again, those are questions going forward in the weeks and months as the case goes forward. of course there is also david perdue and kelly loeffler who lost their seats from associating themselves with the former president's claims of fraud which turned out not to be. in the case of perdue, he pushed for the governor to have a special session, and something that the former president was pushing for, and he wanted to make sure that the legislature intervened to throw the votes, the election results in the state, and then make way for the slate of false electors which are also named by the way, kate, in this document that is the false electors that were named by the grand jury. it was a closer vote, and only nine votes to indict them in the end, but it did not happen.

what is interesting is the role of the high level officials that some of which are obviously played out in public view. in the end, fani willis decided for whatever reason that she was not going to bring those charges, perhaps because of the additional political implications of it, and the difficulty that it would present for her case, kate. >> interesting. evan, thank you so much. paula, as well. they will continue to work their sources on this. sara? >> we wanted to talk to some of the politics of this, and we want to go to chief congressional correspondent manu raju up on capitol hill. and you talked to senator graham about this, and the biggest revelation about this, and really what we have here is who the grand jury thought should be indicted and who wasn't indicted and what the law is, and we don't have the details of the how they got to that place and the evidence that was put before the grand jury in this 25, or 26-page report. but you have had a conversation

with lindsey graham about all of this, and he is obviously a sitting senator, and the one that is going to make the most news frankly from this, and what did he say and what was to take away, and the biggest take away from the conversation? >> yeah, recall that this is right after the 2020 elections, and brad raffensberger spoke publicly about the phone call that he had with lindsey graham, and he believed that lindsey graham was pressuring him, and wanted to get rid of the legal ballots and from raffensperger's view that he wanted to disenfranchise the voters of georgia. and when i asked lindsey graham about that, he said that he was not talking about the 2020 presidential race, but he was talking at the mail-in voting system in georgia and how the verification system worked and how it would work heading into a critical senate race, and there were two senate races in georgia, in january 2021a and the runoffs there, that ultimately the democrats won and

took back the control of the majority, and he said that is the focus entirely, and he pus pushed back on raffensperger's claims. >> i am very concerned if you are going to continue to work by mail, and what systems work or don't, and i think that i have every right in the world to reach out and ask how does it work. i thought that it was a good conversation. >> he says it is a emphatic threat. >> no, that is not my intent, and i categorically deny that. i am asking about a race that we have not yet had. we have a senate race come up, and there anything that we can do to make it better? >> you are asking about a senate race come up? >> yes, there is a process, ab you can't change the law retroa retroactively, and there is no way to do that, and whatever system we have for the

presidential election, we will live with, and the whole conversation was about the senate race. >> and it is unclear why the special grand jury recommended charges, and whether it is graham's testimony was different in any way or additional evidence about senator lindsey graham's 13 in the affirmative to pursue charges, and 7 in the negative of the special grand jury, and the report does not detail any of that specifically. and we do know that lindsey graham did ultimately testify before the grand jury after he fought a subpoena, and he did not want to testify, and he did not believe it is appropriate to bring a sitting senator in to testify before the panel, and he did fight it, and lost, and so he did cooperate. i talked to him about the testimony before the grand jury, and he said that he cooperated fully, but he refused to provide any details about that testimony. i asked him if he expected to be charged and he said flatly, he did not expect to be charged, and it is going to be

interesting to see how his responds to this specific recommendation, and his office has not commented, but with the comments from 2020, he claims that he did not do anything wrong, sara. >> in all fairness, i wanted to say what brad raffensperger said, because he talked to wolf blitzer about what he felt on the other side of the line when he spoke to lindsey graham. we will listen to that. >> you described to the washington post a conversation that you had with republican senator lindsey graham friday, and you came away with the impression that he wanted you the toss out mail-in ballots, and what did he say to you? >> he wanted to know if the ballots could be matched back to the voters and i had the sense that he implied that you could throw those out, and the look at the counties with the highest frequent error of signatures and this is the impression that i got. >> i wanted to be clear on, this mr. secretary, you wanted

senator graham to find ways to get rid of legally cast ballots, because cnn asked him about these allegation, and he denied them and he said that is ridiculous. his words, that's ridiculous. >> well, it is an implication that look hard and see how many ballots you could look out, and they are looking at that in part of the court case and one was subsequently filed, wasn't it. >> so you heard his words there. they are different from what lindsey graham is saying. how does he square that? it is on camera, and he is talking about it. >> exactly. perhaps a difference of interpretation, and perhaps the words were, and he said that he applied to throw out the ballots and maybe the words were not as explicit as raffensperger let on, and it is unclear. none of us were on the call, and two men who had different interpretations coming out of the call, but raffensperger did

testify himself before the grand jury, and he also talked to the january 6th select committee on capitol hill investigating this, and lindsey graham gave his side of events and didn't talk to the january 6th committee, but a difference of interpretation, and maybe perhaps, sara, there wast in a clear consensus of the, among, the unanimous consent of the grand jury voting 13-7, and not 20-1 as most of the other charges were for donald trump on down the line. >> manu raju, thank you for your reporting today and all of the other days chasing people down on capitol hill. i want to go to kristen holmes, because she has new reporting for us. i knew that you would get it in the next few minutes, and what are you hearing from trump camp? >> yes, a statement from the trump campaign spokesperson, and said that democrat partisan fani willis and the unlawfully constructed politically

motivated so-called special grand jury have been exposed as operatives and tools of the radical democrats that they are and in an unbiased american act, the majority of the grand jurors voted to indict dozens of individuals including former and sitting u.s. senators for election integrity and exercising their first amendment rights under the constitution. so, again, this is really the same line that we have heard over and over again, saying that this is partisan, and saying that this is political and pointing to the fact that because there are u.s. senator, and republican u.s. senators, and that is why this is political. one thing to point out here as i spoke to a number of the trump advisers a few moments ago who noted that they believed that because they were thinking about discussing, and indicting the sitting u.s. senators that it would look good for donald trump, because it would look

like they were overreaching in some way. now, again, this is what they are telling me. the statement is what we would expect to see which is trump saying it is all political, and one of trump's biggest things that he likes to say, is that they are not coming after me, and they are coming after you, a and i am standing in the way. and so tonight, we will see him in south dakota in a rally, and so that is the first since the arrest in fulton county, and so it is going to be interesting. >> and to be fair to fani willis, she says that she is doing her job, and they did not indict two former senators, and this is not a circle he cannot square. she did not go forward with the charges against them. all very interesting, and we will check back, and see what he says in south and i'm

going to toss it to john. >> and thank you, sara. the news is who was not charged. who was not charged. one sitting u.s. senator lindsey graham, and two sitting senators kelly loeffler and michael perdue. and with us is shan wu, and now, to be clear, lindsey graham was not indicted, and the question is why. was it because the special grand jury showed reservations only voting by 13-7 to indict him? is that what caused fani willis trepidation or the difficulty in charging a u.s. senator or maybe the evidence? >> picking between the three, john, it is more likely the evidence. as you have been pointing out, that since we can't see the

transcripts and the evidence and seeing a summary here, the votes, i'm a little bit skeptical of that, but there is some distinctions to be made, and having indicted hundreds of grand jurors indictments, i can tell you that the vote did not matter to us, unless it is slim and almost a deadlock to it, but to michael's point, this is a grand jury who had been focused on the one case for a long time, and therefore the weight of those votes might have carried a lot more meaning to the prosecutor in making the decisions. it is also, i don't think that the potential federal official defenses would have bothered this prosecutor very much. that is speculation, but it seems that she would have had the evidence and full steam ahead. it is possible they may have done a good job of themselves in testifying before the grand jury for some of the folks. graham, politicians, sometimes they come across pretty well as witnesses for the down home kind

of approach talking to grand jurors and influenced some of the votes, but the prosecutors may have looked at that and said, well, he has a culpable defense here, and maybe not enough evidence to overcome it. i lean more that she had a look at the evidence that we can't see. >> and it is specific that it is not clear what the special grand jury was leaning towards an indictment, but it is the broadest of the national effort to overturn the 2020 election, and the phone call this we are focused on, it is not enumerated here in the report, but it is for donald trump and others and their phone call, and lindsey gr graham's phone call is not listed here. michael, if you can teach a little bit of the law school here so i can understand it, and the viewers can understand in a normal grand jury, and in a normal grand jury, if there is a vote in that grand jury, and it does vote to indict, and even by a margin of one as shan was

saying, is the person charged? >> well, and i am glad to be with shan this morning, too. in a normal grand jury, and there is a difference of the state grand jury and federal grand jury, and state grand jury, which is what we are talking about here, and a prosecutor would have to say basically an indictment, and go into state grand jury and say that i want you to investigate this, and decide together which charges we are going to bring, and the rule is that an indictment, and we have to call it laid on the table, and in other words, presented on the grand jury for their consideration, and hear from some witnesses, and hear the evidence and little bit of the summary type of evidence, and then they take a vote. so at that point, if it is up to the grand jury, and if they vote to indictment, and that indictment is issued by the grand jury, and so they are not investigated, and this is the difference of what this report is about, and this report is merely an investigative tool,

and we don't use those typically in georgia and that what makes it unique, and gives d.a. the opportunity to subpoena the witnesses and to bring a bunch of people in, and have them talk to the grand jurors over the eight-month period of moving forward with the case, and their report is advisory only. that is different than what you have in a criminal grand jury in the state system here. our state system does not have an advisory grand jury process for the criminal grand jury, and they simply vote to indict or not the indict. the prosecutor uses his or her discretion in decides whether or not to present that indictment to the grand jury, and here she is using discretion in deciding whether or not to accept the recommendations of this special purpose advisory grand jury. so they are different beasts, but the simple answer is that if you were in georgia and the indictment is presented to the

criminal grand jury, the vote is going to rule the day. >> right. that is what is different here. both of the things have the words grand and jury in them, but in practical terms, they are very, very different. one is basically an investigatety panel, and investigative commission that issues recommendations, where as if it lays the indictment on the table, and, shan, i hope people understand it, it recommends charge, but it does not mean they were charged or a prosecutor has to bring the charges or ultimately the grand jury has to choose to indict. so, shan, what now? and is there anything in here, and this is sparse other than the votes, and how can the prosecution and defense in the cases that do exist use this information? well, we can't glean too much more of what the prosecution can do with it.

they know much more than what is in the sparse report, and the defense as has been discussed, there are some nuggets that have been interviewed if not already contacted by the defense, and it is interesting tdz defense counsel what questions and theories that the prosecution is looking at, and finger pointing, and they are not charged, but now i can blame them and they are the real masterminds and not my client. but one distinction that you made, john, is that there is a little bit of the analogy to the special counsel reports or the old statue independent counsel reports that i have been involved in, and the important difference is that when they are writing the reports the people who are mentioned can comment on it, and earlier tim heaphy was making point that when this grand jury report comes out, the

people mentioned they don't have the opportunity to rebut that, and this is significant, but in terms of how it plays out in court, it is difficult to know. and so, these are people who you might want the blame as a defense counsel. >> to read one part of the dissent from one of the grand jurors who voted against indictments for purdue and loeffler and let me read a footnote, one of the jurors recommending indictments for p perdue and loeffler while pandering to a political base do not give rise to a criminal case. >> and that is what is to a

criminal trial. so that is going to allow defense to ask the state, what did you do versus what is so different about what my client did. but that is the jury, they are looking for the one juror to hold out, and look, they were not doing anything criminal, and it is bad, but it is not criminal, and they were asking questions about the election. >> all right. michael moore and shan wu, thank you for helping us to understand this. kate? >> we will keep an eye on this, but also more news we are tracking. a philadelphia officer has turned himself in as the district attorney is going to release body camera footage of an incident that happened last month. and nfl is making major strides toward player safety in football. inside look at what they are trying to do to prototect playe'

health. ♪ there it is. that feeling you get... when you can du more with less asthma.

it starts with dupixent. dupixent is not for sudden breathing problems. it's an add-on treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma. and can help improve lung function for better breathing in as little as two weeks. dupixent helps prevent asthma attacks... and can even reduce or eliminate oral steroids. can you picture it? dupixent can cause allergic reactions that can be severe. get help right away if you have rash, chest pain, worsening shortness of breath, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor about new or worsening joint aches and pain, or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop asthma medicines, including steroids, without talking to your doctor. who knows what you can do when you du more with less asthma. ask your asthma specialist about dupixent. meet the team... behind the team. the coach. the manager.

and the snack dad. all using chase to keep up with their finances. the coach helps save goals here, because she saved for soccer camp there. anddd check this out... the manager deposited a check. magic. and the snack dad? he's getting paid back. orange slicesss. because this team all has chase. smart bankers. convenient tools. one bank with the power of both. chase. make more of what's yours. ♪ when you have chronic kidney disease... there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. if you have chronic kidney disease, farxiga can help you keep living life. ♪ farxiga ♪ and farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure, which can lead to dialysis. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men, and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may lead to death.

a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. farxiga can help you keep living life. ask your doctor for farxiga for chronic kidney disease. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ farxiga ♪ automatically responds to snoring. so, no more hiding under your pillow. because this system actually detects snoring then adjusts to help reduce it. for a limited time, save up to $700 on select tempur-pedic adjustable mattress sets.

okay. moments ago, the full special grand jury report was released from fulton county. this the report that explains recommendations for charges against donald trump and some of his allies for their efforts to overturn the 2020 election in georgia and frankly elsewhere. the jurors recommended -- no, jurors recommended charges against 39 people, and 29 of them were not charged.

let's turn to fulton county on fani willis' thinking, and nick valencia is outside the courthouse, and nick, what are you hearing from the fulton county, d.a.? >> yeah, very quiet. knotting so far from the fulton county d.a. office, and the cnn crew reached out to the d.a. office and offering no comment from the full report of the special purpose grand jury, and we knew that fani willis was going to be using discretion and how she saw fit to be using indictments best digested by a potential grand jury moving forward and we knew the whole time that the special purpose grand jury was an evidence-gathering mechanism, and we know that fani willis had the reason to compel this, and we have read them by now of the conspiracies that one was a fake elector scheme, and we know that

all fake 16 electors in georgia were given target letters and they were targets of fani willis' investigation and it was back in may that we found out from the court filing that they accepted an immunity deal from the attorney general's office. and we know that some of the fake electors were unnamed co-conspirators and we know that david schaffer, and senator shawn steel were fake electors charged in this, and some of them were listed as unindicted co-conpeers or the and the bottom line, we are trying to get comment from the fulton county district attorney's office, but they are tight lipped as they have been throughout the entire process. >> sara? >> and now, joining me is adam smith who is ranking member of the armed services committee. thank you, mr. smith for being with us here, and i wanted to toss something out at you that we just got to us, the grand jury report just released to us.

it is about 26 pages long, and the panel recommended charges against a sitting u.s. senator and two former senators. i wanted to get your take on that, and obviously, the senator is gop senator lindsey graham of south carolina. and i wanted to get some sense of what you think of what happened here, and that fani willis did not go forward with the indictments against them. >> yeah, i mean, everything around this, around the election of 2020 in all of the efforts by the former election of the president is incredibly serious, and in a close election that legitimately say this was right or that was right, and method for doing that, and file the lawsuits and a manner of things, it is very very clear that trump and the supporters went way beyond that, and actually tried the do things that are not legal to overturn a legitimate

election. who did precisely what, i haven't, you know, dove into it in great depth because we have other issues that i have some control over that i am focusing on, but it is a serious thing, and we have to keep the eye on it, and see who played what role. you can't simply overturn the election, because you did not like the outcome and you can't pick electors for the presidential election who are not legitimate electors, so a lot of people got themselves in serious trouble, and i am sure it is going to sort itself out as the prosecution goes forward. >> all right. we will move on to things that you do have some control on, and i wanted to talk to you about the funding of the government. the members of the republican freedom caucus are making three very big demands that they say that they are going to block any more monies or funding of the government if these three things are not acted upon. one is to include the

house-passed secure act and stop the influx of immigration and fentanyl and also, to take the inclusion programs out of the military, and also, to stop the weaponization of the justice department and the fbi, and i am curious if there is anything on the list that the democrats might compromise on? >> i don't think so. i mean, those are fairly narrow items that i am sure are important to the freedom caucus, but we live in a democracy, and the house and the senate and the white house have to agree to keep the government funded. we have a lot of items on the wish list, and the president's build back better agenda, most of which did not get passed to provide better child care to americans to give more support for families on health care. we have a lot of issues that we would like to see passed that the republicans don't support either which ares an tangential

the government, but we don't have the vote, and the freedom caucus does not have the votes either. so if they choose to shut down the government, that is unfortunate voice not just by them, but by speaker mccarthy, because we have the votes to pass a clean cr and we have the votes to pass a defense bill and fully funded appropriation bills, but you have that small group of freedom caucus who does not believe in democracy but their on opinion, and if the votes exist, they will try to block it. there is considerable reason for concern that speaker mccarthy is going to let them and not have a vote on a clean cr to keep the government funded or the appropriation bills that could fund it. so, it is a discussion, but those issues are non-starter for me, and i think that every single democrat, and we not going to support them just because the freedom caucus is

going to shut down the government if we don't. so, we will see how all of that plays out in next couple of months. >> we will be certainly watching. and also, someone who blocking something, tommy tuberville, 300 promotions and a single senator who is doing this, and the battle is over another issue, women's reproductive rights and whether the pentagon is going to end up paying for travel expenses for someone who travels out of state to get an abortion, and why do you think that senator tuberville is doing that, and about a niche issue or is there something else there and what is your frustration about that? >> no, it is about that issue, and look, he is doing it again. i say this, and he does not believe in democracy. all right. he does not believe in the system of government that we set up. you have a vote, you lose you move on. what he and the freedom caucus believe if you don't get what you want, do as much damage as you can to the government.

that is an incredibly destructive approach and destructive to the national security of the country to not have top leaders appointed to the position really undermines our ability to protect this country, bottom line. i know that he does not support the travel policy. joe biden won. he put the policy in place. if senator tuberville does not like that, support a republican candidate next year and go to ballot box and make your case, but you are undermining country to defend itself because you did not get your way on one piece of policy is destructive and wrong. i personally wish the senate would change the rules so that one senator does not have that kind of power so that we can actually would have a democracy where you have a fair vote that the result will come out and you go forward, but the freedom caucus and senator tuberville

does not care, and they will do as much damage they can if they don't get their way, and it is really bad for the country. >> lastly, i wanted to ask you, quickly, about the polling coming out, and you talked about the fact that president biden is the president, and agenda to get through, but the new polling is saying in 2024 serious concerns from democrats about his age, and whether he can lead the nation in the next four years if he is reelected and what are the thoughts? are you worried about the polling? >> two things about that. first of all, objectively president biden doing a really good job. the economy is strong, and unemployment has stayed low as we have reduced inflation. he has helped to build the coalition to defend ukraine against russia. it is hard to believe there is an argument that he is not on top of what he doing as president h. is capable of doing that going forward and second, it is important to remember that all of us running for office, we have flaws.

nobody is going to be perfect. you ask a question to dissect somebody, and what you like or don't, and there is going to be criticisms, and this is the nature of it. but i come back that joe biden is doing a good job. he is in a strong position to win next year, and we will have an election, and it is difficult, but he is in strong position to run for re-election. >> thank you, representative adam smith. we are waiting for a press conference coming out of philadelphia, and they say it is an important update about a deadly police-involved shooting. the district attorney is expected to release the body camera video which is important because there is a discrepancy of the story from the police and what this video shows. the officer involved has turned himself into the police today. we will have the update come up

for you.u. that targets vital cell turnover, evens skin tone, and smooths finene lines. with visisible results in just one week. neutrogena® retinol ancestry made it really easy to learn about my family's history. finding military information, newspaper articl, how many people were livin in the house and where it was, makes me curious and keeps puing me in and the photos reminding me of what life must have been like for them. finding out new bits of information about the family has been a wonderful experience, it's an important part of understanding who we are. we handcraft every stearns & foster® using the finest materials, like indulgent memory foam, and ultra-conforming innersprings, for a beautiful mattress, and indescribable comfort. for a limited time, save up to $800 on select stearns & foster® adjustable mattress sets. we, the first generation of moms to lose our kids to social media,

are sick of waiting. for 25 years, there's been no new laws protecting kids online. while our children are dying. we can pass the kids online safety act. join us. join us. join us. join us. ♪ let's lead the way. i take you to philadelphia and we will take you to officials who are making an announcement and the developments of a police-involved shooting from last month. >> we will show the most relevant portions, but so we are clear and consistent with the

family's wishes, this press conference will not conclude until you had the opportunity to watch all of it. all of each one. so while we will immediately play a shorter portion, the entirety will be made available to you today. for those of you who would like to obtain an electronic copy of these videos, you need to email our chief of communications jane row at jane.row @phila.gov and she will provide that. and once we have completed most relevant portions of the video, we will discuss the charges brought in this case. obviously, many of you are familiar with the fact that x-police officer mark dial has turned himself in this morning to face the charges, and we will go through the charges, and then

we will consistent with the obligation to try this case in a courtroom, not in the media, we will be hearing questions and we will provide the answers where question. but i want to start discussing the videos. first of all, i need you to know that the family of mr. irizarry as well as their counsel were invited to our office for the purpose of reviewing videos. they did review the videos, and we have had lengthy and detailed discussions about their wishes. while it was not their decision of what to do, we were careful to talk to them in detail, and talk to them after at their request, and they watched the entire videos and even to check in the next day to make sure this is what they wanted to do,

and what they said to us is that they wanted the videos played in their entirety. they wanted no portion of the videos blurred. when they came in and before they had seen the videos, which i had seen multiple times as well as the attorneys behind me, whomly introduce in a moment, i warned them repeatedly that this is extremely difficult to watch. and especially for family members to watch something that is extremely violent regardless of the warnings, tand wanted to see it. we understand, and they saw it. i hope that anyone who is considering looking at these videos in the public, i hope that will think three times and

then more, and any adult will think twice about watching these videos. because in some ways and for some people, they will be traumatic. nevertheless, and even though it is our decision after long and close consultation with the family, we have decided to follow their recommendation. i also want you to know that the family repeatedly said to me, and the family's counsel repeatedly said to me, they do not want any criminal unrest. they do not want any rioting. they do not want any looting or anyone to claim that what this video depicts or the nature of the case or the event itself justifies any criminal behavior, and that it would be a violation of their respect, their love and

reverence for young eddie irizarry. they can articulate it better than i can, but that is what they said. i hope that anyone who sees this video and feels strongly about it will follow their heart when it comes to the lawful, peaceful exercise of free speech under our constitution. but i hope they will also understand that free speech is not a license to commit any crimes. we will be playing both of these videos in the most relevant portions and at the conclusion of q&a, we will play the remainder, and we will not play them multiple times, because we will have access to the videos and those of you in the media will be able to look at them at your leisure to complete the

complete and necessary reporting and they will be played in this order. first, we will be playing the body-worn cameraf officer dial. officer dial was initially as you know, the passenger in the police vehicle, and you will see some of that. >> you are listening to larry krasner explaining that he is about to show a video that is extremely graphic, and the family wants to have the public see it, and because we have not seen it, and we will hold back a moment, because we want the view it ourselves that we want to know that it is something that we should show our viewers and he also has said that children should not see it. it is that graphic. and so we want to bring in brynn gingras, and also jen miller with, and this is the shooting of eddie irizarry and there is

body worn camera that the public is about to see. >> yes, rightfully so, so as the d.a. said, that it is disturbing video and i have watched it beginning to end, and it is two police officers and body camera worn, and the family did want it to be seen, and it is extremely graphic. what it does show, sara, within five seconds of police pulling over irizarry and exiting the police vehicle, shots were fired. this is the thing that is so important and why i can only assume that the family wanted the video released in full is because the initial accounts of what the police said happened that day on august 14th is that irizarry was driving wrong way down a one-way street and driving erratically, and pulled over by the police, and the police got out of the car and gave multiple warnings and shot him when he was out of the car. it was only until iri version

arry attorney came forward with neighborhood surveillance that he never exited the car. when they did a search of that car, they did not find a gun, but only two knives. so it is clear that there is some distrust that comes with the community, because it is a different story than what the police had initially put out there. but, again, what we are seeing in the two videos are not really commands, and i will mention that we are going through it and trying to figure out what was said, but multiple shots were fired within five seconds to our count after the police arrived there on the scene. that is a major issue that i am sure that the d.a. is going to further discuss when he is talking about the one officer mark dial's charges against him. we do know that mark dial has turned himself in, and his attorney says that he does not know what charges he is facing yet, and he does know at this point, and we don't know if it is manslaughter or murder

charges and we will have to wait and find out, and he says that he called them appalling. essentially saying that when he pulled over irizarry and that irizarry pulled for a weapon and the officer retreated when he fired shots showing a clear indication that he was able to shoot those shots, and this is the picture of the defense that we might hear as the case moves forward, and the video is disturbing, and will be able to release bits of them, because that is why the family wanted the unedited body cam footage out, there because the initial accounts from police are so glaringly different from what actually happened. >> again, we are waiting to go through that video before we put some of it out so people can see what everyone is talking about here. we are waiting to hear from district attorney larry krasner and the charges against larry

dial, the former police sufficienter who has turned himself in. and as brynn has pointed out, one of the notable factors that has been pointed out that the family wans outts out there, is the officers said initially, that eddie irizarry got out of the car and he didn't. >> they said that he got out of the car, and lunged with a knife, and he clearly didn't. and one thing is that i have investigated i could not tell you how many police shootings at the scene, and you know, you would piece together the story from eyewitnesses and canvassing and officer's statements you get through the union rep on the off of the record, this is what we think happened, and once we had body cameras, we would review them literally on the scene, and

download them there and review them there, and have the officer's account in some measure, and often times before we went out with the story, we would find that there was a difference between the officer's account and what happened and sometimes that is the way that the officer remembered it, because of the events unfolded quickly, and sometimes major differences and sometimes perfectly together, but in the case, the account given by police officials and the body camera is so distance and you wonder why so many days as it did. to her credit, danielle outlaw the police commissioner came out after reviewing the tapes and said, this is not what we were told at the scene, and the story as changed and the officer is brought up on charges literally because he would not cooperate with the internal investigation, and the criminal investigation is what we are seeing unfold now. >> and pending. i wanted to quickly sort of talk about that discrepancy.

that discrepancy is what gets the people in the community so upset and fuhr, you because they feel like there is a cover-up that has already happened, and so why do the police departments not do what you are suggesting. you have the body camera video, and why go forward with this, if there is any chance that there is a major discrepancy, and this what happened with george floyd, and we know what we saw initially and then what we saw on the camera. >> that is a perfect logical question, and that is why between segments here i will have to dig into the procedure in philadelphia. for instance and i don't know the answer to this. is the procedure the officer's account and then the video to the district attorney's office for review and a gap or the officer reviews it, and so there is a coup of wild cards here, and a labor agreement of how soon it is turned over between them and the fraternal order of the police, and we have to figure out what was the delay of days between knowing this is the

officer's account and this is a bad story, because let's go to the videotape. >> so, john, waiting still to get this video n in. as the district attorney said they will play the relevant parts in first, and then play it in entirety, and he talked about how tough it is. also he talked about how involved the family was and in the decision to release it. how important is that when they move forward, because we know that family, and part of what happened in the intervening months since last month when this incident happened is that family was demanding answers right from get-go, and they did not feel they were getting them. >> and the family hired their own attorney. their own investigators went out, and they obtained that video from a restaurant, and we have not seen the body camera video which is the officer's point of view, and that is the best version outside of being in the officer's eyes to see what he saw, what he thought, and maybe what he perceived.

the camera from the restaurant shows that the van pulls up, and the window is closed and mr. irizarry and the officer comes out with the gun drawn and one hand and the sound, because the restaurant is further away from the body camera is will be muffled, but on the sound is show me your hands, show me your hands and six shots. what you don't see is anybody getting out of that car or lunging with a knife. so, this will be a much closer view. the sound is going to be much more telling. >> again, the video is being released. we are just going through it, because the warning from the district attorney is that it is really hard to watch, and we want to make sure that before we put it out -- >> and the family does not want any of it blurred. >> we will take a look, and get it to you when we can, and much more coming in, and more on the

district attorney here of what the officer mark dial is facaci when we come back. i'd like to tackle one of these after a game. quarterbacks can't tackle anything! shingles. some describe it as an intense burning sensation or an unbearable itch. this painful, blistering rash can disrupt your life for weeks. it could make your workday feel impossible.

the virus that causes shingles is likely already inside of you. if you're 50 years or older, ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingles. let innovation refunds help with your erc tax refund so you can improve your business however you see fit. rosie used part of her refund to build an outdoor patio. clink! dr. marshall used part of his refund to give his practice a facelift. emily used part of her refund to buy... i run a wax museum. let innovation refunds help you get started on your erc tax refund. stop waiting. go to innovationrefunds.com you really got the brows. okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we provide nutrients to support immune, muscle, bone, and heart health. yaaay! woo hoo! ensure with 25 vitamins and minerals and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪

♪birds flyin' high, you know how i feel.♪ ♪breeze driftin' on by...♪ ♪...you know how i feel.♪ you don't have to take... [coughing] ...copd sitting down. ♪it's a new dawn,...♪ ♪...it's a new day,♪ it's time to make a stand. ♪and i'm feelin' good.♪ start a new day with trelegy. no once-daily copd... ...medicine has the power to treat copd... ...in as many ways as trelegy. with three medicines in one inhaler,... ...trelegy makes breathing easier for a full 24 hours, improves lung function, and helps prevent future flare-ups. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler... ...for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating,... ...vision changes, or eye pain occur. take a stand, and start a new day with trelegy. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy... ...and save at trelegy.com.

conquer financial reports. conquer 2000-word essays. conquer a 6 course menu. rule over what you write with the smooth writing, longest lasting gel ink pen in america. do you g2?

- [announcer] do you have an invention idea but don't know what to do next? call invent help today. they can help you get started with your idea. call now 800-710-0020. president biden arrived in india for the g-20 summit this. on the agenda, huge issues, as always, like climate change and offering debt relief and more support for developing nations. top of the agenda as well is continued international support for ukraine against the invasion from russia. another big issue, though, is also who is not attending. this is the first summit xi jinping has chosen to not attend. also not attending is vladimir putin.

joining me for more at the stakes and what really needs to and could be happening here at this very big summit this week, david sanger, national security analyst with "the new york times." talk to me, as you mentioned to me, not just the two leaders not there, but the third that is also not there, president zelenskyy of ukraine. what does this mean? >> it really is pretty remarkable because president biden has tried to turn every one of these big international gatherings toward the issue of building support for ukraine and isolating russia. xi jinping is not coming. he's preoccupied at home with financial problems, economic problems of a scale he's never seen before. putin didn't want to show up because he didn't want to face the condemnation. and they couldn't get the rest of the group to agree on inviting the president zelenskyy, who you'll remember

was at the g7 summit early in the summer, has been at these other events. there's going to be a struggle even to get a communique here that condemns russia. because the russians and chinese will veto that. it's not clear whether president biden will be able to take on the biggest issue, and that will leave him with trying to make sure that they work on debt relief, grain and other food issues, and the by lateral relationship with india, as the president tries to deepen that. india's leader mode was in washington for a state dinner only two months ago. >> i have heard people talk about the absence of xi jinping as a real opportunity for president biden amongst the group. what are you hearing about that? >> it does in that they won't be there to push back.

that's particularly interesting about xi jinping. he did send his premier, and they will be active in all of this, but it was only all the a little more than a decade ago that china would come to events like this and be really the other big player. during the financial crisis in 2009, the first one that president obama went to, it was china and the united states that worked out a path forward. thatter ra are of cooperation is over. and obviously, with russia, we're back in something that is somewhere between a cold war and a hot war, fortunately not with u.s. troops involved, but a full-on conflict. so what we're seeing here is the world fracturing into other blocks. you have seen xi jinping to try to bring south africa, iran,

more into their orbit that's the competition underway, particularly with india, which has been right on the fence on the war in ukraine. >> that's really in the spotlight now with the g-20 summit. david, thank you. it's good to see you. we appreciate it. we have our eyes on new delhi, where the g-20 is rolling out and beginning. president biden is beginning this bilateral meeting with the prime minister there. we are also keeping an eye on this press conference in philadelphia that we have just been covering. they are continuing to try to -- they are unveiling and releasing body camera video. >> people are going through that video. it is horrific, and we will be showing it to you, once we get a good look at it and are able to show you the clips. thank you so much for joining us. this is "cnn news central." "inside politics" is up next. i saw how easily it picked up my hair every time i dried it! only takes a minute. look at that! the heavy duty cloths are extra thick, for r amazing trap & lock. even for his hair.

wow. and for dust, i love m my heavy duty duster. the fluffy fibers trap dust on contact, up high and all around without having to lift a thing. i'm so hooked. you'll love swiffer. or your money back! (sfx: ping) (♪) ♪ please don't go ♪ ♪ please don't go.. ♪ ♪ please don't go ♪ ♪ please don't go ♪

♪ don't goooooo! ♪ (♪) ♪ don't go away ♪ (♪) ♪ please don't go ♪ my name's dan and i live here in san antonio, texas. my wife magda and i have been married for 39 years. about three or four years ago, i wasn't feeling as if i was as sharp as i used to be. i wanted to try something that was over-the-counter. i saw the prevagen commercials. after a short amount of time taking prevagen, i started noticing a difference-- that i'm remembering this, i'm remembering that. i stopped taking prevagen and i found myself slacking back so i jumped right back on it. i feel as if it's brought me back to the good 'ol days. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. today on "inside politics,