and prioritizations to the strategic national stockpile. however, it was the strategic national stockpile's responsibilities to make those purchases. >> how about femcee, does barda participate in femcee? can you please briefly because my time is limited explain what femcee is? this is a plan that experts like yourselves participate in. i want the american people to know there have been plans, there have been plans. femcee had put forth a 2017 implementation plan. the white house put forth in september of 2018 a national biodefense plan. did you participate in that national biodefense plan? >> i did. many of us did. >> it was the first time our country had actually put forth a national biodefense plan. many said it was kind of landmark. and same thing with femcee putting forth many plans. i want the people to know a lot of folks over a long period of

time have been focused but yet we did not still have enough. we didn't have enough swabs. we didn't have enough masks. we didn't have enough gowns for all of those incredible health care providers. i don't want everyone to be given the impression you raised the flag just in january, okay, when you saw it was short because you hadn't gotten the job done prior to january. you were at those tables, as were so many others. this happened over a very, very long period of time. and those of us have been very disappointed to learn what was and was not in the strategic national stockpile. i thank you for your service. i thank you for your expertise. but across the board over many administrations we did not do enough, and i yield back. >> do you want to respond, doctor? >> i can say those plans had been in place and it was disappointing they were not pulled out in january of this year and followed. they were not put on the table with a strong leader indicating these are our plans. everyone fall in line and follow

through with this plan. i can also -- i think it's important to emphasize the public health emergency countermeasure enterprise, comprised of many great scientists across our federal government, to put these plans in place. since 2017, we have largely disbanded, dismantled that femcee organization. we have not had those inner agency discussions for a number of years, executive enterprise committee and executive leadership committee. we may have had one or two meetings at most in a restructured and reorganized femcee organization. the partners and colleagues across government haven't had the venues to even talk or coordinate for a number of years to understand what that plan looked like and how they would work together to implement that plan when the day came to need it. >> okay. the gentlewoman's time has expired and she's yielded back. pleasure to recognize the gentleman from new mexico, mr.

lujan, for your five minutes of questions. >> thank you, madam chair. dr. bright, you've described pressure from senior trump administration officials to promote the drug hydro kwo hydrochloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. according to your document, when bayer offered to donate pills your team of experts at hhs determined, quote, there are safety liabilities associated with the drug, close quote. and that, quote, accepting the donation could lead to widespread use that was not supported by any clinical data, close quote. further one of the public health experts you cited said no data to say that hydroxychloroquine provided beneficial treatment to the prevention of covid-19. yes or no, before bright, are there safety risks associated to hydroxychloroquine?

>> there are, yes. >> and the consensus from barda and fda scientists is it was advisable for additional clinical data before making any recommendations on the use of chloroquine to treat covid-19, is that correct, yes or not? >> yes, that's correct. >> they announced on march 18th to move ahead with the hydroxychloroquine and president trump said the drug had, quote, shown very, very, very encouraging early results, close quote. yes or no, was the president's statement accurate? >> i don't not think that was the best-informed statement. >> in that press conference the president said the drug had, quote, been around for a long time so we know things don't go as planned, it's not going to kill anybody, close quote. yes or no, is that statement accurate? >> the drug had been around a long time for its use in malaria but not been around for a long time for its use in covid-19. that's a different indication, different clinical outcome and the drug can behave differently

in those people. >> yes or no, is it true within days of that press conference you received urgent instructions from hhs general counsel passed from the white house directing you to obtain the authorization necessary to make the drugs widely available to the public? >> that's true. >> yes or no, did the hhs and white house general counsel put you in a difficult position? >> yes. >> how did you handle this pressure while still trying to protect the american people? >> we had to come up with an alternate solution that our administration would accept. >> yes or no, did the administration respect this compromise? >> they accented eventually the emergency use authorization option was accepted by dr. cadillac in the administration, yes. >> would i agree with the hhs secretary on april 4 said this compromise, quote, matters not,

and the drug needed to go to pharmacies as well as hospital. dr. bright, there are only 24 hours in a day. every hour you and your team had to spend on chloroquine was an hour you couldn't work on fighting this virus. yes or no, did the president's obsession with this issue distract you and others on your team with your mission for saving lives? >> the directive we received to put an expanded access of protocol in place within 48 hours was extremely distracting to dozens of scientists who were focused on the coronavirus outbreak. they had to set aside all other work to try to put together this protocol in the 48-hour directive time period. >> yes or no, did it distract from efforts to prepare for this crisis including securing ppe and wrapping up testing and the production of other essential supplies? >> it distracted from their efforts of developing other vaccines and drugs and they were focused on at that time, it was a different group of individuals who were focused on procuring ppe. >> dr. bright, just yesterday

the president questioned the testimony of dr. fauci when discussing children and schools. the president insists that, quote, it has very, very little impact on young people. dr. bright, yes or no, do we know that the president's statement is accurate? >> there's a lot we don't yet know about this virus. and it's real childrening over the last few weeks we're getting more and more data out of new york and other places where they had high numbers of infections of the impact of this virus in children. it's a very different presentation and outcome in children than we see in adults. it's very concerning and we don't yet have an answer for that. but we should proceed very cautiously and not have any hope or knowledge that we know everything about this virus. >> dr. bright, i want to end by quoting your testimony, quote, without clear planning and implementation of the steps that i and other experts have outlined, 2020 will be the darkest winter in modern history. the darkest winter in modern

history. yes or no, do you believe this administration is doing everything it can to prevent the darkest winter and what more should they be doing? >> i believe there's a lot of work that we still need to do. i think we need still -- i don't think, i know, we need still a comprehensive plan and everyone across the government and everyone in america needs to know what that plan is or what role they play. there are critical steps we need to do to prepare for that fall, for that winter coming. we do not still have enough personal protective equipment to manage our health care workers and protect them from influenza and covid-19. we still do not have the supply chains ramped up for the drugs and vaccines and we still don't have plans in place how to distribute those drugs and vaccines and we still do not have a comprehensive testing strategy. so americans know which tests do what, what to do with that information and we know how to find this virus and trap it and kill it. there's a lot of work we still have to do.

>> gentleman yields back. pleasure to recognize the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. mulland, for his five minutes of questions. >> thank you, and thank you for your continued prayers for my son. that's kind of you and i really appreciate it. dr. bright, you're here on your own time as an individual, is that correct? >> yes. >> where are you currently employed? >> i'm currently an employ of the department of health and human services and i'm in the middle of a transition i guess you would say between barda and nih. >> so you have accepted the reassigned position to nih? >> accept that position is under discussion at this point. i have not yet accepted that role. >> are you currently being paid? >> i'm currently being paid. >> where are you being paid from, barda or nih? >> it's not completely clear to me but i believe it's out of nih. >> so are you getting a paycheck? you have been over there since mid-april, right?

is that correct? >> i received one paycheck, sir. >> from nih? >> i think it was still part of nih. i have had discussions about my onboarding at nih. >> at barda you may $225,000, is that correct? >> that's true. >> how much are you currently making at nih? >> i don't think my salary has changed. >> it's still the same. you have been over there for approximately four weeks a month? >> it's been about three weeks since i was removed from my office at barda. >> have you reported to nih yet? >> i've checked in with the nih director's office and we discussed the onboarding process, finger printiprinting and had a recall just last evening of their responsibilities they envision for me at nih. >> so you have not actually reported to work but you're still getting paid, correct? >> i have been on sick leave since i was pushed out of my position at barda. >> sick leave for what? >> very high blood pressure and

i have been under treatment for my physician. >> for hypertension? >> yes, sir. >> you're on medical leave? >> i have been on medical leave this week. however, i transition from the medical leave to annual leave so i can imagine this. >> what does that mean? >> vacation time. >> you're on vacation time right now? >> i'm on vacation time. >> did you inform your supervisors about you coming here today or did you need to do that? >> i had informed them about my leave status. i had a conversation with them last night. >> you transferred from medical leave to vacation this week or does that start next week? >> i had the is conversation with my physician about my hypertension and how we had been managing it over the last three weeks because this has been very stressful to be removed suddenly without explanation for my role and position. it's a life change for me. and my physician has been working very closely with me to manage my hypertension and stress. and the conversation i had with him last night indicated -- >> i guess i'm kind of confused there. you say you have hypertension

but yet you're able to do these interviews. you're able to make the report. you're able to prepare for this hearing. yet you're too sick to go into work but you're well enough to come here while you're still getting paid from the united states government, is that correct? >> sir, i have been under medical leave until -- >> i get that. but if you had been under medical leave, too sick to do that but you can prepare for a two-hour hearing. just having a hard time tracking that. i have a hard time understanding that. and if you have hypertension and you're too sick to go to nih but you never experienced that in barda, right? you never had issued in barda with hypertension? >> i did not have the level of stress of being removed from my position while i was in barda. this has been very stressful. my position -- >> i get it. people handle pressure quite different. but as a director of barda, i would feel like you're quite a bit of in a stressful position when you're trying to manage a

pandemic. but you can't imagine that or you could imagine that but you can't imagine your own hypertension when it cocomes be you are removed from the office and you can all of a sudden prepare for this but can't do that. i just have a hard time understanding it. i know you're a bright individual and very smart. but you are an employee of the federal government. i just want to make sure you're not doing something to deceive the american people at the same time getting paid from the united states government. with that, i'm going to yield to a ranking member walden. >> i thank the gentleman. dr. bright, your lawyer appears to have a pretty substantial binder there and i know mr. guthrie asked about the documents on the table. are those the exhibits to your complaint to the office of special counsel? >> i don't know what -- i don't know what those are. >> i will direct it to the counsel then, since she's answered other questions. are those the exhibits to the

complaint to the office of special counsel? >> some are. and some are my work product. and some are my notes. they're not appropriate to turn over to congress. >> and is it appropriate to turn over the documents that are referenced in the complaint, not your work product, i respect that, to this committee, and would you do that? >> you asked that question initially and i said we would look at the documents to determine whether they are appropriate to turn over. >> i'm just talking about the ones that -- we have partial ee kmanlz. we have screen shots of emails. i think we should have the right to see those documents if we're going to effectively know the full extent of this complaint. and i just wish you would commit to turn those over. dr. bright, would you turn those over? >> i think i addressed that. >> dr. bright -- i'm asking dr. bright now. >> my complaint to the office of special counsel and that is the process i know to follow. >> but you're here as an individual -- >> gentleman's time expired. >> we just want to see what you

submitted so we can evaluate it ourselves. >> i don't understand the full process other than i was supposed to submit it to the office of special counsel, which i have done so. i don't understand the legalities of sharing that before they've had their opportunity to review that. >> they've certainly been shared out into the public and press. "the washington post" has them from some source. they look a lot like what's referenced in your complaint. i don't know where those came from. other media outlets are certainly seeing them. i think it's part of this investigation. madd madam chair, you should request them. >> we will seek all information that's appropriate to be to the comm committee. what i circulated and recirculated to all members of the subcommittee were the emails that were public as well as the complaint. that's what was out there. >> i know, but -- >> i haven't -- >> any other investigation -- >> daily who says one.

politico has something too. i don't know the voracity of things. >> in any other investigation we would both be going, say we need to see all of the documents as a committee. so that's all i know. just the facts. >> i think we need to move on. the gentleman from oregon is recognized, mr. schrader. >> thank you. thank you for being here, dr. bright. really appreciate it. tough to do. very impressive that you're here. can you describe the tone and reactions of dr. cadillac and dr. azar at the january 23rd meeting when you had the all agencies meeting on the covid virus? can you describe how up to speed they seemed to be? >> in that meeting, sir, it was one of our first meetings we had to address the outbreak. i came in with my list of needs and those lists were money, people and viruses. ment my request was met with a

bit of surprise and puzzlement. i remember secretary azar looking around the room and saying money, you need money? maybe there's money somewhere. i mean, it was just something i -- >> despite the fact we had the outbreak in china for some time? >> this was january 23rd at this point. >> could you describe january -- if you remember -- january 25th email exchange with mr. bowen on the mask situation? >> i don't remember that specific but i'm sure it was urgent. i'm sure mr. bowen was sending me a notice asking if -- >> you didn't ask him to come talk to you. he just reached out to you? >> yes, sir. >> okay. how about an email exchange from a dr. kerr on january 27th. you reach out and he would come and ask -- >> dr. kerr reached out to me, i

believe. this was, again, he's a pandemic influenza expert as well response. he knows the vital nature of needing those viruses. he was involved in prepping our secretary for a call with vine minister moa of china. we knew the high priority of the secretary to ask for the viruses. we had challenges in the past from getting viruss from china, even ave yarn avian influenza viruses. and he was alarmed as he wrote that morning indicating the cdc director had reprised and actually indicated he did not need to -- the secretary did not need to ask china for viruses. it was alarming to us because we knew how critical it was. >> that sounds incredible in light of what has transpired since then. i guess my major point here is that we have a brave individual coming forward as a whistle-blower but he's not alone. there are many other experts,

scientists, manufacturers that realized we were in, if i may say, deep shit not a long time ago, long before the administration and white house began to wake up. what do you think would have happened if mr. navarro had not reached out to you and actually responded to you? where would we be now if you hadn't been able to at least get one person at the white house's attention? >> it's difficult to speculate where we were, sir. even when mr. navarro reached out and strongly suggested action be taken on february 10th -- february 9th, the email was february 10th, it was delayed that we needed to ramp up production of n95 masks. that order did not go out. that solicitation did not close until march 18th. even with the pressure of mr. navarro, who i believe shared a sense of urgency about this outbreak, that pressure alone still did not spur dr. cadillac

and our strategic national stockpile to that urgently needed action. >> that's very disconcerting and the reason we're here today perhaps. last question if i may, and switching gears and going to the other side of the spectrum, while it's been hard to get folks' attention here in washington, d.c. and the administration on the seriousness of this, i think most people now are convinced this is a very serious issue. and i'm a little concerned we're going too much the other way in terms of information. you alluded to it here on the vaccines. i think some people are under the impression there's a vaccine going to be developed in a couple of months and everything's going to be fine. i can go back to work. we, unfortunately, have to juxtapose economic issues. they have to have realistic expectations at home. you i think accurately indicated, well, you know, can take up to ten years, and the quickest we did i guess was ebola and that was, i believe, five years. so is it -- it's a tough

question to ask. i suppose you don't have to answer it. i don't want america to think they can just not get back to some semblance of a new post-covid life until a vaccine comes out. because that could take years. and there's a chance the vaccine will maybe not be as effective, much like our flu vaccines. with the flu mutating year to year. so i just want to make sure you would -- ask you if you would agree we can't wait to open up america entirely until a vaccine is there. we have to use some of the other parameters you already suggested. >> we have to make sure we have some scientifically led and driven decisions on how and when it's safe to reopen america. if it happens before we have a vaccine, i mean if we have a vaccine faster, that's great. but we do need to open america up sooner. we need to make sure everyone understands the risks and understands the risks of their activities. and everyone has to play a critical part in following those activities to reduce the risk.

we have to have a testing plan in place and enough tests to make sure we know when people are exposed so they can be quarantined and isolated and not continue to infect others. we also are developing a number of therapeutics that could offer some potential benefit prophylactically or protect you almost like a vaccine before you're infected. those are being developed and maybe even faster than a vaccine. and if health care workers and frontline workers can use those therapeutics, that might offer them some protection as well until there is a vaccine. so there's a number of steps in between now and a vaccine that i believe if we let science lead the discussion, and we inform america of the risks and the clear guidance on what needs to happen and people follow that guidance, then there's a step process to getting back out to work and out of our homes. >> thank you very much. >> the gentleman's time expired. please to welcome back the gentleman from north carolina, mr. hudson, for his five minutes

of questions. >> thank you, madam chair. first, let me say i believe any whistle-blower should be respected and allowed to be heard. as a core component of keeping our government accountable and running smoothly. but this hearing is not about a whistle-blower complaint. it's been undermining the administration during a national and global crisis. as evidenced by the fact this hearing is being held in the wrong subcommittee and well before the office of special counsel finishes its work. to disregard the minority so spectacularly in the organization of this hearing only highlights the partisan and political nature of this hearing. i hope today will be held up in the future as a lesson of what not to do and the respect and gravity that should be given to whistle-blower complaints so they're not abused for political expediency. more importantly though we have vital work we should be doing. my constituents want congress to get back to work. so i'm glad to be here to highlight the important work that needs to be done. i heard from an ophthalmologist in my district this week about the need for relief. she said she will consider this

year a success if her practice group even breaks even. long story short, we should be examining 175 billion authorized and appropriated in a bipartisan manner for providers and what providers still need and recommendations for moving forward. we should also be examining why there are gaps in outcomes and access from minority communities. fayetteville, north carolina, in my district has a large and diverse community. understandably folks back home are scared because coronavirus hits them hardest. why are we not spending our time today examining this crisis within a crisis more closely? i hear from providers and hospitals about issues with ppe. i know this administration has done extraordinary things to secure more ppe. i want to thank president donald trump for his strong leadership. not only did his administration move quickly to coordinate a response but his travel ban on january 30th was a bold move, though panned by critics as an overreaction at the time. the administration gone to great lengths to overcome an inadequate system they inherited. as you testified moved quickly to start programs like project

air bridge to expedite more ppe coming in. the questions remain about why there is a global shortage and what more congress can do to support the administration's effort to secure sufficient ppe. this committee should be working on that question. we have multiple pieces of bipartisan legislation to be considered to improve the operations of the strategic national stockpile. we should be examining why our stockpile was allowed to dwindle on previous administrations. answers to these questions and solutions are timely and critical to helping this administration combat this virus and deadly diseases it causes. i hear from constituents every day suffering under these stay-at-home orders. this crisis is hard for anyone, even if they're not suffering from substance use disorder or mental health challenges before they're confined to their homes. this crisis exacerbated this problem. why not examine the mental health providers and the effects this had on our constituents' health.

dr. bright, i appreciate the service you rendered this country. you deserve to be heard and your whistle-blower complaint should be given the same consideration any whistle-blower complaint deserves. but we also have serious allegations made against you. i note again, this is not the time or place from that hearing. the time is after the special counsel's office completed its work and the investigations committee. dr. bright and others politico released an article yesterday saying your complaint left out a lot of information and context regarding agency decisions how to achoir hydroxychloroquine. you chose not to elevate your concerns to the office of the attorney general but kept select screen shots. another example reported by "the wall street journal" today seemed to show you were in support of acquiring and supporting use of hydroxychloroquine. can you elaborate what was missing from your screen shots and why you didn't elevate your concerns at any time to the office of the inspector general?

>> sir, in the early days when i was aware that hydroxychloroquine, we were interested in acquiring that drug for its use in randomized controlled clinical study. when i heard from dr. woodcock that it is something we should try to investigate in the randomized control study, i even reached out to a company that was licensed and approved to make that drug in the united states to see if they could donate that drug to the nih to conduct those clinical studies. i was aware of other efforts that were ongoing to try to acquire some of the that drug for use in randomized control studies. as long as it was going to be used at that time for randomized lynn cal control study, i thought we should look into that supply chain the same way we did remdesivir. it was only after i learned the supply was being discussed was coming in from pakistan and india and facilities not approved by the fda and drug not

approved for use in the united states that i became increasingly alarmed having that drug in the united states. second, it was when i learned that the plan was to make that drug available through an expanded access program so people could potentially get that drug and not be under the close supervision of a health care provider, that caused significant concern. it's because of that and the cascading days afterwards, that we put in that emergency use authorization with the safety bumpers and barriers we felt comfortable with that that drug would only be used under close clinical supervision. but in the earlier days in that email exchange that you're referring to was before we knew about this information of pakistan, before we knew it was going to be used for expanded access clinical -- expanded access protocol. it was when i thought our efforts to obtain some of that drug would be used at the nih to conduct randomized control clinical studies. so i was relieved we did identify supplies of is that

drug for those clinical studies. >> my time expired. madam chair, i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. pleasure to recognize -- and good day, everyone. i'm andrea mitchell in washington. we're continuing to monitor this hearing and we will bring you any more highlights as the ousted hhs vaccine researcher, rick bright, dr. rick bright, has been testifying that his early warnings about the threat of covid-19 were, he says, ignored. and that the window is now closing for government action to prevent an even greater crisis. >> i believe that proper leadership and collaboration across government with the best science leading the way we can devise a comprehensive strategy. the time is running out because the virus is still spreading everywhere. people are getting restless to leave their homes. >> when you look at the first four months of this year, would you describe the government's and the administration's

response as a success or a failure? >> i believe we could have done better. i believe there are critical steps that we did not take in time. >> and joining me now, msnbc's garrett haake on capitol hill, nbc white house correspondent geoff bennett, dr. mario ramirez, former acting director for pandemics and emerging threats at the department of health and human services. dr. vita patel, primary care physician and former policy director in the obama administration. and white house correspondent kristen welker. garrett, first to you. we were in the room. we have been listening for more than two hours. tell us about the highlights, how are dr. bright's allegations holding up? >> bright is painting a picture of a federal bureaucracy, particularly at hhs, that was very slow to respond to concerns about everything from the virus itself to lack of ppe to a general lack of preparedness. and then when it did respond focused on, in his view, the wrong things.

it's always interesting to hear a scientist or any kind of technical professional questioned by largely nontechnical members of congress, but you are in the course of this hearing having teased out some of these important elements of alarms that dr. bright says were raised and ignored. as to the hearing itself, this is another example of congress continuing to find its footing in the coronavirus era, being in that hearing room. the members are spaced out. all but one when i was in the room were wearing a mask. but the usual drama and pomp and circumstance of a major congressional hearing like this is absent. for a good portion of the time i was in the room, i was the only reporter in a room that would normally be full of staff and reporters and members of the public who would be wanting to hear testimony like this, andrea. >> and geoff bennett at the white house, the president is about to depart for allentown, pennsylvania, one of his unusual trips during this covid-19

pandemic, and the shutdown in pennsylvania. let's talk about how he's responding. he apparently is continuing to call dr. bright a disgruntled employee and he's got the hhs secretary alex azar with him, is that correct? >> you're right about that, andrea. in fact as i stand here and talk to you, president trump is on the south lawn as he prepares to get on marine one to head to pennsylvania, his second trip to a battleground ee lech attorney general state in the last two weeks. yes, he is with the health and human services secretary. according to our friend and colleague jeff mason, who is part of the small pool of reporters who are there speaking with the president, president trump said again that dr. bright looks to him to be an angry, disgruntled person. and secretary azar, according to jeffer mason, said everything dr. bright is complaining about was achieved. dr. bright taped an interview previously with another network. he said he's not disgruntled. he said he's frustrated. frustrated by lack of leadership

and lack of preparedness. previously president trump had said, in fact earlier this morning he tweeted he did not know dr. bright, never heard of him. and that's conceivable because up until now dr. bright led a government agency that was fairly obscure. but because dr. bright oversaw the government agency that is charged with investing in and developing vaccines, you can make the argument, and many have made this argument, president trump should have known who dr. bright is, given that public health experts say the only way out of this, the only way we can return to some sense of normalcy is through widespread testing, which we currently don't have, or a vaccine. >> and dr. patel, let's talk about the overall picture dr. bright presented of a delayed government response. your evaluation of that as you've been watching? >> yeah, he's been trying to lay out, you know, a pretty

objective set of measure that's did not get accomplished. so he's reinforcing what we have been hearing from other health officials like dr. tony fauci that we're not ready to both reopen the country and also feel like americans have the confidence to come out of our homes and be able to cope with this virus. what he laid out -- and i realized a lot of it is mixed in with his whistle-blower status, andrea, but he's trying to paint the picture a vaccine is far away from coming soon, which is something we've heard. and number two, we just do not have the necessities ppe testings, swabs, all of the details we've been hearing about, we still don't have what we need in place. it's bleak. but i also think that people like dr. bright are saying what a lot of us are saying, is that we need to let the voices of the scientists be heard and we need a strategy to help us find a way towards recovery. it doesn't need to be science versus recovery. the two can work hand in hand.

. >> and one of the arguments that he was making or part of his testimony involved the n95 masks. he was talking about a government contract where some of masks that had been checked were only 30% effective and are now in use by nurses. so that's part of his argument that the stockpiling was not done effectively and the contract was not done effectively. dr. ramirez, i wanted to play something also he had to say in response to questions from congressman frank pallone from new jersey about the government's ability to get a vaccine out quickly. let's watch. >> i've been very critical of the administration in terms of their -- i call it incompetence with the lack of spline chauppl and testing. i'm afraid this will happen with vaccines and distributions. should i be concerned, sir? >> absolutely. we are already seeing the

challenges with limited doiss of remdesivir with data we're getting remdesivir has benefit in people and we have limited dos doses and we don't have a plan how ty distribute that drug. >> and your response to that testimony. >> certainly. i believe dr. bright is raising a key concern. we were facing this during the ebola pandemic thinking about how we would administer a vaccine in west africa. it's critical thinking through these plans and creating a viable distribution strategy and dr. bright brings up a good point about remdesivir. there's a lot of reporting this week about misclarity how remdesivir is being distributed in the country. i think if we get to a point where there's a vaccine and we mirror on on a significant scale, it could create significant problems in this country. i think dr. bright is raising a very important point. >> i also want to point out that kristen welker is with us as well.

kristen, the president is speaking now about hydroxychloroquine, defending hydroxychloroquine. of course, that's a central part of this whistle-blower complaint from dr. bright, saying it had not been adequately tested when it was being pushed by the president and other political leaders at the white house briefing. but he's also talking more generically about the whole -- with alex azar there, about the whole conflict so far. i wanted to play a little bit of what the president had said yesterday about dr. fauci. because this is also part of the political debate today. let's play that and i will talk to you on the other side. >> dr. fauci yesterday was cautious about opening the economy too soon. do you share his concern about -- >> reopening the what? >> reopening the economy too soon in some states. >> look, he wasn'ts to play all sides of the equation. i think we're going to have a tremendous fourth quarter. i think we're going to have a transitional third quarter and i think we're going to have a

phenomenal next year. >> when you say dr. fauci is playing both sides, are you saying that's the advise -- >> i was surprised by his answer actually. because, you know, it's just -- to me it's not an acceptable answer, especially when it comes to schools. >> so that was part of what he had to say in criticizing dr. fauci yesterday, not all of what he had to say. he was very critical of dr. fauci. more overtly critical in previous comments where there's been ongoing tension behind the scenes. kristen, while we wait from the president's tape from the south lawn to be replayed by the pool, the small pool with him, what is your response on the tension between dr. fauci coming from the white house and whether you think something more aggressive is going to happen? >> well, i think you hit the nail on the head, andrea. that was the sharpest rebuke, if you will, that we have heard from president trump about

messaging by dr. fauci. this has been the source of ongoing tension between president trump and his top doctor, because dr. fauci has consistently tried to give what he believes is the reality check on this situation. so there you had it again when he was testifying remotely, and he said that a vaccine likely wouldn't be ready in order to help schools to reopen. clearly that's not the messaging president trump wants to project. he wants more positive messaging as he looks to reopen parts of the economy and as he looks to his re-election campaign. i have been speaking with administration officials who say this is nothing new. it's nothing different. they underscore dr. fauci likely not in trouble of being sidelined entirely as part of the task force because the information that he has is so relevant and so critical to resolving this. but what we have seen, andrea, dr. birx, for example, take a much larger role publicly in terms of the messaging when she is standing with the president

at some of these events. so these tensions are ongoing. not clear though that there's going to be any type of movement in terms of removing him or sidelining him on the task force. it does come as president trump is heading to pennsylvania. and some of these tensions are on display there. the democratic governor insisting some parts of the state stay closed. a lot of pennsylvanians have been protesting that. president trump siding with them. >> thanks to kristen. if you will stand by, i want to also bring in -- bring in our colleague kasie hunt and pete williams. i want to thank dr. patel and ramirez. going on to more breaking news today, and there's a lot of it, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell just announced senator leader richard burr has tentatively been asked to step down as chair of the intelligence committee effectively tomorrow after the fbi seized burr's phone

wednesday, part of an investigation into possible insider trading. a federal authority is looking into whether senator burr used information as a so-called gang of eight, eight top congressional leaders who received the most secret intelligence, whether he did that to sell off stocks before the market plummeted, before most people were widely aware of the risks of growing covid-19 pandemic. in march senator burr's attorney released a statement saying in part, quote, the law is clear that any american, including a senator, may participate in the stock market based on public information that senator burr did. when this issue arose, senator burr immediately asked the senate ethics committee to conduct a complete review. so now to nbc's justice correspondent pete williams and, of course, our kasie hunt, host of "kasie dc." pete, what is the legal situation here? >> the legal situation is the government got a search warrant. this is not the kind of thing where the fbi went on a raid to senator burr's house but we're told here is that the fbi actually served the search

warrant on senator burr's lawyer, whether that was alice fisher or not, the one you just quoted, i don't know. but a legal representative in any event for the senator, who then notified the senator that the fbi was coming. and when they knocked on the door, he handed them the phone. this is not a raid. this is just the fbi taking possession of a cell phone with a search warrant. i think the most interesting part of this is simply the government now has a search warrant. of course, any investigation to get a search warrant, you have to go to a judge and say there's probable cause that you will find evidence of a potential crime on the thing that you're looking for. the difficulty of this case though, andrea, is if the government's going to allege that any member of congress used official information in a committee to commit a crime, then they have to find out what that information is and in the past when the government has tried to do that in other cases,

they run into this speech or debate clause. it's very hard to do. separately there's something called the stock act that says members of congress can't use any information they gain as a result of their office for private gain, but that's not a criminal law. that's just something to a fine. so it certainly indicates there is a ratcheting up of the investigation. whenever you search something or get something from a member of congress like this, that has to be approved by very senior people in the justice department. beyond that, i don't think we can say a lot here. >> and kasie hunt, there was a case, of course, of a republican congressman from buffalo who did leave congress as a result of an insider trading investigation. in that case, they had images of him on the telephone from the white house itself making these trades. and they had the telephone records as well. but in this case, this is the head of the intelligence committee, a member of the gang of eight. i have never seen anything like

this. what the allegation is this senator gained from his knowledge of the private briefings, intelligence briefings about covid-19 in january, very early in the game, but he has a complicated relationship with his own party and with this president. kasie? >> that's right, andrea. i will say that the fact that burr decided to take this step of stepping aside while this investigation proceeds is pretty remarkable. because it didn't seem as though there was necessarily pressure around that. the precedence that had been established previously, we have dealt like this in the past, specifically with bob menendez, democrat from new jersey, and the official rules say unless there's an indictment, a formal charge, there's seems to be a general acceptance that people can remain in these positions. but i think it underscores the seriousness of how far along this probe has come that this is what senator burr is doing in stepping aside for the time being. now that said, the political

context of this is particularly striking. and senator burr has not made many friends among die-hard trump supporters because of the way he's handled the russia investigation in his committee. remember, he's in the final stages of pulling together the investigation, the report about russia and the potential collusion, involvement and attempts by russia to interfere in our election to help president trump. in fact, the committee confirmed the intelligence community's assessment that's what happened in april. some people may have missed that in all of the coronavirus news. so i think that's an important thing to remember as we watch this case unfold. i should also point out, andrea, senator burr did briefly stop by the pool cameras just a few moments ago to answer some questions. he wouldn't go far beyond what we heard from his lawyers or anything like that. he simply said he did not want

the distraction of this. so i'm looking to see what senator warner, the vice chairman and others are saying about what they think may have unfolded here. the other little piece of news we've been reporting, burr is not the only member of congress who conducted stock trades or had trades conducted on their behalf in the run-up to this pandemic. senator dianne feinstein has answered questions from the fbi, according to her spokesman. she answered some of those questions from law enforcement a couple of weeks ago and turned over some documents as well. her office says that those documents showed that she had no involvement. we're also reaching out to senator kelly lock ler, republican of georgia, whose family sold through a broker stock in the wake or as this was all unfolding before the market crashed amid this pandemic. so some swarming questions across the board. very clear now what's happening

with burr is by far the most serious of these investigations, andrea. >> and according to our own colleague, ken dilanian, one of the issues, one of the reasons why it might be more serious with him, first of all, his position as intelligence chairman, unlike kelly loeffler, freshman appointee and also dianne feinstein. this is the first instance where in his case he trades himself and what he sold was a large part of his portfolio. so the others either have blind press or worked through a broker and not a large part of the portfolio. pete williams, we're within the two minutes where we may see the president's tape being played out by the pool. pete, there's another big development overnight, which is that judge emmet sullivan has asked for a retired federal judge to act as an amicus to look into the prosecution being dropped by the federal government of mike flynn.

pete? >> so this is a sign that the judge is not simply going to rubber stamp what the justice department asked him to do. remember, when the justice department last week said we're going to walk away from the flynn case. guess what, judge, you have very little discretion here except to say okay, clearly the judge sees it differently. he's appointed this retired judge to come in and basically argue why that's the wrong thing to do. and then, somewhat cryptically, the judge said i also want this friend of court, or amicus, to argue why flynn shouldn't be charged with perjury, with attempt of court for committing perjury. what statement the judge is talking about there we just don't know. is he going to say that flynn committed perjury by pleading guilty? i just don't know. and there's a larger question here, andrea, which is the decision about whether to prosecute somebody is totally executive branch. so question, can the judge force the government to continue a prosecution it doesn't want to do? or can the judge say, you know

what, i don't need you anymore. he's already pleaded guilty. he got the benefit of the plea agreement. i'm just going to sentence him. is that where we're headed? in any event, wherever we're headed here, i would be very surprised if it isn't appealed. >> pete, perfect timing. the president is now speaking. let's play that as well. >> you have a lot of people wanting their freedom and will get their freedom very soon. we've been doing very well in the numbers. i'm going to have kayleigh say a couple of words. kayleigh, please. >> hey, there. i just wanted to outline our preparedness. the obama/biden plan referenced was insufficient, wasn't going to work. so what our administration did under the leadership of president trump was do an entire 2018 pandemic preparedness report. beyond that, we did a whole exercise on pandemic preparedness in august of last year and had an entire after-action report put

together. in other words, the obama/biden paper packet was superseded by a president trump-style pandemic preparedness response plan. >> it was much more complete and which was a we were given very little when we came in to this administration, and they've done a fantastic job, and i think we're going to have a vaccine by the end of the year. and i think distribution will take place almost simultaneously because we've geared up the military and you'll see that tomorrow. all right. anything else? >> we'll have a full update tomorrow at the briefing, line by line of how prepared we were for this pandemic thanks to the leadership of president trump. >> alex, you're going with us? >> yeah. do you want me to talk about our -- >> dr. bright is up there testifying today. everything he's complaining about was achieved. everything he talked about was done. he talked about -- he says he

talked about the need for respirators. we procured respirators under the president's direction. he said we need a manhattan project for vaccine s. this president initiates a vaccine manhattan project. diagnostic manhattan project. therapeutic manhattan project. and by the way, whose job was it to actually lead the development of vaccines? dr. bright. so while we're launching "operation warp speed" he's not showing up for work to be part of that. >> and as we watch the hhs secretary alex azar trying to rebut what dr. bright has been testifying to, kristen welker rejoining me. we're waiting also to see the president's comments because so far we've seen his press secretary sort of showing us a pamphlet they say is their response but there's been plenty of evidence that they disbanded the pandemic office in the white house and withdrew officials who had been involved in

preparations. this goes well beyond and before dr. bright's allegations. a lot of testimony from current and former officials. let's talk for a minute about what the president has been saying until we hear his actual answers to the questions of the day. kristen? >> well, and you're right. and i think what you saw there was a defense of the administration's -- what they would argue preparedness against the backdrop of all of that criticism that you just laid out, andrea and against the backdrop of dr. bright testifying that there is no plan. he said that in stark terms. i think that's why you're seeing that very forceful pushback there. again, president trump referring to dr. bright as disgruntled, trying to undercut his testimony and bring out alex azar. by the way, the president and alex azar have privately had tensions of their own when it comes to the issue of messaging. and so it is notable he'd bring out his hhs secretary to help

him defend the administration's response. it is worth noting, andrea, that president trump also gets into the issue of hydrochloroquine, the controversial medication that dr. bright is testifying about as well, essentially telling congress that he did not believe there was enough evidence to justify the use of hydrochloroquine and he felt as though his expert advice was being undercut and he was being pushed in one direction or another. and that is why you're hearing president trump's robust pushback to that allegation. now the president also weighing in on burr. you were just talking about that breaking news with pete williams and kasie hunt so i do just want to bring you some of what he said about that. he called his decision to step down -- >> in fact, kristen -- >> -- too bad. >> kristen, i want to interrupt because i think that that part of his q&a is up now. let's watch. >> i know nothing about it.

nothing about it. i never discussed it with anybody. that's too bad. that's too bad. go ahead. >> [ inaudible ]. >> we'll see. we'll see. we've got a lot of things going with china. we're not happy about china. i will tell you that. the ink wasn't dry on a great trade deal and all of a sudden, the plague comes in from china. we're not happy about it. >> [ inaudible ]. >> i'm okay with it. i'm okay with it. the -- if you look at the world trade, not only the world health, and we'll be making an announcement on the world health organization shortly, soon, probably next week some time. but the world trade organization is horrible. we've been treated very badly. i've been saying it for a long time, and we act on it. when i talk, we act on it. the world trade, they treat china as a developing nation. therefore, china gets a lot of

the benefits the u.s. doesn't get. they have other countries in a developing nation and the people sitting in the oval office should never have let that happen. i'm going to pennsylvania, yes. >> [ inaudible ]. >> i don't know how they are counting. i never discussed it with them. death is death. we don't want people dying in this country and we've done a great job. we've done a great job. i'll tell you what. what we've done on ventilators and on testing, except the press doesn't write it that way because you have all this fake news, but what we've done on testing, we've now tested more than the entire world put together. the entire world put together, we have many more tests than they do and better tests. and the reason we have more cases is because we have more testing. we've done a great job. and the people, the men and women stlhave done this great j should be acknowledged by the press.

>> [ inaudible ]. >> i can't hear a word you're saying. go ahead. i can't hear her. >> kristen welker, you've been out there so often as a member of the pool and as the general press pool. the president attacking china, targeting the w.h.o. they'll have a statement on that later today. he's heading to pennsylvania. and again saying they're doing a great job and claiming they have more tests -- they've done more tests than anyone in the world. the issue is not how many tests but how many per capita, but most importantly, how many early in the game when you could have isolated and prevented an epidemic from spreading in the u.s., not tests that are now coming online when, really, it's too late to stop the epidemic from spreading across the country. and so many people from dying. kristen? >> that's right. remember earlier this week, the

president said his administration had prevailed on the issue of testing, and then you had republican senator mitt romney testifying or saying during that senate hearing, a day later, that the testing record is nothing to celebrate because it continues to lag and lag in the early days. now it has ramped up significantly. more than 9 million tests have been administered, but health experts say that many more, millions more are needed until the entire country can reopen and can do so safely. andrea, it's worth noting that we are anticipating new guidelines from the cdc later today that will presumably provide more specific details about how some of these states should reopen, these public places like restaurants, like schools. we are anticipating they will be more restrictive guidelines, and that is why it's our understanding the administration rejected them initially. remember, the president has really wanted to put this in the hands of the states.

it is also, i think, worth highlighting the fact that you heard that very strong language from president trump about china. this is an ongoing war of words. as he continues to point the finger at china, accusing them of not being transparent enough in the early days. there's bipartisan agreement about that but the question remains, what to do about it? will there be some type of retribution? will it impact the trade deal you heard president trump reference there. those are among the questions on the table as president trump heads off to pennsylvania, another battleground state, as he continues to eye his re-election campaign as well. >> and there have been protests in parts of pennsylvania against the governor, governor wolf, democrats shut down, the lockdown they've had hot spots in a couple of counties as well. kristen, dr. mario ramirez is still with us. i'm so sorry about the tightened time frame but your overall take

as we continue to monitor the hearing and the president's strong rebuttal of it today. >> well, i think about dr. bright. dr. bright is clearly a career professional who has dedicated his whole life to studying pandemic and emerging outbreaks. and discrediting him as a disgruntled employee does a real disservice to the american people. he should be heard. i think he's clearly an expert in the field and then just to discount what he says without listening really puts the country in danger. >> i want to thank you and dr. patel and geoff bennett. garrett haake, to all of our contributors, kristen welker and kasie hunt and pete williams as well. chuck todd and katy tur are going to pick up our coverage right now. >> thank you, andrea. good afternoon. i'm chuck todd. breaking news all over the place. senator richard burr is stepping down as the chairman of the senate intelligence committee pending an investigation into

potential insider trading as senior law enforcement official confirms to nbc news the fbi executed a search warrant for burr's phone as part of that investigation. we'll have more on that decision in a moment. the ousted top vaccine expert, dr. rick bright is still testifying on capitol hill. he's been telling congress that he believes the worst is yet to come for the united states and without proper planning, quote, gent 2020 could be the darkest winter in modern history. two administration officials say the cdc is expected to release new guidelines today for states to reopen schools and businesses. parts of the plan were initially shelved by the white house over concerns they were too restrictive. joining me is my co-host for the next two hours, katy tur. she has a look at the numbers again. a compelling and busy day, katy. >> no doubt about that. there are now more than 1.4 million confirmed cases of covid-19 across the united states. more than 85,000 people have died. nationally, the number of new