's a stand-up guy for what he's doing. you have have him on. bring him on. i bet he'll guo on your show. >> thank you. i've got to run. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back. ♪

don't flex your pecs. terminix. - that moment you walk in the office and people are wearing the same gear, ♪ you feel a sense of connectedness and belonging right away. and our shirts from custom ink help bring us together. - [narrator] custom ink has hundreds of products to help you feel connected. upload your logo or start your design today at customink.com you know when your dog is itching for a treat. itching for an outing... or itching for some cuddle time. but you may not know when he's itching for help... licking for help... or rubbing for help. if your dog does these frequently. they may be signs of an allergic skin condition that needs treatment. don't wait. talk to your veterinarian and learn more at itchingforhelp.com.

the world around you may seem like an immovable, implacable place. it is not. it can be bright. quiet. and safe. it's a change that will be felt from this street. to this street. to no street. and everywhere in between. all it takes is the slightest push in just the right place and that will be the tipping point that changes everything.

♪ ♪ so take this. a new report revealing the paltry amount of taxes the ultra wealthy pay in the u.s. i know, compared to the billions upon billions of dollars of wealth they've amassed over recent years. surprise, surprise, right? propublica says it obtained secret irs tax files for thousands of the wealthiest people in our country. their research compares how much the richest americans paid in taxes per year to how much forbes estimated their wealth grew in that same time period. what propublica calls their true tax rate, okay? among the names, warren buffett, michael bloomberg. buffett's wealth grew more than $24 billion from 2014 to 2018. in that same period, he paid

about $23 million in income tax. propublica calculates that as a true tax rate of -- wait for it -- 0.1%. jeff bezos, he added $99 billion in wealth between 2014 and 2018 and paid less than 1% in federal income taxes. so when you compare bezos to the typical american household, it's even more stark. in this chart, the yellow line represents total taxes paid while the black line shows wealth growth. notice anything strange? the typical american household is paying more in taxes than their wealth is growing while jeff bezos' taxes, they stay relatively the same and his wealth is going to the moon, literally. the reasons for all of this? the u.s. taxes people based on income, not wealth. there's also plenty of tax loopholes. what is the solution? le with, depends on who you ask. some democrats like senator

elizabeth warren have proposed a wealth tax. so now you know. we have some breaking news in some key primary results tonight when we get back.

today let's paint with behr ultra scuff defense... so that you can live that scuff-free life. honey, i'm home from my really important job! scuff defense. honey! scuff defense. [ chuckles ] scuff! -defense! i love our scuff-free life. you too, scruff defense. today let's paint with the interior paint that's too tough to scuff. behr. exclusively at the home depot. the harry's razor is not the same. our razors have five german engineered blades designed to stay sharp, so your eighth shave is as smooth as your first. and we never upcharge you for high quality. harry's. available in store and at harrys.com.

overwhelmed by the ups and downs harry's. of frequent mood swings of bipolar i?