here with us. on behalf of all my colleagues at the networks of nbc news, good night. it's a rare event that brings out three former american presidents in one place at one time, and especially during a global pandemic. but some events are just that important. the funeral today for congressman john lewis was such an event. john lewis represented atlanta in congress for over 30 years, and he was laid to rest there today. hundreds of mourners gathered at ebenezer baptist church in atlanta to pay their last respects. presidents george w. bush and bill clinton made remarks. president obama delivered the eulogy. and it was a eulogy really worth hearing. we're going to play you some of it here in just a moment. there's a lot more to get to tonight. businessman and former

presidential candidate herman cain has died. the cause was covid-19, for which he had been hospitalized for the past several weeks. though it's not known where he contracted the virus, his positive covid test late last month made news in part because he had recently attended a donald trump rally in tulsa, oklahoma, where social distancing and face masks were noticeably absent. several trump staffers working on the event also tested positive. mr. cain's death comes as multiple states continue to break gym nrim new records. we'll get some expert help on news today in the case of donald trump's former national security adviser, this man, michael flynn, who appeared very close to having the entire case against him dropped by trump's justice department. an appeals court may have stepped in to say, not so fast. and of course it was another day in which the nation was consumed by a presidential tweet. now, it continues to be this president's one neat trick. we know he's baiting us, trying

to distract us and manipulate our attention and our outrage, and yet he is using the office of the presidency to say something that is so outrageous and so undemocratic and so frightening that it is impossible not to respond. we can't abide by the possibility that ignoring him might be interpreted as approval or even normalizing the things that president trump says, and who can say for certain what in particular the president might have been aiming to distract from today? there was a lot to choose from. there were new numbers showing that the nation's broadest economic measure, the gdp, dropped off a cliff in the last quarter. "the new york times" called it, quote, the most def interstavas three-month collapse on record and offered that chart to prove it. it could have been today's unemployment numbers with jobless claims rising for the second week in a row. it could have been that trump wanted to detract from his and his party's shambolic -- or it

could have been that the president simply couldn't stand so much attention being paid to other people today, in particular, a beloved american hero like john lewis being praised by donald trump's three predecessors. but whatever the catalyst, the president did succeed in provoking a response today from just about everybody by suggesting that maybe the presidential election should be delayed. and the response was honestly pretty unanimous from democrats and republicans, from election experts and constitutional scholars, from all across the spectrum of american politics and civic life. one, the president cannot delay the election either constitutionally or logistically. two, the president should not delay the election because it is antithetical to democracy to do so. and, three, congress, the body that could, in theory, delay the election, will not do that. but here's the thing. there's unanimity the apparent settling of this issue with such

clarity today, this idea that the president may want to delay the election but he may not be able to do that -- well, that itself threatens to be a distraction from all the ways that this president and his allies can and will try to make election day a disaster even without delaying it, which brings us back to president obama's eulogy for congressman john lewis. you know, president obama has always said that when it comes to speaking out about current political events or our current president, he chooses his moments carefully and sparingly. and i don't know that anyone necessarily expected today to be one of those moments, but today president obama issued a forceful warning that voting rights and democracy are in danger right now, that we have to protect them the way john lewis did. >> he knew from his own life that progress is fragile, that we have to be vigilant against the darker currents of this country's history, of our own

history, where there are whirlpools of violence and hatred and despair that can always rise again. bull connor may be gone, but today we witness with our own eyes police officers kneeling on the necks of black americans. george wallace may be gone, but we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators. [ applause ] we may no longer have to guess the number of jelly beans in a jar in order to cast a ballot,

but even as we sit here, there are those in power who are doing their darnedest to discourage people from voting by closing polling locations and targeting minorities and students with restrictive i.d. laws and attacking our voting rights with surgical precision, even undermining the postal service in the run-up to an election that's going to be dependent on mail-in ballots so people don't get sick. now, i know this is a celebration of john's life. there are some who might say we shouldn't dwell on such things. but that's why i'm talking about it.

john lewis devoted his time on this earth fighting the very attacks on democracy and what's best in america that we're seeing circulate right now. he knew that every single one of us has a god-given power, and that the fate of this democracy depends on how we use it, that democracy isn't automatic. it has to be nurtured. it has to be tended to. we have to work at it. it's hard. and so he knew that it depends on whether we summon a measure -- just a measure of john's moral courage to question what's right and what's wrong

and call things as they are. he said that as long as he had a breath in his body, he would do everything he could to preserve this democracy. and as long as we have breath in our bodies, we have to continue his cause. if we want our children to grow up in a democracy, not just with elections but a true democracy, a representative democracy, and a big-hearted, tolerant, vibrant, inclusive america of perpetual self-creation, then we're going to have to be more like john. we don't have to do all the things he had to do because he did them for us. but we got to do something. even if every bogus voter

suppression law is struck off the books today, we got to be honest with ourselves, that too many of us choose not to exercise the franchise. too many of our citizens believe their vote won't make a difference or they buy into the cynicism that, by the way, is the central strategy of voter suppression, to make you discouraged, to stop believing in your own power. so we're also going to have to remember what john said. if you don't do everything you can do to change things, then they will remain the same. you only pass this way once. you have to give it all you have. as long as young people are protesting in the streets, hoping real change takes hold, i'm hopeful, but we can't

casually abandon them at the ballot box, not when few elections have been as urgent on so many levels as this one. we can't treat voting as an errand to run if we have some time. we have to treat it as the most important action we can take on behalf of democracy. and like john, we have to give it all we have. >> president barack obama eulogizing congressman john lewis today, warning of all the ways that, quote, those in power are doing their darnedest to discourage people from voting. election day doesn't have to be delayed for this president and his allies to find plenty of ways to undermine the election. 95 days to go. what should we be doing? joining us now, mark elias, an election lawyer for the democratic party and the founder of an organization dedicated to

providing advocacy. we thank you for joining us. you had a blog post on march 31st, four months ago, in which you said there is one question that i get asked more than any other. is there any way at all that trump can legally cancel or postpone the november general election? the answer is clearly no. there are going to be some people that are critical you and i are discussing this right now because the answer is clearly no, and yet the president gives us cause to discuss it. really the bigger issue is that the president continues on a daily basis to give us cause to wonder -- or give some people cause to wonder about the legitimacy of this election because he thinks that might be the only way he holds on to power. >> yeah, i think you're exactly right. i wrote that three months ago. it feels like three years ago. i wrote that three months ago because i was getting at that point calls and texts almost every day from people who were concerned that donald trump was going to try to move the

election or otherwise refuse to leave office. and so i felt like it was an obligation to put out the actual facts, which is that only congress can set election day. they've done so by federal statute, and only congress could change election day, and they would have to do that by federal statute. that means you would need both speaker pelosi and mitch mcconnell to agree on a new election day. so that's not going to happen. election day is going to be november 3rd, and that is the good news. the bad news potentially is election day will be november 3rd, and the question is whether or not we will be prepared as a country, between now and then, to deal with all of the challenges that the president is spewing out in the public and that the republican party is every day in court trying to convince judges to make voting harder because his only chance -- you put it very well. his only chance of winning the election is to try to prevent people from voting. and that is his central

strategy. >> 95 days away. we should be stress-testing the system that we know is going to be in place because we are likely not to be rid of this virus in 95 days. the president made another comment today about how we need elections on election night, not weeks or months away. i don't think anybody thinks it's going to take months, but the truth of absentee ballots and mail-in ballots is that sometimes we may not have the results on election night. >> yeah, but here's the thing, ali. that's not new. we've had absentee voting in this country for a long time, and we regularly don't have all the ballots counted on election night. you know, it is usual that when you get to the end of election night, there are still ballots that have come in in the mail in the last day or in some states where they allow ballots to be postmarked by election day to come in after election night. so this isn't new. what's different this time is two things. number one, we're going to see

more people voting by mail than ever before. that is as you said going to put more stress on the system, and we should be using this time to bolster the postal service and to bolster other mechanisms to make sure those ballots get delivered on time and counted. and then the other big thing is that you have a president who rather than reassuring the american public in american democracy is trashing american democracy. every day he's trashing american democracy by saying that we can't do it and that we shouldn't do it. and that's what's really making this election different. >> the president makes a distinction between absentee balloting and mail-in balloting. what's the distinction, and is it important? >> there is no distinction. they are synonym. in fact, his own legal team at the same time that he's saying that, his own legal team filed a brief or filed a lawsuit in pennsylvania in which they said that the term "mail-in" and

"absentee ballot" are used, quote, interchangeably. some states tend to use the term mail-in. some states tend to use the term absentee, but they are both the same. they are both processes by which people who don't want to show up to the polls in person can receive in the mail a ballot in advance that they fill out and they cast and they either mail back or they deliver through some other mechanism to election officials. but there is no difference. >> marc, thank you for your time tonight. we appreciate it. we hope we have many occasions to talk again because what you are dealing with is probably the most important issue to our democracy right now. marc elias is a founder of the democracy docket, an election lawyer for the democratic party. thank you for your time, sir, tonight. we appreciate it. whatever is in store for us on this historic upcoming election day, an election day that is coming at us amid an unpre unprecedented health crisis a,

whatever happens on november 3rd, a big part of whether and how anything will actually function on that day is going to be in the hands of state and local officials. not only do they have to be prepared to carry out an election amid a deadly pandemic, they have to be prepared for whatever else might be thrown at them by this administration. whether donald trump means what he tweets or not, whether he thinks he can get away with something or someone in his inner circle convinces him that he can't, the states have to be ready for all of it. our next guest is certainly projecting readiness for new york state. attorney general letitia james tweeted this in response to the president today. quote, new york will lead in fighting any of trump's efforts to delay the election and deny our right to vote. we are examining all legal options. joining us now is new york state attorney general letitia james, madam attorney general, thank you for being here tonight. the president has made his most brazen attack today yet on democracy, and i do worry because it's 95 days out, and he's talking about delaying the

election. that got shut down fairly quickly, but he does not give up on this attack on what he wants you to believe is the fraudulent nature of mail-in ballot. there are 50 state elections in the united states, and people like you are going to be involved in the integrity of them. >> so the democratic attorney generals all across this nation have been responding to the president of the united states as he continues to violate the constitution and violate state and local law. and each and every time that he changes a rule, an obama-era rule, each and every time when he puts the lives of marginalized and vulnerable individuals at risk, state democratic attorney generals have been responding and we have been winning. we have been protecting our democracy each and every day, and we are prepared to support and to defend the right to vote. and it's unfortunate that on this day, as we funeralize the great congress member john lewis, that this president would

tweet this notion that somehow he can delay the vote. the constitution is clear. it is in the constitution, article ii, section 1. it's up to congress and the president of the united states does not have the authority and/or power. there will be an election on november 3rd, period, full stop. >> talk to me about what happens. as we just heard from our last guest, there will be an election, and the votes will need to be counted. the president -- there's little doubt in any of our minds that the president will move to delegitimize the election. he will do so until election day, and he will do so on election night. how do you prepare for that attack, that onslaught? >> we are considering all of our legal options and we are coordinating amongst states all across this nation, particularly democratic states. but it's really critically important that individuals understand that we respect the rule of law. it's unfortunate that we have a president of the united states who does not respect the

constitution and/or rule of law. and our constitution lays out the secession. but the reality of the issue is that there will be an election on november 3rd, and the president of the united states will probably challenge the results, particularly the absentee ballots. but there is a process in place, and we are prepared to challenge him in court and to ensure that the rule of law applies. and we protect the fundamental and the most fundamental part of democracy, and that is the right to vote. john lewis, again, he bled, he cried, he sweat for the right to vote, and we have to protect it and guard it, and we will. >> i have to ask you about your federal counterpart, the attorney general bill barr. yesterday hakeem jeffries asked him about what would happen if donald trump lost the election. let's listen to this for a moment. >> mr. attorney general, what will you do if donald trump loses the election on november 3rd but refuses to leave office

on january 20th? >> well, if the results are clear, i would leave office. >> so that was interesting. first of all he said if the results are clear. the president is already outlining the fact that he thinks a full count on the evening of november 3rd is clear and nothing else. then bill barr said, i would leave office as opposed to doing all the work that he currently does, he would just leave office. he wouldn't, as the attorney general, apparently take it upon himself to ensure that the president understands that the president needs to leave office. >> i'm confident that the president of the united states will accept the results, and it may not happen on november 3rd. we've got to count all of the absentee ballots, and there is going to be a flood of absentee ballots that need to be counted. we need to ensure that every vote is counted. but at the end of the day, the president of the united states again will have to accept the results of the election and respect an individual's right to vote and recognize that this country, again, is built on a

democratic process. we believe in the rule of law. and that fundamental and elementary right to vote must be preserved, protected and respected. and the president of the united states over and over again has lost each and every case, and we continue to challenge him in court, and we will do it again. >> attorney general letitia james of new york, thank you for joining us. coming up next, if you thought the mike flynn saga was over, think again. another chapter in the long saga starts today. we'll have more on that just ahead. ahead. [♪]

when you have diabetes, managing your blood sugar is crucial. try boost glucose control. the patented blend is clinically shown to help manage blood sugar levels. it provides 60% more protein than the leading diabetes nutrition shake. try boost glucose control. i appreciate what makes each person unique. that's why i like liberty mutual. they get that no two people are alike and customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. almost done. what do you think? i don't see it. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ wabba wabba! all new, plant powered creative roots gives kids the hydration they need, with the fruit flavors they love, and 1 gram of sugar. find new creative roots in the kids' juice aisle.

the calls with the russian ambassador were entirely appropriate on their face. that was the position of attorney general bill barr's justice department when it sought to dismiss its own case against trump's first national security adviser michael flynn earlier this summer. you will recall that flynn was charged and twice pled guilty to lying to fbi agents when he told them he did not discuss sanctions with the russian ambassador weeks prior to donald

trump's inauguration. in media appearances and again in house testimony this week, the attorney general has tried to paint a picture of flynn as a victim of fbi harassment in justifying barr's own decision to intervene in the case and try to put flynn's legal troubles to rest. >> in that call, there was nothing wrong with it at all. in fact, it was laudable. there was nothing inconsistent with the obama administration's policies. he was saying to the russians don't escalate. they asked him if he remembered saying that, and he said he didn't remember that. >> according to barr, flynn's call to the ambassador was laudable and in u.s. interest. except if it was, why did flynn lie to the fbi about it? maybe because the call transcript showed it was neither laudable nor in u.s. interests. flynn did in fact discuss sanctions with the ambassador but far from raising any concern about the recent hostile attack on his own country's election, flynn dismissed it as, quote,

the current issue of cyber stuff. he implored the russian ambassador to, quote, not go any further in response to sanctions levied by the obama administration. quote, don't let this administration box us in right now, flynn said, talking about his own u.s. government. quote, when we come in, we can have a better conversation about where we're going to go regarding this relationship, end quote. and yet according to bill barr, the fbi had no legitimate reason to investigate flynn. since then, flynn's legal case has gone through many hoops. when a judge in flynn's case refused to go along with barr's plans to drop the case earlier this summer, flynn's lawyers in the department of justice made the extraordinary decision to petition a higher court to step in and toss the case. and in a surprising 2-1 decision last month, a three-judge panel of the d.c. circuit court of appeals agreed to do just that, ordering an immediate end to michael flynn's case, except now

today, in the latest legal turn, the full u.s. court of appeals for the d.c. circuit has agreed to reconsider that decision, essentially wiping out last month's ruling and setting oral arguments for august 11th. joining us now is the former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan and legal analyst for msnbc barbara mcquade. barbara, thank you for being with us. my go-to when anything gets a little complicated here. this one is complicated. let's start with the idea that bill barr at any opportunity paints a picture of a guy who was tricked into lying to the fbi and that what he was actually talking to the russian ambassador about was positive for the country and in keeping with u.s. administration policy, none of which is true. >> you're absolutely right, ali. and even if william barr or donald trump thought that what michael flynn was saying was laudable, it wasn't their call. at the time that michael flynn

had that conversation with the russians, president obama was president. this country has only one president at a time. and on that day, president obama's foreign policy was to punish russia for interfering with our election. when michael flynn talked to the russians and said, forget about it, he was undermining the foreign policy of the united states. it was a very significant call, and it wasn't his decision to make. one of the reasons he lied about it is not only was he protecting himself, but there is evidence that michael flynn, as documented in the mueller report, was talking back and forth between various members of the trump transition team as he was talking to the russian ambassador to get advice. so he was not only covering for himself. he was covering for many other people on the trump transition team. >> so let's talk about what happened. the team -- the legal team and the department of justice went to a panel of the d.c. circuit court, a three-judge panel. they tossed the case in a 2-1

ruling. now the whole panel -- i guess they call it en banc, when the whole circuit court hears this case on august 11th. tell me what the distinction is. >> well, when there is a decision that the whole court believes is of extraordinary importance, they can step in and say we're going to completely vacate that decision. we're going to throw it out, and we're going to do a do-over because we have very serious concerns about that legal issue. so there will be a do-over on flynn's motion for a writ of mandamus. that's essentially an order that says, district judge sullivan, you must do something. we are commanding you to dismiss the case. it's that order that was entered by the three-judge panel that has now been vacated, and there will be a do-over. so i think if you're trying to read tea leaves there, what that suggests is a majority of those judges feels strongly that this case was wrongly decided. i agree with them because a writ of mandamus is to be used in very rare situations.

it's a drastic remedy and only available when there is no other adequate legal remedy. here michael flynn always has the ability to appeal later. all this does is leap frog the court by doing their job for them and pulling the rug out from under judge sullivan. so i think there's a very strong reason to believe based on these things that this court will come out the other way and send this case back to judge sullivan for further proceedings. >> and donald trump was asked about this on july 23rd on fox news. sean hannity asked him if he'd consider a pardon for the people involved. donald trump said, i've looked at a lot of different people. they've been treated extremely unfairly, and i think i probably would, yes. so play this out. michael flynn -- what's he doing here? he's damagingngling a pardon. >> yeah. i think michael flynn is someone who could explain what the role of various members of the trump administration, the trump

transition team was during this time they were having all of these conversations with russia. so as we saw with roger stone, there is this, as you put it, dangling of a pardon, letting him know that people who go against me like michael cohen end up in prison. people who are loyal to me like roger stone get a commutation. so choose your path. choose your fortune, michael flynn. and i think that if michael flynn reaches the point where he's out of legal options, i think that will be the point where we see trump act. i think he won't if he doesn't have to because he doesn't want to expend the political capital. just like roger stone, he waited for the last minute before he played that card. i think we'll see the same with michael flynn. >> barbara, thank you again for joining us. i always appreciate your clarity on these issues. barbara mcquade is the former united states attorney for the eastern district of michigan. when we come back, apparently the federal government knows where the emerging coronavirus hot spots are. so why don't they tell the rest of us? that's next. bill assumed it was a costume party.

bill assumed his mayo was the best choice. assume nothing. just like the leading brand, kraft real mayo is made with high quality ingredients at a price you can feel good about. no wonder kraft is so good.

every 60 seconds yesterday, a person with coronavirus died in this country. the death toll climbed by another 1,400 people yesterday. an american dying once every penicilli minute. it was the highest single-day death toll since may, and the trend line is pointing up, not down. in florida and mississippi and arizona today, those three states each reported a record high number of new coronavirus-related deaths, not a record since may. an all-time record. this is the third day in a row that florida has broken through its previous death toll record. the number of coronavirus deaths in florida is up 176% since last week. we have, of course, been following the contours of the crisis in hard-hit states like arizona, florida, california, texas, as infections rise and hospitals are overwhelmed. but hot spots are emerging all over the country. abc news has obtained an internal document distributed by the department of homeland security which maps out 98

coronavirus hot spots across 30 different states. 21 of those outbreaks are just beginning to take off. dhs calls them new emerging hot spots. now, abc news has reprinted the locations of just a handle of those coronavirus hot spots here. we do not know the locations of dozens of other government designated hot spots because that's not information our government has chosen to share with us. instead we've learned through leaks from the press but it is information that would be nice to have, right? wouldn't it be nice to know if you're living in one of these hot spots, if you're thinking whether to send your kid back to school in one of these hot spots? but your government disagrees. they have not made that information public. so parents, teachers, kids, college students, they're all flying blind in fall as they're faced with life or death consequences. the search for how to open schools safely takes tonight to

a university in michigan where they are exploring a way of watching their campus for outbreaks. you will not see this story anywhere else. it's coming right up. stay with us. ay with us

outside of new york, new jersey, and connecticut, michigan was one of the states first at bat against a huge outbreak of coronavirus. michigan hit its peak in april, reporting a high of more than 1,800 new cases on april 3rd. new cases remained above 1,500 for days that month. governor gretchen whitmer declared astate of emergency by april 1st. she closed all schools through the academy years. hospitals were overrun. thousands of medical workers came down with the virus as they struggled to treat patients. by the end of the month, the state ranked third for the highest number of coronavirus fatalities in the country. michigan struggled to bend the curve, but michigan came through. the curve bent. now the question is whether michigan can stay out of the red

zone, and the state has seen a few smaller waves since the worst of it this spring. there was the outbreak last month at harper's bar, the popular haunt for michigan state university, which reopened to an unexpectedly large crowd on june 8th. local reporters found young patrons lining up less than six feet apart and then packing the dance floor like they would on an ordinary non-pandemic night. no masks to see in that picture. state health officials later linked that bar to nearly 200 new infections, and today michigan posted one of its higher totals of statewide new cases for the past couple of months. that's concerning, especially because everywhere in the country right now educators are trying to figure out how to get education going again. it's basically every state and in some instances every school district or even school for themselves. at michigan state in east lansing, they're exploring a combination strategy that's going to be new to them and that might be new for anyone else. and it starts with a spit test developed at the university by a neuroscience professor named

jack lipton, this man. the kit costs around $3 apiece. as you can see, it's pretty simple. you can do this in the privacy of your own apartment or dorm room. you put your sample in the vial with the little bar code. you seal it in the bag and voila, your part is over. the lab at michigan state will take your sample and combine it with others in what is known as pool testing, which maybe you've heard about recently. the idea behind pool testing is that it can help labs do more, way more with way less. instead of having each person take their own separate test, you pool the samples from a small number of people, about a dozen, and you run a single test on that pool. if the pool turns up positive, only then do you need each person in the pool to take a test. but if the pool turns up negative, you're done. the single test covered a dozen people. in a place where you expect a lot of negatives, pool testing is remarkably efficient. at michigan state, they've gone a step further than that. each volunteer who takes a spit test goes into two separate pools of about ten or so people. so think about it like each

person gets to be on two teams. your a miami dolphin and a seattle seahawk or you'. the point is if two pools come back with positive results, it can only mean one thing. the lab just finds the person who belongs to both pools using a handy grid like this one and recommends that person get a follow-up diagnostic test. that's what professor lipton plans to do with samples from msu volunteers, testing 2,000 of them every day and referring any apparent positives for an individual diagnostic test. the third and most unusual part of this plan has to do with sewage. scientists are discovering that they can spot a rise in coronavirus cases early on by testing a community's wastewater. michigan state professor joan rose and her team have been testing the campus wastewater since april. she said they noticed a peak in the virus that lined up with the news about an outbreak at a college hangout, which

demonstrated that their sewage diving expeditions worked. i made that up. i don't know if they're actually diving. now, for the testing this fall, the idea is to sample the wastewater from different places on campus so they can get hyper local data. if they can get good enough at sampling and turning around their results in a timely fashion, their work as an early alert system, perhaps at the level of individual buildings. you've got the pool testing with the affordable spit kits. you've got expanded diagnostic testing, but literally just for 240ez people who appear to be positive or just plain turn up sick. and then you've got the wastewater testing which looks like a means to get a warning in time to act. it could help the university find and contain outbreaks. if it works, the plan could help michigan state and its 67,000 students stay on campus and have something like a normal semester. joining us now is the aforementioned dr. jack lipton, chair and professor of translational neuroscience at michigan state university. dr. lipton, thank you for being

with us. we've heard about pool testing. i want you to tell us a little more about it and why it is specifically helpful in this instance. what about michigan state makes it a perfect candidate for this pooling of spit? >> well, when you think about pooled testing and michigan state, one of the things that is really important is to understand that the resources that we have as a university are fairly limited, right? we're not a multinational corporation, so funds are limited. resources are limited, and pooling allows us to have more tests being done with the same amount of resources or with less resources. so in this case, if we're dealing with supply chain issues with testing, if we can test ten people with the reagents that we would need to test one person, then we're saving a lot in terms of supplies. and if we don't have to run ten tests and we can one run test,

we save a lot of time. so if you can save time and you can save supplies, you're going to ultimately conserve. that's really what our goal is. >> and this works because you're not expecting a large proportion of people to have this thing, right? so generally speaking, a bunch of these pools will come out negative? >> right. pools, if you have about ten people in a pool and your expectation is maybe seeing two or three out of 100 people show up as positive, then most of your pools are going to be negative. the more the prevalence increases or the more the rates of infection increase, then you're going to have more and more positive pools. if one out of every ten people are positive, then a pool of ten most likely is going to have a positive individual in it. so you have to really balance pool size and prevalence together in order to come up with the right balance to save resources and save time. >> so this actually could have broader implications. there's a "wall street journal" op-ed that you wrote about a previous test, not this one that we're talking about, but it was a concept of pooling.

you said, across the united states, tens of thousands of similar academic research labs have the expertise and equipment to help the country test for covid-19. if even one-tenth of these loab join the effort, we could test additional samples a day. your larger point is there are ways to get to more people and then figure it out early rather than what we're in right now where there are some places where people are waiting in excess of seven days for typical test results. in a concentrated environment like michigan state, you can see things early and intervene. >> absolutely. and i think it's really important to note when you were talking about the op-ed that we put together, the vast amount of resources and know-how that exists at the academic laboratories and universities around the country. one of the things we proposed was to develop a biomedical national guard and utilize all of these individual laboratories across the country and have them be organized through the federal government in order to be able to respond to pandemics or other natural disasters with

biomedical know-how. and i think that if we could get something like that done, if the next administration is interested in doing something like that, we can be proactive instead of reactive in in these kinds of situations. >> that's incredible because you just answered the question i was going to ask. i was going to say, what can government do to take advantage of these kind of resources? and i just answered that. i just want to say that again, a biomedical national guard. what a great, simple idea. resources all over the country run by different people, but the government of the united states providing the centralization for the data and the distribution? >> if you think about all of the laboratories and universities that were shut down as a result of the pandemic, so many people were sitting home. like i'm sitting home on zoom all day. if we have the opportunity to come back into the laboratory and help, we could do so much in terms of trying to not only develop new treatments and working on new methods of

detection, which is what our laboratory did during april, but we can marshal all of these resources, all of this know-how that exists in order to attack this problem in a concerted and coordinated way. >> dr. lipton, there's not a lot of great news about coronavirus, but i have to tell you after this conversation, i'm optimistic that there are people like you around this country who are actually in this moment, while everything looks as grim as it is, finding solutions that are going to help us see the other side of the coronavirus. dr. jack lipton is the chair and professor of translational neuroscience -- i don't even know what that is -- we'll talk about that another time, at michigan state university. thank you for all you're doing. we'll stay on top of this with you. when we come back, civil rights legend john lewis passes the torch to the next generation of activists. hear him deliver his inspirational words himself next.

♪ (brad) apartments-dot-com makes easier than ever.w home (brokenhearted guy) i thought you loved me. [brokenhearted guy sobs] ♪ apartments-dot-com. the most popular place to find a place. in a highly-connected lexus vehicle at the golden opportunity sales event. lease the 2020 es 350 for $359 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

congressman john lewis spent much of his final years building connections with young people in order to pass on his legacy of activism, what he called good trouble, to the next generation. a big part of that push was his award-winning best-selling graphic novel trilogy called march, which told his story from childhood on a farm in alabama to the day he saw the first black president inaugurated. the congressman even went to comic-con in san diego in 2015, cosplaying as his younger self, leading children on a march around the convention center. this morning "the new york times" and other papers published an essay that the congressman wanted made public on the day that his body was returned to the earth. the title, together you can redeem the soul of our nation. it was written to all of us but particularly to young people. i do not want to read his words to you. i urge you instead to find them and read them for yourself. they are important. but i do want to play what i believe to be the congressman's last words on camera and characteristically, they too

were worded delivered to the next generation. president obama in his eulogy today alluded to his last interaction with the congressman during a virtual town hall that he held with young activists in the wake of the killing of george floyd. now, this was in early june, months after the congressman's office announced that he was suffering from stage 4 pancreatic cancer. >> what was and what has been the source of your strength? what keeps you going and what keeps you fighting? >> more than anything, my faith helped me, held me together, and i couldn't give up, could not give in. i thought when i was beating on the bridge, i thought i saw death. i thought i was going to die.

and i said a little prayer. i said, lord, let me live. i want to stay here. i want to be around. and i believe it was the grace of god and praying witnesses that helped save me. and so today i feel more lucky, more than lucky, more than blessed but to be here to see the changes that have occurred, to live to see a young man, a young friend like president barack obama become president of the united states of america. it was worth the pain, and that's why i believe that we cannot give up, give in, become bitter or hostile.

and to see all of the young people, all of the young men, not just men of color but black, white, latino, asian-american, native american, all of the young women standing up, speaking up, being prepared to march. they're going to help redeem the soul of america and save our country and maybe help save the planet. >> they're going to help redeem the soul of america and help save our country and maybe help save the planet. amen. congressman john lewis laid to rest today. that does it for us tonight. we'll see you again tomorrow. now it's time for the last word with my friend laurnsz o'donnell. know you were hoping to come up today at that white house briefing and it didn't, that is