early with us on this thursday morning. don't go anywhere. "morning joe" starts right now. >> on my orders, the united states military has begun strikes against al qaida training camps and the taliban regime in afghanistan. >> last year, we removed 10,000 u.s. troops from afghanistan. another 23,000 will leave by the end of the summer. after that, reductions will continue at a steady pace with more and and more of our troops coming home. and as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014, the afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country. >> my original instinct was to pull out, but all my life, i've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk. >> i'm now the fourth united states president to preside over american troop presence in afghanistan. two republicans, two democrats. of i will not pass this

responsibility on to a fifth. >> president biden announcing when u.s. will come home from afghanistan. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, april 15th. along with joe, willie and me, we have white house reporter for the associated press, jonathan lemire. member of the "new york times" editorial board, mara gay, and washington anchor for bbc world news america, katty kay is with us this morning. a lot to get to this morning. it was -- we'll start, though, in minnesota, where there was another night of protests following the police-involved shooting of daunte wright. hundreds of people, most of them peaceful, gathered outside of the brooklyn center police department for a fourth night in a row. authorities say some people in the crowd were shooting fireworks and throwing objects at law enforcement, leading police to declare an unlawful

assembly. protesters were told to disperse several times, and by 10:30, many had left. authorities say some of the remaining protesters were arrested, but the night was much calmer than what we saw earlier this week. willie? >> meanwhile, the former police officer who fatally shot daunte wright has been charged with second-degree manslaughter. police say kim potter, was taken into custody around 11:03 am yesterday. sheriff's records show she posted $100,000 bail and was released from custody shortly after 5:30 p.m. the second-degree manslaughter charge carries a maximum penalty of ten years behind bars if she is convicted, mika. >> let's bring in civil rights attorney and former brooklyn new york prosecutor, charles coleman. this one, charles, i would love for you to just give me your gut

on the charges against kim potter and also the events that led up to the shooting of daunte wright, should they be looked at as closely as the actual shooting? >> well, good morning. and thank you for having me. i think when you start looking at the charges, particularly with respect to the manslaughter charge that potter was currently charged with, what you have to basically surmise is that the prosecution is already playing it safe. what they are doing, they are eliminating the element of intent by making the top count basically a charge that requires negligence, not a charge that requires intent. basically, the statute as it reads suggests that in order for her to be convicted, they have to establish that she was negligent in her duty, which basically will come down to a question of reasonable use of care or reasonableness compared to whatever the standard of law is. so the question, if the indictment stays what it is, if the charges stay what they are,

the question will remain, was it reasonable for a 26-year-old veteran, a 26-year veteran of the police force to mistake a taser for their service weapon? and the prosecution is already playing it very, very safe in this regard. >> it's so interesting you said that. when we first get the news, and we didn't say any of this on the air, but you just assume, okay, there was a scuffle, somebody mistook their weapons. my original thought was, this is terrible train welcome this is somebody new on the police force, but the fact that this was a veteran, somebody who had been around for 26 years, even if it was a tragic accident, certainly with a 26-year veteran, a standard of care you would expect far differently than a rookie cop in that same position.

>> it's not just that. you're absolutely spot on in terms of that assessment. but i would also say that quite frankly, we are having the wrong conversation about whether she should have drawn or service weapon or taser. at the end of the day, the question remains from me stepping back from the situation a bit more, why was there a need to use any sort of weapon or escalate the level of force being used for what amounted to a traffic stop for warrants? this was a misdemeanor warrant that mr. wright had. he should be here today. and quite frankly, i'm not necessarily convinced that the situation warranted that course of action. now, reasonable minds may disagree on that point. however, i think it's deeply problematic when you start looking systemically as what has happened in the state of minnesota regarding police force and civilians and the use of force there. while i do appreciate the fact and also agree with you that 26 years on the force should have invoked a greater sense of awareness in that situation, i'm yet to be convinced that that

was even needed in terms of apprehending mr. wright for this misdemeanor warrant. >> and mika talked about the chain of events a minute ago. those chain of events we look at, you question why three police officers even approached a vehicle for an expired tag. that fatal shooting of daunte wright began with a traffic stop for a minor infraction. wright was pulled over sunday while driving an suv. according to then chief tim gannon of the brooklyn center police department, it was a traffic violation related to an expired registration tag. >> from what i've understood, from the public safety briefing, there was an expired registration on the vehicle. that means the tags were expired. >> according to the "star tribune," minnesota law prohibits motorists from driving

without current license tags. but the deadly coronavirus pandemic has not slowed policing of these expired license. the brightly colored stickers are no longer valid ten days after the month listed on the registration plate. gannon never said, though, when the tags were lapsed on wright's car. why am i bringing this up? because while the policing of such offenses is not slowed, it does appear the process for getting those tag renewals have slowed down. a minnesota department of vehicle services spokeswoman told the "star tribune" last summer, the agency is behind on processing mailed in tab and license plate renewals for thousands of minnesotans. >> like across the country, because of the pandemic. >> at the time, she said, many delayed requests were due in part because staff was telecommuting and did not have access to the mail-in documents. mara, there's a lot more that we can talk about there.

the thing that i've just not been able to come to terms with. and i say here all the time, you know, chauvin, he had nine and a half minutes, he knew what he was doing, he saw a man slowly die in front of him. we often see scuffles, we see police officer making terrible mistakes. people getting hurt or dying because of it. and that will be tried in court. and i will just say now, i suspect that a jury would probably have problems, even charging this officer with negligent homicide. but let's step back. why -- hold on. excuse me one second. here's a question -- and i'm sorry it's taken me so long to get to it. why did three officers in the middle of the derek chauvin trial, ten miles away from where

that trial was being held, in an area that had a history of problems with race relations, regarding policing, why did three officers feel the need to go up to a car with an expired tab? i mean, you talk about a lack of situational awareness. it's remarkable to me that they said, oh, this is what we're going to do this afternoon. we're going to pull somebody over with an expired tab when we know that a lot of those tabs are expired because of covid. >> you know, the answer to your question, joe, is, unfortunately, across america, police officers in those situations are often doing the job that the public has hired them to do. and i don't say that to be tongue in cheek. i mean that with all sincerity. you have a couple of things going on here. in some cases, you have officers who are bad actors, who need to

be brought to justice, and then in other cases, i think this is the majority of cases across america, and certainly here in new york that i've covered in my career as a journalist, you have a situation where police officers are essentially set up along with the people that they come into interaction with, in many cases, to have these bad interactions that too often end in the loss of life of black americans, who should still be with us. and so, we really have to ask ourselves, what kinds of jobs do we want police officers doing? for example, do we want police officers being entrusted with policing, i don't know, homeless people, for sitting on benches? do we want them entrusted with pulling out guns instead of tasers at routine traffic stops? i mean, if this had happened in europe, first of all, it wouldn't have, but the question we should be asking is, why are guns so readily available in the united states? why are police departments so

heavily militarized? it's not just the training. it's the culture of the way we use police departments and the history of how we have used police departments in this country, which is heavily militarized, and too often, to police the bodies of those who are black, brown, and part of labor movement. and so i think that really needs to be part of the conversation here. and i don't know what was in officer potter's heart, but i do have a lot of empathy for the officers who are put in these situations as well. because, ultimately, sometimes they are set up to fail. and that is no excuse. there should be personal accountability. but why are we putting all of this on individual officers only? there needs to be a larger conversation, i believe, about reform, that doesn't just focus on officer behavior, but also focuses on the entire process by which we have empowered people in some cases, with very little

training, and in other cases, with very little accountability, to make life-and-death decisions before the judge and jury have weighed in. >> yeah. and willie, in this case, again, you have to ask why the police chief, why the department itself was having a situation where three police officers were approaching somebody on an expired sticker -- on an expired sticker on a car in the middle of the chauvin trial. and this is the second time over the last week, week and a half, we've seen two black men approached, one, of course, in virginia. the lieutenant in virginia, who was pulled over nor reason at all. but they said, oh, you didn't have a tag. >> he did. >> i'm curious how they didn't see that. >> and he did. >> that tag in his window. >> and he died, yes, and he did. so we saw that tragedy, that

humiliation of a black man play out. and it was just absolutely sickening -- i think it sickened most everybody that saw it. it certainly should, everybody that saw it. but in this case, here we have a sticker. you know, we absorb that. we watch that, two or three days later, a young man is killed because of an expired sticker on the back of his license plate. >> yeah, no one ever, obviously, should lose their life over an expired tab on the back of a window. we also heard from the chief of police that he had something -- daunte wright had something hanging from his rearview mirror. they had an air freshener hanging, they pointed to that as evidence that he had violated -- which is apparently a law in minnesota, you can't have an obstruction from your mirror. we're talking about air freshener and expired tabs and a father and a son is dead because of that. come on, now.

that doesn't add up. and we know for people of color in this country, we saw it in both cases, lieutenant nazario and daunte wright, they knew how high the stakes were. lieutenant nazario put up his hands and said, i'm afraid right now, the officer said, you should be. daunte wright called his mother when he was getting pulled over. think about that? why would a person call their mother? because he knew how high the stakes were? and tragically, he was right, over an expired tab. this is all tied into the derek chauvin trial. we had the second day of the defense testimony. former maryland chief medical examiner argued that floyd's death should be ruled undetermined rather than homicide because he said there were several conflicting factors there. >> the placement of the knee is towards the back and the back right side of his -- of mr. floyd's neck. and the airway is around the front. it is nowhere close to his

airway. >> we were talking about having an open airway. how does that affect your ability to speak? >> the ability to speak or make any other sound, groaning, mr. floyd did groan, so any of the sounds that mr. floyd is making requires you to be able to take air in over the vocal chords and out over the vocal chords. >> the defense also focused on where derek chauvin held george floyd. the witness testifying that they were directly next to the car's exhaust and that carbon monoxide may have contributed to the death. here's part of that testimony, followed by some of the prosecution's cross-examination. >> did you pay attention to where mr. floyd's head was positioned relevant to the squad car? >> yes, i did. >> which way was his face or his mouth facing? >> his face was facing towards

the vehicle, towards the rear of the vehicle. and directly towards the area where you would expect the tailpipe or tailpipes of the vehicle to be. >> now, just going right to the punch line of carbon monoxide. that you talked about at some length, you haven't seen any data or test results that showed mr. floyd had a single injury from carbon monoxide. is that true? >> that is correct because it was -- >> i specifically asked you whether it was true. yes or no? >> it is true. >> did you see any air monitoring data that actually would give you any information as to what amount of carbon monoxide, if any, would have been in mr. floyd's breathing zone? >> no, because it was not tested. >> it was a yes or no question? you haven't seen any, have you?

>> i have not seen any data. >> earlier in the day, the defense requested that the judge acquit derek chauvin, arguing the prosecution failed to prove its case. the judge denied that request. charles, so let's talk about what we're seeing here from the defense over these two days, as they lay out their case. obviously, it was a very compelling two weeks for the prosecution. they had their own medical experts who said that, in fact, george floyd did die because of the knee on his neck from former officer chauvin. what are we hearing now from the defense and how compelling do you think it might be to the jury? >> sure. what we saw when the prosecution presented their case in chief was essentially three different phases. the prosecution began by setting the tone for the trial in a very emotional way that was going to grab the jury and set the tone for the color, the feel, and the emotions of what this was all about. and then we saw the prosecution began to transition to what i believe was the most important part of the trial, and that is focusing on the technical aspects with respect to their

experts and the medical professionals who were responsible for determining george floyd's cause of death, which is a central element that the prosecution must prove in order to establish a conviction. and then we saw the prosecution sort of transition to a hybrid third phase, where they blended both of the emotional with respect to george floyd's brother, and also still emphasizing some of the technical aspects. what we have seen from the defense is that on their first day of their case in chief, they began with essentially a cycle of witnesses that presented an opening or an introduction to each of their defenses. their central defenses are threefold. number one, that it was the crowd that may have distracted derek chauvin and fellow officers during that day. number two, that there were additional causes of death. and number three, that derek chauvin's use of force was not actually unreasonable. because of that, now we are seeing more and more technical attacks. that's what we saw all day yesterday. and it's important that viewers

understand this. the standard of what needs to be proved or the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. and so what the prosecution is concerned with, as they are supposed to be, is that the defense, in terms of offering outside expert testimony is that they are going to create reasonable doubt. it's important that viewers understand, it's not the quantity of evidence and the judge is going to instruct the jury as much, it is not the quality of evidence presented, it's the quality. they can choose to take in doctor fowler's testimony if they so choose and weigh it evenly against all of the testimony from the mental experts that the prosecution put forward. so what the defense is attempting to do is offer their own expert, so that they can say, on summation, you've heard from experts from the prosecution, you've heard from experts from the defense. it's up to you to make the decision, because what they want to do is create reasonable doubt. >> so, charles, i'm so glad you

brought that up. because i've had a growing sense of anxiety and we ought to read from eugene robinson's op-ed in a minute, but i've had a growing sense of anxiety over the past several weeks, watching coverage of this trial, reading opinion pieces about it, listening to legal experts on news shows talking about it. and everybody is saying everything but, this is a slam dunk. he's going to be convicted. the defense doesn't have the case. and it's -- it's caused a concern, because i don't think many people have the understanding that aren't attorneys of what you just said. that regardless of the evidence, a prosecution's case is precarious because it's beyond a reasonable doubt and they can just find one juror and get a hung jury. and we think back, whether -- you know, whatever the cases are that have shocked us in the

past, i think americans need to hear exactly what you're saying right now, is the burden is extraordinarily high. and while i saw the video and millions of americans saw the video and i think it's murder and millions of americans think it's -- i'm not one of 12 in the jury and i'm just -- again, i'm very fearful that people don't understand what you just said. they have to -- whether it's causation, whether it's something else, whether it's drugs, they just have to find one jury and put reasonable doubt in one juror's mind and you have a hung jury. >> joe, you're exactly right. and i think that's the thing that gives me pause as an attorney and as a black man, quite frankly. because i know we cannot take these things for granted. we've seen video of heinous, ridiculous, horrific offenses that to the common eye would

absolutely seem like no brain cancer. we can go back to rodney king. we can look a lot walter scott. we can look at terence crutcher. we can look at over and over and over again different videos from different incidents from police on camera, unarmed civilians, and we can see from the common eye that this seems to be a no-brainer. and yet and still, it does not result in a conviction. and i think your point about one juror, just one juror being the difference between a conviction and a hung juror is an important one. it only takes one juror to have reasonable doubt to end up with a hung jury. and i think that's what the defense is aiming for with the presentation of these experts. >> charles coleman, thank you very, very much for your insight this morning. we'll continue this conversation next hour reading from gene robinson's piece in "the washington post." after 20 years of the u.s. military involvement in afghanistan, president joe biden announced yesterday that it's,

quote, time for americans troops to come home. as politico notes, the military spent more than a decade urging three different american presidents to stay in afghanistan. with president joe biden's decision this week to withdraw all u.s. forces by september 11th, they finally lost the battle. biden made the announcement from the treaty room, the same location where president george w. bush announced a month after 9/11 that strikes against al qaeda had begun. >> we went to afghanistan because of a horrific attack that happened 20 years ago. that cannot explain why we should remain there in 2021. rather than return to war with the taliban, we have to focus on the challenges that are in front of us. when i came to office, i inherited a diplomatic

agreement, duly negotiated between the governor of the united states and the taliban, that all u.s. forces would be out of afghanistan by may 1, 2021. just months after my inauguration, that's what we inherited, that commitment. that's perhaps not what i would have negotiated myself, but it was an agreement made by the united states government. and that means something. so i'm keeping with that agreement and with our national interests, the united states will begin our final withdrawal, begin it on may 1 of this year. we'll not conduct a hasty rush to the exit. we'll do it responsibly, deliberately, and safely. >> after making the announcement, the president visited arlington national cemetery, where more than 2,300 casualties of operation enduring freedom are buried.

joe, symbolically showing why he feels this must be done. >> right, well, jonathan lemire, joe biden was a skeptic of our participation in afghanistan before he was sworn in as vice president, famously having a confrontation in afghanistan with then-president karzai, getting -- pushing away from the table, throwing down his napkin and leaving because of corruption in that government. he then was opposed to barack obama increasing the number of troops in afghanistan. so, a lot of people not surprised by this decision. >> yeah, joe, this was a long time coming, as you just laid out now, president biden has been a longtime skeptic of american's long-running presence in afghanistan. he was overruled repeatedly, while vice president, but his

position didn't change. he believed that, as he laid out yesterday, that america's position in that country was to eliminate a safe haven for terrorists. that was, of course, the country where the september 11th attacks were launched from. and as he said yesterday, that had been accomplished. he also, and this is interesting, for a president who has been so quick to overrule so much what he inherited from his predecessor. he said yesterday that the treaty that the trump administration negotiated with afghanistan was legally -- it was done correctly and america should oblige by it. he pushed back on the timeline, with his symbolic exit on the 20th anniversary of those terror attacks. but he felt like americans needed to keep their word here. and there has been some criticism from the usual suspects among republicans. a few moderate democrats, the senate, as well, and certainly

some in the military establishment, who feel that america's presence should still be there. no question, there are real concerns as to what will fill that void. will the taliban roll back human rights gains, particularly for women in that country? but biden laid out the sacrifices that american soldiers have borne, and he underscored that with his visit to the cemetery and talking about his own son, beau biden, and his service. this is a wait-and-see game. there'll be a lot of world leaders nervously watching what happens in afghanistan, but this is something that was a long time coming for this president. >> and obviously, donald trump wanted to remove troops from the beginning of his administration and pushed back against generals in the pentagon. pushed back against him. willie, obviously, there is

great risk to this move, as well. we saw what happened when americans cheered, including myself, this country's exit from iraq. but that created a void and into that void, isis moved. and then we had to send troops back over to clean that up. there is no question that the taliban will act as the taliban always acts, towards civilians, towards women, towards young girls, towards people who aren't islamic extremists. they will act abhorrently. "the new york times" reporting a few weeks ago that isis also gaining a foothold in afghanistan, as well. this is certainly something that the president and those in his cabinet understood, and a risk they were willing to take. but there is no guarantee that we won't be back or some force won't be back in the future. for the same reason we had to go

back into iraq after we left. >> and that's exactly the point a lot of military leaders, former military leaders, like general david petraeus made yesterday. he was very vocal of the criticism of joe biden. of course, general petraeus commanded forces in afghanistan for a long time and said the endless war doesn't end just because we leave. to your point, we may have to go back and clean up what we leave behind. katty kay, obviously, 2,500, nearly 2,500 americans have lost their lives over those 20 years. about 500 offer allies from the uk as well have lost their lives. this is not a celebratory moment, just talking to veterans yesterday and people who served there, they're thinking about the friends who they lost there. they're thinking about the long-term damage to their own lives. and they worry, frankly, about what joe was just talking about. leaving, yes, they want to go home, but they worry that they may have to go back. >> the irony of the u.s. forces

in afghanistan compared to iraq is that the u.s. forces are actually welcomed by the afghan people. they recognize that they depend on them to preserve some sort of quality of life. we had an interview yesterday with a taliban leader and he was absolutely blunt about the fact that the taliban today is what the taliban was decades ago. he doesn't see that movement has changed. he said that they are just as rigorous, what they want is an islamic state and they can continue to carry on campaigning for some sort of jihad in that area, which doesn't bode well, as you're suggesting, for particularly for afghan women. and i had a conversation with congressman adam kinzinger yesterday, who of course served in iraq. and he made exactly the point that joe made. that the real concern is this is not in u.s. national security interests. there are 2500 forces in iraq

right now. if they pull out now, he said, his thought is that in a year, u.s. forces will be back in the region again, just because of the rise, not just of the taliban, but of the islamic state as well. and you can't monitor that. you can't do that with just a clandestine cia force and drones sent from the persian gulf. it's just not possible. >> and what you're hearing now, mika, is, this administration, the last administration considered this. you have soldiers, marines that have served that, you hear their quotes about the guarantees that they made to the afghan people. the guarantees they made to women. the guarantees they mode to young girls. go to school. we will be here to protect you from the taliban. to protect you from recriminations.

it's the same thing, obviously, the same debate that we had when donald trump removed all of our troops that were working alongside the kurds to push back against assad, to push back against iran. so push back against putin. to push back against turkey. and in that void, when they took out those2,500, 3,000 troops, really concerns about what would happen. >> but if the president announced we would be staying for five more years, there would be many people on this set saying, how long are we going to be there? >> right. >> how long do our men and women have to serve in this endless war? i want to bring in -- >> really quickly, mika, to your point, i think that's the overwhelming view of most americans. i think we'll likely support

this president's view, because -- >> it's been too long. >> that 20 years is enough. >> absolutely. >> of course, we've been in germany since 1945. >> yeah. >> we've been in korea and have had troops in the dmz for 70 years. >> so then let's commit to forever. like, there's that -- the debate just can go either way. completely making sense on both sides. i want to bring in a different point of view. joining us now, democratic member of the foreign relations committee, senator chris murphy of connecticut. and laying into that, i'll read from your tweet. every time i went to afghanistan, i met with a new general who told me the last general did it wrong and that this time was different. is it time for perhaps a different take on the issue and what do you think of the president's announcement? >> well, i think the president did the right thing. i think a decision to stay for another year would have effectively been a decision to stay forever. at some point, you have to

accept the facts on the ground. this is america's longest war in our 240-year history. it is not a cold conflict. it is different than our troops presence in germany or in south korea, because there is an active fight happening inside afghanistan. what you've seen over especially the last five years is the taliban continue to advance because our presence in that country ends up being recruitment fodder for the taliban and other extremist groups and it becomes a crutch for the afghan government. they haven't been able to root out corruption as long as the american presence is there. the decision that president biden was making was not really a decision to stay another year or another two years, it was a decision as to whether we were going to permanently have 25,500 troops in afghanistan.

and of course, this is a choice. this is a week in which the chinese are saber rattling around taiwan, the russians are amassing troops on the ukrainian border. you know, we don't have limitless resources and as you've mentioned on this show already this morning, al qaeda has been degraded to the point where they have maybe 200 fighters in the entire country. they don't have the ability to directly plan attacks against the united states. it's time for our troops to come home and it's time for the military to be able to reorient against threats that are much more serious to the united states and to the international rule of law. >> so senator, is there a time when the united states should have, as general petraeus was saying yesterday, a small, narrowly focused, sustainable presence in countries like afghanistan or when we were in syria, to assist the kurds in pushing back against isis,

pushing back against putin, pushing back against iran, pushing back against assad? >> well, my worry is that when we have these small forces, and these relatively small military, what we end up doing, often, is just extending the conflict, when we give just enough support for one side to keep the fight going, but not justify to be decisive. it just ends up in conflicts being elongated. and they're really not being an impetus for real settlement talks. and i think that's been part of what has happened in afghanistan. that our presence there, again, has allowed for the afghan government to keep up the fight rather than to necessarily sit down and engage in the kind of difficult conversations internally that would provide them the legitimacy to govern

that country. so i get a little bit nervous when i hear about these sort of discussions regarding small u.s. troop deployments overseas. there's not a lot of evidence that they end up being decisive. there's more evidence that they just end up lengthening these conflicts. >> first of all, with all due respect, i don't think that 2,500 to 4,000 troops lengthened assad's civil war in syria. but by doing that, also, as we saw in iraq, does that prevent a bad situation from becoming worse? >> well, we also have other capabilities to date to be able to track the true terrorist threats against the united states. there are ways in which we can both monitor and with surgical precision go after the individuals who are, in fact, trying to plot against the united states. but joe, i guess i would push back in a place like syria.

i think what we did there was essentially give just enough support to these rebels who are fighting assad to keep up the fight. and never enough sport to them to actually beat assad. assad was always going to win that conflict. it was just a matter of when, not if. unless the united states was prepared to put, you know, 100,000, 200,000, 300,000 troops there. so again, that's why i worry. and i know other people differ in that take, but i do think we have the ability with isr, with surveillance and with more surgical counterterrorism tools to be able to protect our interests in places like afghanistan in the future. >> senator chris murphy, thank you very much for coming on the show early this morning. and we'll have more on the afghanistan troops decision when president biden national security adviser, jake sullivan, joins our conversation. plus, the very latest on johnson

& johnson's coronavirus vaccine. what a panel of experts is saying about the next steps for use of the single-dose shots. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. watching "" we'll be right back. for members like kate. a former army medic, made of the flexibility to handle whatever monday has in store and tackle four things at once. so when her car got hit, she didn't worry. she simply filed a claim on her usaa app and said... i got this. usaa insurance is made the way kate needs it - easy. she can even pick her payment plan so it's easy on her budget and her life. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa. i think the sketchy website i bought this turtle from stole all of my info. ooh, have you looked on the bright side? discover never holds you responsible for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter.

so you're a small business, (giggling) or a big one.y turtle. you were thriving, but then... oh. ah. okay. plan, pivot. how do you bounce back? you don't, you bounce forward, with serious and reliable internet. powered by the largest gig speed network in america. but is it secure? sure it's secure. and even if the power goes down,

your connection doesn't. so how do i do this? you don't do this. we do this, together. bounce forward, with comcast business.

focusing. 3-2. first. he has thrown a no hitter! >> that is white sox starter carlos rodan, tossing the first no-hitter of his career in last night's 8-0 win over the cleveland indians. the 28-year-old threw 114 pitches in that complete game no-hitter, two outs from a perfect game, losing from a hit in the ninth inning.

an 0-2 pitch that nicked the inside foot of the batter and losing the perfect game there. that's brutal. he settles for the second no-hitter of the major league season so far, five days ago after san diego tossed the first no-hitter in padres hitter. rodan in disbelief after his performance last night. >> what's up, man? >> carlos, congratulations. >> what just happened? >> where's your mind right now, carlos? >> on a toe ball. no, man, that was awesome. cool team effort. >> the toe ball was that pitch that just barely nicked that foot of the indians hitter that cost him the perfect game, but he did get the no-hitter. i'm sure you were distracted by the red sox winning their ninth in a row. that may be the first time we see that. >> i saw it and he wasn't -- rodan wasn't pleased that the

indians batter made absolutely no effort to get out of the way of the ball. he just stood there. the foot didn't move. and he threw down to first base, he said, dude, come on, you couldn't have just lifted your foot a little bit? you know, willie, red sox, this is it's difficult for me. baa barnacle told me that the front office is banning not only myself, but jack scarborough and jerry scarborough this year, because the red sox record this year when we're not watching a game live, it's a thousand. we go to the games, they lose. this ended the first game

yesterday. it worked out well for the red sox yesterday. >> that's another conversation. >> as i tweeted a couple of days ago, why don't you just sing the luxembourg national anthem at the beginning of every game and replace hot dogs with eclaires. and willie, i don't know -- it's only april, so this means about as much as, you know, my report card one weekend in eighth grade. i always ended up in the low 70s in all of my classes. but, willie, we've been surprised that you haven't jumped in, jonathan lemire and i have been continuing the tradition as old as time itself. we always have the red sox pregame on clubhouse. what you do with this since 1946, you know, willie, we came

a hungry kids from the war and started "morning joe" and we started this clubhouse deal. barnicle, lemire, and mike lupica are doing it. >> it's actually fun. >> but we're inviting everybody to come in. . 48 million fans can't be wrong. you look at our armed forces radio. but 49 million listen to red sox clubhouse in pregame since 1948 every day. >> i remember those shows back in the 50s, where you have ted williams from korea and you could barely make out what he was saying, but the crackling radio coming through on clubhouse. he would give his analysis from far overseas. jonathan lemire, you have been kind so far, not jumping on the yankees early start, publicly, anyway. you've been brutal on tex messages about cory clubber and some of the other pitchers.

but as a red sox fan, i know you're conditioned to expect the worse. has that changed now since you've become the big money dynasty in baseball. >> we're going to lose, jonathan. we're going to lose. >> let him speak. >> willie, the nine-game winning streak is soon to be followed by a 19-game losing streak, joe and i are convinced. this is a -- it's the middle of april, a pleasant surprise considering how dreadful the red sox started under the watchful eyes of the scarborough boys. and i clubhouse, we've seen some highs and lows since 1946 with america's longest-running pregame show. willie, we would to have you onboard. you can discuss just what might be ailing the new york yankees right now. that i believe are residing in the cellar of the american league east.

>> don't do that, jonathan! it always -- >> i know. >> very cocky on tax day. it's april 15th. there's a long road ahead, jonathan. >> it is april 15th. but let me see here. so what time's the game today, jonathan? >> it's an afternoon game in minnesota again. >> 1:00. that means the clubhouse chat starts at 12:40. >> and this is the time we were going to use to talk about jonathan lemire -- okay. moving on, because we're going to do the news now. >> no, we'll get to that later. that's the punishment. >> this is what the kids in the business call -- >> this is a consequence. the advisory committee for the centers for disease control decided yesterday to maintain the pause of the johnson & johnson vaccine, while it continues to evaluate the situation. the panel has decided they needed more time to assess the

data and risks and will not vote on a recommendation until it meets again within the next ten days. j&j's chief scientific officer said in part, we continue to believe in the positive benefit-risk profile of our vaccine. we value the consideration of the advisory committee and we will continue to collaborate with medical experts and global health authorities as we work towards continuing vaccinations to end the global pandemic. >> so, mara, what impact does this have on communities, not just across the united states, but across the world, regardless of the numbers, even if the fda decides that the risk/benefit suggests that we should continue giving the j&j vaccine. what do these stories do to those who are already hesitant to take vaccines? >> i mean, it's a really difficult moment. and it's a precarious moment for

the world in terms of our fight against the coronavirus. the reality is that the cdc is actually acting within the normal protocols of what you do when a new vaccine causes allergies in terms of being able to quickly maneuver and be nimble on their feet, to test out the safety profiles of a new vaccine. so the larger context here is you can ask the question in the opposite way. which is, if they weren't following that protocol and americans or people around the world came to find out that despite some basic concerns that the cdc did not actually vet those, and take a pause for a week or so, just to kind of knock the tires on that, what would that do to undermine the trust in the vaccines? so there's no easy answer here. but i actually tend to believe that despite -- this is very frustrating, and it's not something that we want to happen for sure.

johnson & johnson is very confident that this testing will eventually be cleared by the cdc. but i actually think this was the right decision and move swiftly and be confident with this vaccine. the other thing is even though johnson & johnson only represents -- that vaccine is about 5% of the national stockpile at this point. because it's one shot, it's meant to go specifically to populations that already may not have trust in the vaccine or access to the vaccine on the same level. it's much easier to convince somebody to take one shot than two. all of this is to say that we're going to have to double down on our efforts to convince americans. people deserve access to as much information as the cdc has about the safety profile.

so people deserve a right to know. >> every aspect of this is difficult. these are jeopardizing vaccination campaigns about shots available to them. as cases continue to rise and variants spread globally, the race to vaccinate faces multiple roadblocks, especially in africa. "the new york times" reports that in ma l malawi, people are asking doctors how to flush the astrazeneca vaccine from their bodies. and in the democratic of congo, 1.7 million astrazeneca doses have gone unused. the decision in the u.s. to pause the johnson & johnson

vaccine and the eu's announcement that it would not purchase anymore astrazeneca or johnson & johnson vaccines is increasing the hesitancy. as "the times" notes, if the perception takes hold that rich countries are dumping second-rate shots on poorer nations, those suspicions could harden, slowing the worldwide rollout of desperately needed doses. and here's the big problem. the world needs to solve this problem, katty kay, not just the united states of america or the uk. no country with stand alone in beating this virus. it's a global pandemic and it does need to be approached from a global perspective. >> if we don't get everyone in the world vaccinated, effectively we have to seal ourselves off from the rest of the world and that doesn't work. if we want to have any sense of

travel or trade or movement or business travel, we have to make sure that other countries are vaccinated, not just on moral grounds, but also on economic grounds. there actually wasn't very much vaccine hesitancy, as i understood it, from our correspondents in africa, prior to the problems that we saw with astrazeneca and now with johnson & johnson. but when you have news like yesterday where a whole country like denmark banned the astrazeneca vaccine from its government rollout, that sends a message. people are hearing that in tanzania and south africa and understanding, that rich country denmark has decided they're not going to distribute this vaccine ever. wow, it must be really unsafe. why would i want to take it? they're going to send it to me, a rich white country is going to send it to africa and it's going to cause me problems. and vaccine hesitancy in africa has spiked enormously since the beginning of the astrazeneca problems. i think mara's right.

the only thing that authorities can do is be transparent. it would have been catastrophic if we had heard the news in the headlines that somebody had died because of a blood clot related to the johnson & johnson vaccine and the government had somehow covered it up. that really would have increased conspiracy theories around vaccines. so regrettable though it is that there is this pause, and it may be that it doesn't help, we still have the vaccine hesitancy anyway in these emerging economies, you've got to have transparency from the authorities. we've got to feel that we can trust our authorities on this. >> absolutely. joining us now, "morning joe" chief medical correspondent, dr. dave campbell. doctor dave, what do you make of this pause? there are major health experts in the government and outside of the government that are supportive of it, but also clearly, you know, have the same concerns that this is going to lead to bigger problems. is there a line of thinking about the johnson & johnson vaccine that this decision is

important, that it is pause for much longer now? >> yeah, mika, this is not a decision that was made in a vacuum. and i think that has been important in my reporting. it turns out the new england journal just published reports about the astrazeneca vaccine having similar problems that we've been talking about already today. so now we know on the worldwide stage that two vaccines out of the plethora that have been under development have problems with blood clots. and that's the astrazeneca and now we see that's the j&j. so the reports that came out literally just this week in the new england journal about astrazeneca included germany and norway, some of these similar problems we're seeing with j&j are happening. so those two vaccinations are rather similar platforms. they're different, importantly

different than the moderna and the pfizer vaccines. so, if we go back to a year ago when we remember that the governments of the world and particularly the united states were supporting lots of different companies and lots of different vaccine platforms, now we see it shaking out a little bit and some are having some issues. maybe related, maybe not. that's the questions that are trying to be answered now by the cdc and the fda. and scientists across the world. but we also know that moderna and pfizer have already come out saying that they are going to continue to up their production to try to meet these needs. it's a complicated problem across the world. the world is between a rock and a hard place. but what happened this week with j&j should not be viewed as in a vacuum. because if we saw something like this coming with the astrazeneca vaccine.

so we are going to stand by and wait for this advisory committee on immunization practices to have more time to study this. it is indeed important that many people as possible across the world get vaccinations. >> so, i'm talking about the rate of incidences here. obviously, i give an example of me taking the anti-inflammatory bextra and there were quite a few incidents in 2000 or around that time. they took it off the market. this happens from time to time. i'm wondering if we're actually applying an even stricter standard to these vaccines, when you look at the level of incidents compared to the number of people that are actually using the j&j product. >> it goes back to this

risk/benefit issue. and remember, when you get a vaccine, jr. generally a healthy person being given something to prevent a disease. so the risk benefit analysis, as in all medicine is a little different if you're trying to prevent something in someone healthy versus treat somebody that already has a disease. while there is some consistency to what you're saying, vaccines are held to a higher standard in general. and looking at the number of complications that may be associated, say, with the astrazeneca, it was a handful in germany and norway. and now we see six, maybe seven people in the united states with the j&j vaccine platform having had these really critical blood clots. so it's an important question, but it's an important public health question as well, joe. >> all right. dr. dave campbell, thank you, as always, for coming on this morning. back now, at the top of the

hour, to president joe biden's announcement yesterday, that it is, quote, time for american troops to come home from afghanistan. >> we cannot continue the cycle of extending or expanding our military presence in afghanistan, hoping to create ideal conditions for the withdrawal and expecting a different result. i'm now the fourth united states president to preside over american troops presence in afghanistan. two republicans, two democrats. i will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth. we went to afghanistan because of a horrific attack that happened 20 years ago. that cannot explain why we should remain there in 2021. rather than to return to war with the taliban, we had to focus on the challenges that were in front of us. >> the president made a strong,

clear argument in his words and gestures about this decision yesterday and joining us today, from the white house, president biden's national security adviser, jake sullivan. thanks so much for joining us. i guess my first question to you will be, what do you think of critics when the first thing goes wrong upon the troop's departure? because there will be challenges ahead in the future. >> well, first of all, thank you for having me. what we'll say is that the united states put 20 years of investment into afghanistan to achieve a clear objective, what was to get the people who attacked us on 9/11 and after ten years, we got blin bolin and it has been ten years since then. al qaeda is degraded, the terrorist threat is reduced substantially in afghanistan and we believe that we can accomplish our counterterrorism mission with forces from outside afghanistan not keeping a

permanent military presence in the country. and we believe we had trained up 300,000 afghan national security forces to take responsibility narrow own country. we will continue to support them diplomatically and economically, but it is full-time for the afghan people to take responsibility for afghanistan. >> "the new york times" reported several weeks ago the rise of isis in afghanistan, but now a concern about the rise of isis in afghanistan. is that a concern that you and the president share? >> we are concerned about both isis and al qaida in afghanistan. we judge today that the level of threat from isis in afghanistan -- the level of threat from isis in al qaeda is substantially reduced that we cannot present today an exact

threat against the homeland. however, there is also the possibility that that threat grows. we will keep our attention on afghanistan for that reason. and we'll hold the taliban to its commitments to not let afghanistan be a base for attacks against the west. but, joe, a key point here is that the terrorist threat has become much more dispersed and distributed since we went to afghanistan 20 years ago. isis is still in iraq and syria. isis is in africa. al qaeda is in yemen and syria and somalia. so we need a forced posture to deal with this terrorism threat that isn't all focused on a garrison in a single country. >> it's been dispersed in part because we have had a presence in afghanistan. >> if the argument that our presence in afghanistan has led to the rise of isis in al qaeda and multiple other parts of the world, i'm not sure that's a good argument to remain.

but what i would argue is that the conditions have changed dramatically across multiple countries and multiple continents, because it's been two decades since we went. the world of 2021 is much different than the world of 2001. and we need to set up our foreign policy and our counterterrorism policy to focus on the next 20 years, not the last 20 years. >> the president said that there are -- there have been four presidents over 20 years that have dealt with troops in afghanistan. i believe there have been 14 presidents over 72 years that have been in charge of troops that are in korea, in another hot zone. what's the difference between those two? are there not times when troops need to remain in countries because of the dangers that are

caused by those countries? >> yes, and the biden administration supports america's forced posture in asia to defend our national security interests and defend our allies. but the big difference between germany and korea on the one hand and afghanistan on the other hand is that we are not under fire at bases in germany and korea. we are not facing the possibility of being back at war with an armed military force on a daily basis, taking casualties, losing lives. we are able to sustain those presences at the request of the government and in conditions that allow us to both achieve our objectives and protect our troops. and the president judged, after may 1st. after the deal with the u.s. and the taliban, the deadline set in that deal arrives, we would have to go back war with the taliban, for the 21st and 22nd and 23rd year. and he was not prepared to keep

american troops in harm's way, when he believes that we accomplished what we set out to accomplish going into afghanistan in 2001. >> jake, it's willie geist. good to have you on the show this morning. what do you say to some of the veterans who i was context texting with last night and people we've heard from publicly, yes, of course they're happy it's winding down. 20 years of their lives they've lost. their friends, their lives have been forever changed by the war in afghanistan. they don't want to be there forever, more than anyone. but they just said, as a matter of fact, we'll be back. it may not be me, but maybe somebody younger than me. we'll have to go back to afghanistan, because it is what it is and the taliban will be what it is and was before we ever got there, 20 years ago. so what do you say to them, who are fully expecting that they'll have to go back to afghanistan? >> the first thing i would say is just to thank them for their incredible service and bravery over the last 20 years. i had the opportunity to join president biden yesterday when he went to arlington national

cemetery and it was an incredibly powerful reminder of their service, their sacrifice, what they put into this. and for 20 years, they stood watch and protected this country in afghanistan and for 20 years, afghanistan was not used as a base for terrorist attacks against this country. we believe that we have developed a strategy that allows us to have the kinds of capabilities and assets we need outside of afghanistan to suppress the terrorist threat coming from inside afghanistan. and we believe that with the right level of attention and resources and focus, we can protect this country without sending forces back there. there are always risks, of course. but in the balance of risks between staying at war, as it enters its third decade or taking the course that president biden set out yesterday, we believe that not only honors the troops, it also protects the united states of america. >> you may have seen, yaik, that general david petraeus was very critical yesterday of the

decision that he commanded forces in afghanistan. he started by saying, of course i understand the instinct to come home. nobody wants to come home more than the men and women on the front lines who are fighting the war, but he said, quote, i'm really afraid we're going to look back two years from now and regret the decision and wonder if we might sought to maintain it that would have ensured that al qaida and the islamic state would not have experienced sanctuaries. what do you say to general petraeus? >> i respect general petraeus. but i would say this. president biden made a very powerful argument yesterday that a common theme in the criticism is, we should leave afghanistan at some point, but just not now. let's wait until the conditions are right. that has been the logic that has kept in this country for 20 years. and if the conditions aren't right now, when will they be? one year from now, five years

from now, ten years from now? permanently? and as general petraeus is, i think, arguing, permanently, then to stay, you would have to accept a level of casualties of american forces killed and wounded on an ongoing basis decades after we have successfully degraded the threat from al qaeda and we had gotten their leader osama bin laden, and that was just not what the president found convincing on a going-forward basis. and he believes that have we have a way of approaching this terrorist threat and as we were discussing earlier, the broader metastasized, dispersed, distributed terrorist threat across multiple countries where we're not stationing thousands of troops and yet we're keeping the eye on the ball to protect the american people. >> national security adviser, jake sullivan, thank you very much for being on the show this morning. we appreciate it. the justice department announced yesterday it will not file charges against the capitol

police officer who fatally shot a riter. 31-year-old air force veteran ashley babbitt was shot by an officer as she climbed through a broken down door in the speaker of the house's hallway. after combing through evidence including social media visits, officials found that there was insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution. the officer who shot babbitt has not been identified. and jonathan lemire, this morning, we are announcing that you are writing a new book. it will be entitle the big lie. tell us what inspired the concept? >> well, thank you, mika, and for the opportunity to say on the show this morning, and certainly the events of january

6th are the pinnacle of what we know now as the big lie. in the book, my first, will trace those claims' origin, which along predate the 2020 election. how they spiraled into violence. but going forward, how it's reshaped debates on voting rights like georgia and texas and other places. how it challenged the biden white house and indeed how it has sort of defined politics for both parties going forward. >> jonathan, congratulations, it's great news. we would like to book you here and now. i know it's not coming out until next fall, but can we get you on the show to talk about your book? >> well, willie, i'll have to check my schedule. i wouldn't presume to be a part of the book residencies. but i would love to be part of

that and thank you to all of you for your support. >> jonathan, i just got this breaking news. it's very exciting. we'll have you on "morning joe" for a two and a half-minute segment. it's going to be moving. but i've just been told that clubhouses, the red sox clubhouse pre-game show since 1946 will have a residency for give five days. we'll turn now to the developments of the brooklyn center, minnesota, where there was another night of protests in a police-involved shooting of daunte wright. hundreds of people, most of them peaceful, gathered outside the police department for a fourth night in a row. authorities say some people in the crowd were shooting fireworks and throwing objects at law enforcement, leading police to clear an unlawful assembly. protesters were told to disperse

several times. by 10:30, many people had left. authorities say some of the remaining protesters were arrested, but the night was much more calm than what we saw earlier this week. meanwhile, the former police officer who fatally shot daunte wright has been charged with second-degree murder. excuse me, second-degree manslaughter. authorities say kim potter, a 26-year veteran of the brooklyn center police department was taken into custody around 11:30 a.m. yesterday. sheriff's records show she posted $100,000 bail and was released from custody shortly after 5:30 p.m. the second-degree manslaughter charge carries a maximum penalty of ten years behind bars if convicted, mika. >> this all comes amid the murder trial of former minneapolis police officer derek chauvin. the second day of witness testimony for the defense focused on the cause of george floyd's death. former maryland chief medical examiner dr. david fowler argued

floyd's death should be ruled as undetermined, rather than a homicide. >> the placement of the knee is towards the back and the back right side of mr. floyd's neck. and the airway is around the front. it is nowhere close to his airway. >> we were talking about having an open air. how does that affect your ability to speak? >> the ability to speak or make any other sound, groaning, and mr. floyd did groan, any of the sounds that mr. floyd is making requires you to be able to take air in over the vocal chords and out over the vocal chords. the defense also argued that because chauvin held floyd on the ground directly next to a vehicle's exhaust pipe, carbon monoxide may have contributed to floyd's death.

let's bring in civil rights lawyer and former prosecutor, david henderson, also joining the conversation, msnbc contributor, mike barnicle. and "the new york times'" mara gay is still with us. mr. henderson, david, what do you make of the concept of the exhaust pipe potentially contributing to george floyd's death? >> among the ridiculous things that dr. fowler said, i thought that was the most ridiculous. and it was a surprise, because i think everyone was rolling their eyes at it. but the defense is trying to appeal to a potential lone wolf juror. and that case is, george floyd is a big guy who is on drugs who is a problem. so what derek chauvin did is justified. you can't say that. but you can say, well, we heard from the good dr. fowler who said derek chauvin is not

responsible for causing george floyd's death. that's what this witness is here to do. it looks like they're going to causation. and they want to plant that seed of doubt, saying, it was the exhaust pipe. oh, wait, he was still using his windpipe because he was groaning and making noises. oh, he was on drugs. so that seems to be the logic of that. could that work? that argument? could that work with that one lone juror? >> joe, you've hit the nail on the head. and what's easy to forget about this case and about all of the responses to the case is just how different they've been. many of us saw what happened to george floyd and we took to the streets. we protested, we pushed for change. other people could have blue lives matters signs in their yards. i have a neighbor who did that, in fact. so, yes, we didn't really during

jury selection get to know these jurors well enough to get to know what they truly think. buff someone who's biased, the defense's approach does have the ability to work, because they use someone like that that to hang their hat on. >> "the washington post's" eugene robinson has a recent op-ed entitled, i want to believe that justice is possible in derek chauvin's trial, but a part of me hold back. he writes in part this, george floyd's death is fully documented on video, recorded from multiple angles. on witness' cell phones and the officers' body camera and a surveillance camera across the street. all the jurors have to do is believe their own eyes and ears. i should be able to expect that they will do so. i should at least be able to hope that they will. but hope still feels dangerous. here's some of why gene is so

cautious. in 1992, the los angeles police officers accused with beating rodney king were acquitted. in 2014, a florida jury acquitted george zimmerman in the shooting death of trayvon martin. in 2016, the trial of south carolina officer who shot walter scott in the back three times ended in a mistrial after jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict. michael schrager later pleaded guilty. in 2017, also in minnesota, a jury acquitted the police officer who shot and killed philando castile. and in new york, no charges were ever brought against the officer who put eric garner in a deadly choke hold. >> and mara, all we have to do is look at eric gardner, who was murdered on the streets of staten island. we saw the video. charges weren't even brought. and then we look at the case of walter scott, where he was

moving slowly away from the police officer, who took out his gun thinking mo one was watching him and shot him in the back repeatedly. and that case ended in a mistrial. so there's one example after another example that suggests we need to be looking at this jury and wondering if there's somebody on that jury that is biased and is going to have a, you know, cause a hung jury, despite the overwhelming evidence that we've seen. this isn't the first time. i guess what i'm saying, that we've seen such overwhelming evidence. >> that's right, joe. you know, we seem to be extraordinarily invested in the spectacle of black death in this country. and that goes back a whole long way, unfortunately, to when there were picnics around lynching. now, i see a direct line from

that to this ritual we have now, where we go over and over these killings that don't stop, but yet we see unable, uninterested, unwilling in doing anything to prevent them as a society. so it's the level of frustration, i think, among americans who are watching this what care and among black americans is extraordinary. you want to understand why people are in the streets, mostly peacefully, this is why. what do we have left but this anger and i would also say, why are we so invested as a country, as a justice system in ignoring what is in front of our eyes. ignoring what we see. who benefits from that? it's certainly not black

americans. it's not just individual police officers, but it's the system that they represent. i think if you're a black american and you're watching this. if you're -- you know, i think about young kids watching this. what hope do they have of getting a fair shake? so you know, the lesson learned here for black americans is, there are no rules to follow. there are no rules to follow to keep you safe. and to circle back to what you were saying last hour, i'm wondering how important it is a you talk about still talking about this year after year after year, how important is it that when you look at what policing is like, what you talked about last hour, we start asking, do we really want police officers to be the ones that are making three armed people making

traffic stops over expired stickers. do we want police officers being the one policing homelessness and people on parked benches across our cities and towns? maybe there's some more dramatic steps back, not just reform and not just training, but taking a more holistic approach on what police officers should be doing and should not be doing in 2021. >> that's right, joe. my frustration is because of these slogans like antifa and the police, which is just a really, i think, unfortunate slogan all the way around, we have been unable to have a real conversation, that's a very rational one about, you know, why it is that we have police officers doing the work that teachers should be doing, that homeless services should be

doing. and if you talk to police officers, which i have in my job many times, they don't want to be doing that work either. i'm sure there's a whole lot of room for reform that both help police officers and importantly, the communities that they serve. so it starts with accountability, not just for individual officers, but for the policies and the police chief that are actually including these officers with these weapons in these situations on a clash force with actually the people that they are meant to protect and serve. we need to change that dynamic. otherwise, we'll see this again and again and it won't stop. >> all right. thank you so much, mara gay. we greatly appreciate you being here. thank you. and mike, getting to mara's point, not just looking at sweeping reforms that she's suggesting, but even looking at what's happening around minneapolis and what's been

happening around minneapolis over the past couple of weeks, you just look at this video soft three officers approaching a car with an expired sticker, ten miles from where i think the most important trial we've had in quite some time involving race is going on. and you wonder what the chief of police and others were thinking. at the end, they said, be careful out there. my god, i think somebody should have told the police chief and the leaders of this community, be careful out there! these are perilous times! you can't afford to be in a position where you can make a stupid mistake, that could cost the lives of somebody and cause

this town to erupt. it just, it really is beyond me about -- there's going to be a trial on how you grab a taser and how you're grabbing a gun thinking -- there's going to be that trial, all right? but we need to back up and just ask, what the hell was the police chief -- what was the hell was everybody else thinking when they're bringing three armed cops up to the door of a young black man, because of an expired sticker? >> why did they make that stop? how many people in the country have been stopped for similar things and the cop walks up to the window, asks for the registration, tells them they have an expired sticker, hands the registration back and says, get going and get the sticker taken care of. that's what happens when you're white, not when you're black. and mara mentioned and you've

been talking about the tape, the highly visible tape that is on trial now. and we've got two tapes now, the brooklyn center tape and the george floyd tape. and i harken back to studies that were done after rodney king, after the rodney king trial. and the jurors had seen the tape so often in the trial and prior to the trial that they were desensitized to the horrific beating that rodney king took at the hands of the los angeles police department. and my feeling is from covering a lot of trials, a lot of murder trials, and david, i would like your thought on this, your view on this, is that you can measure evidence, you can measure testimony, but you can never measure human nature in the jury, in the jury pool. and you don't know what they're thinking. and it seems to me off of yesterday's testimony, from the

medicaler, i forget what state he was from, that the defense obviously is looking for two things. they're looking for a hung jury and they're also looking maybe driving down the manslaughter highway, they're looking for a manslaughter charge, evidently. what's your opinion of this? >> there's a saying that if you make them cry in the jury box, they won't cry in the jury room, and that goes to what you're saying about desensitizing jurors to evidence. there's always that danger when you watch a video over and over again, at the same time, i've got to be honest with you, i have come home and told my wife, if i have to watch this video again, i'm going to break down. for me, the more i watch it, the more it hurts, to see the way they treated him, to see how fearful he was of being killed by police. and for anyone who thinks that's unreasonable, tell that to philando castile. because when gene listed off the cases that caused him to have doubt, remember, there have been

three wrongful killings of black people in the minneapolis area in the past five years. philando castile, george floyd, now daunte wright. and so, i think what this video probably truly does is further cements what people are already feeling for those of that are sympathetic and who appreciate what's going on. it hurts. but for people who are resistant, i think it has the opposite effect. and that goes towards them trying to seek a hung jury. a hung jury, there's still hope. you can retry derek chauvin. but if they convict on manslaughter, that will be a slap in the face for this community, because the punishment simply will not fit the crime. >> former prosecutor, david henderson, thank you very much for being on this morning. still ahead on "morning joe," house intelligence committee chairman adam schiff joins us ahead of today's congressional hearing on global threats. plus, we will talk with congresswoman veronica escobar of texas for the latest on the

crisis at the border. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. er you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. stay restless with the icon that does the same. the rx crafted by lexus. lease the 2021 rx 350 for $439 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. ♪ ♪i've got the brains you've got the looks♪ ♪let's make lots of money♪ ♪you've got the brawn♪ ♪i've got the brains♪ ♪let's make lots of♪ ♪uh uh uh♪ ♪oohhh there's a lot of opportunities♪ with allstate, drivers who switched saved over $700. saving is easy when you're in good hands. allstate click or call to switch today. my psoriatic arthritis pain? allstate i had enough! it's not getting in my way. joint pain, swelling, tenderness...much better.

my psoriasis, clearer... cosentyx works on all of this. four years and counting. so watch out. i got this! watch me. real people with active psoriatic arthritis look and feel better with cosentyx. cosentyx works fast for results that can last. it treats the multiple symptoms of psoriatic arthritis, like joint pain and tenderness, back pain, and helps stop further joint damage. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine, or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. i just look and feel better. i got real relief with cosentyx. watch me! feel real relief. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx. i signed up because i was curious. i learned about my grandfather's life on ancestry and it was a remarkable twentieth-century transformation. he did a lot of living before i knew him.

bring your family history to life like never before. get started for free at ancestry.com - [announcer] meet the ninja foodi air fry oven. make family-sized meals fast. and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away. open talenti and raise the jar. to gelato made from scratch. raise the jar to all five layers.

raise the jar to the best gelato... you've ever tasted. talenti. raise the jar. i was injured in a car crash. you've ever tasted. i had no idea how much my case was worth. i called the barnes firm. when a truck hit my son, i had so many questions about his case. i called the barnes firm. it was the best call i could've made. your case is often worth more than insuran call the barnes firm to find out i could've made. what your case could be worth. we will help get you the best result possible. ♪ the barnes firm, injury attorneys ♪ call one eight hundred,est resul eight million ♪

if donald trump were the 2024 nominee, would you support him? >> i would not. >> okay. liz cheney, very good catching up with you. >> wow. it's a simple response seems to be so shocking that the host is speechless. congresswoman liz cheney with that very succinct response yesterday. she has emerged as one of the former president's top targets after she voted for his impeachment. meanwhile, new polling gives president joe biden a solid job approval rating, just about two weeks away from his 100th day in office. in the latest quinnipiac

university poll, 48% approve of the president's job performance. 42% disapprove. while the latest monmouth university poll shows biden with a 54% approval rating, edge over 41% disapproval. when looking at the issues, the quinnipiac poll finds that 64% approve of the president's handling of the coronavirus. 29% disapprove. on the economy, 50% approve, 42% disapprove. on taxes, 45% approve, 42% disapprove. and on the situation at the southern border, just 29% approve of the president's handling. 55% disapprove. willie? >> new polling also shows the plurality of america's backing president biden's infrastructure plan, as support grew even more if it's if you wanteded by raising tangss on corporations in the poll. in the latest quinnipiac university poll, 44% support the

$2 trillion plan. while adding a corporate tax rate found it, support rose by nine points to 53% while 39% opposed the plan. joining us now, white house correspondent for pbs "newshour" and msnbc contributor, yamiche alcindor, former senior adviser for the house oversight committee, now a columnist for "usa today" and the "l.a. times." kurt bardela and jake sherman, answer msnbc political contributor. fascinating there in that polling when you look at the corporate tax rate is what republicans are hanging their hat on. they say, we're not going to vote for a bill that raises taxes. well americans, when they hear the details, we're going to raise taxes 7% potentially on big companies to pay for all of this stuff that you say you like within the bill, support for it actually goes up. does that take something away from the republican criticism of this bill proposed plan? >> it should, willie.

two things to point out here. number one, i can't tell you how many conversations i've had with the white house and the administration officials where they tell me that they believe that soaking the rich and corporate tax increases are popular. they believe that most americans think that tax increases on corporations are very popular. and they believe that most americans think that corporation s actually deserve taxes, that's why they're paying for this large scale bill with tax increases on corporations. that's number one. number two. does this change the calculus of senate democrats who are against this. because forget republicans, they're probably not going to participate in this bill anyway. but does this move, joe manchin and kerstin sinema. joe manchin has said time and time again, nothing happens without his approval. if he's for 25%, maybe they have to move there. the only dwhae matters is what does joe manchin and kyrsten sinema do? everything else is relatively academic at this point. and the question is, can you

find a sweet spot if it's going to get 50 votes under the fast track process that 25 to 28 rate. >> the white house has said explicitly, we're willing to negotiate on that number for the corporate tax rate. they point out when donald trump came into office, the corporate tax rate was 35%. this has legislation moved nit 2018 down to 21%. so they're just looking to bring it back somewhere in the middle not going all the way back to the pre-trump corporate tax rate. but is it your sense that there are negotiations happening between the white house and senators like joe manchin to bring that number down from 28? >> it is my sense that the white house is talking to senators and especially joe manchin to really try to get at what rate will be the one that can be passed in the senate.

you hear, this is a bill they've been very open about wanting to negotiate on that corporate tax rate. and when you push the white house, specifically, and say, joe manchin wants 25%, they don't shrug their shoulders and say, well, we can't give joe manchin what he wants. they say, that might be the number that we end up at. so this is really an ongoing discussion but they very, very open to working with senator man chins. the other thing, it really underscores the white house merge, which is that if republicans in the senate and the house won't get onboard, we'll go directly to their voters that should be able to support for this bill. and that is the playbook with the covid-19 relief bill that was passed, that seemed to again be the playbook here. i will tell you that i have been

talking to a number of white house officials and some senators who say, it does not look good to have such a big trillion-dollar bill go throughout without support from republicans. they definitely want to look like they're having bipartisan support. they want to try to get some republicans onboard. but jake said, and if republicans, with only democrats voting for it, republicans will be able to say, these are two huge bills. >> you have a bunch of americans say, if you want to make amazon pay a few tax dollars so you can fix our bridges and roads and get us broadband and green energy and all the rest of us, go for it. >> yeah, if you're the democrats and looking at the corporate tax structure and how to sell this to people, the 1 trillion cost

of infrastructure, and you say, they took the corporate tax rate and knocked it down from 35% to 21%, you think people would be likely it if we raised to it 25 to 26%, so they wouldn't have to pay as much? i think they would probably see the democrats sitting around the table saying, i think we have a winner f, but let's talk about your old party here. we have a political party that's saying "no" to almost everything on both sides of the house. both the senate and the house republicans saying "no" to almost everything that's been proposed. not voting for anything that democrats are trying to pass. so going forward into the election year, the off year election year, you've got a government, the biden administration, seemingly proving each and every day that government, when it's run efficiently, works. people are getting vaccines. people are getting money to help

stem them through the horrendous losses they've suffered over the years. the past 14 months or so. what is the future of the political party, the republican party that is basically going to go to the right now, philosophically next year, and say, here's our position. no. >> the future for this matter is one that's going to find themselves losing elections with regularity. you can't find something for nothing, if what you're offering the american people is an ongoing diet of "no," while the other party is able to march out a litany of successes from both sides of the aisle, that's part of the problem. and when you go back and

campaign and ask to get re-elected, how can you look voters in the face and say, keep voting for me, i oppose that bridge that got fixed that you like. i opposed that freeway extension that was paid for by stimulus dollars that i voted "no" on. who helped you get through covid-19, but it turns out i've been espousing anti-vaccine conspiracy theories. the list goes on and on of policies that have shown time and again are resonating with the american people. and republicans are looking very, very dangerously close to looking out of touch with where their own voters and constituents are. at the end of the day, nobody come november or 2022 is going to care or remember whether it have bill was completely democratic or republican. they'll know whether it worked. whether results in their backyards and their communities and their economies. if the results are there. if the financial spigot that's being turned on works, they're going to like it. republicans don't want to risk

being on the wrong side of it. i think they're really overplaying their hand by saying no to everything. >> so coming up, when it comes to migrants seeking asylum here in the united states, is there an alternative to the process that currently calls for families and children to be detained? it's an issue for our next guest. she's looking into it. congresswoman veronica escobar joins us next on morning joe. n r joins us next on morning joe my retirement plan with voya keeps me moving forward. they guide me with achievable steps that give me confidence. this is my granddaughter...she's cute like her grandpa. voya doesn't just help me get to retirement... ...they're with me all the way through it. voya. be confident to and through retirement. still lots of room. just more to view. still the big move. just more moving. still singing. just more in tune. still hard to find a spot. just easier to park.

still the gangs all here. just less “are we there yet?” the chevy family of suvs. making life's journey just better. ♪♪♪ is now a good time for a flare-up? enough, crohn's! for adults with moderate to severe crohn's or ulcerative colitis... stelara® can provide relief and is the only approved medication to reduce inflammation on and below the surface of the intestine in uc. you, getting on that flight? back off, uc! stelara® may increase your risk of infections, some serious, and cancer. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection... flu-like symptoms, sores, new skin growths, have had cancer, or if you need a vaccine. pres, a rare, potentially fatal brain condition, may be possible. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. lasting remission can start with stelara®. if you've been financially impacted by covid-19, janssen may be able to help. how great is it that we get to tell everybody ifhow liberty mutualcially customizes your car insurance

so you only pay for what you need? i mean it... uh-oh, sorry... oh... what? i'm an emu! no, buddy! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty. ♪ new dove men deodorant is different. it has 48 hour protection. and a plant-based moisturizer... that cares for your skin. odor protection that works new dove men plant-based care. [sfx: psst psst] and a plant-based moisturizer... that cares for your skin. allergies don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily stops your body from overreacting to allergens all season long. psst! psst! all good age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein.

new numbers from the u.s. department of homeland security and the department of health and human services show migrant children in hhs care have now reached over 19,000, while the amount of children many border patrol custody continues to decrease, now just over 2,800. vice president kamala harris

will soon be traveling to mexico and guatemala to address the root causes of migration to the u.s. as part of her role leading the white house immersion effort. joining us now, democratic member of the judiciary committee and co-chair of the immigration task force and the congressional hispanic caucus, congresswoman veronica escobar of texas. the voice of the border. her district includes el paso county, which borders with mexico. well, this is a very difficult issue and i know that you've been working very closely with secretary mayorkas. what do you think the clearest steps are that should happen immediately for what some call directly at the border with the diminish custody? >> good morning, mika. thank you again for hosting on your show. it's always a delight to be with you. so while vice president kamala harris works on the long-term

issues addressing those root causes, congress and the department of homeland security and a number of other committees, actually, have quite a task at hand. and i think if we're going to look at what's happening at the border, which we do do need to in addition to what the vice president is doing, we need to take a step back and look at how we got here. so we need to realize as congress, number one, the more we've clunken the legal pathways over time, we should not be surprised that people are seeking illegal and dangerous pathways. so the more we've limited image immigration, of course it's shot up for people in desperate situations, people who are literally dieing to get in. number two, the current approach and the approach we've had for decades, which is walls, personnel, concrete cells, it's

not worked. we need to realize militarizing the border has been a forward. and third, we've got to get people act sed to get their cases adjudicated very quickly. so i'm working on solutions. i'm working on a piece of legislation to include some new conceptses and i'm hoping folks will have an open heart, an open mind, acknowledge the way we've done things in the past hasn't worked. and can we have to do our job as congress and try new solutions. we need to better manage what is happening at the border while vice president harris comes up with some of the strategies for those root causes happening not just in the northern triangle, but in mexico, as well. >> jake sherman has a question for you.

jake. >> hey, congresswoman. it doesn't seem like anything could get 60 votes to clear the threshold in the senate. i'm curious whether you think immigration reform is worth blowing up the filibuster for. that's number one. number two, you said the administration needs to do a better job in managing the situation at the border. i'm wondering what that looks like to you. what should joe biden be doing either by executive order or by some sort of individual action to manage the situation better at the border. >> good morning, jake. so i think the filibuster needs to be abolished for a number of reasons, including immigration. i feel like we're stuck in groundhog day in america where we are reliving the same challenges year in and year out, whether it's immigration, whether it is race relations, whether it is economic inequity. we can't keep pretending that

these are new situations for a new congress and a new senate. and in the house of representatives, what we've been doing is we've been passing good legislation with our majority. because we don't have the filibuster. so without having a majority ruled senate, we are going to see the senate continue to be an instrument of the status quo and, frankly, an instrument to obstruction and progress. so we have urgent issues to deal with in our country. we can't say, oh, let's start from scratch and let's see if we can kind of water down as many ideas as possible to get as many votes as possible. the majority of americans want progress. we need to deliver. we have done that in the house. i would urge the senate to do the same thing. and with regard to what more of the administration can do, i have been so incredibly impressed, jake, with the people that they've appointed. and we see them quickly ramping

up and filling those positions. so i am incredibly hopeful. they are engaging in absolutely the right public policy and the right strategy. and so i am heartened by all of that. i would love to see the administration lean in and assure the american public, look, this is really -- because we're going to deal with this current situation for a bit while we work out all of these challenges. i would love to see the president say that. but also, jake, congress, you need to hold us accountable. you know, i really appreciate all of my colleagues, but we've got to focus on solutions. and that's why i'm bringing forward a piece of legislation and a framework that i hope they will be open to and i hope that they will acknowledge that the strategies of the past have not been helpful. last night, we were in a house

judiciary hearing, a mark up of multiple bills. my republican colleagues continued over and over and over again to talk about the border. they found a way to weave the border into nearly every conversation. and their fallback is, let's go back to the policies of the past. policies like remain in mexico. and one of the things we have to realize as a country is that those strategies were cruel and they're not sustainable for mexico. so it's on us. we have to figure this out together and i hope folks will be open to what i'm bringing forward. >> all right. congresswoman veronica escobar, thank you very much for being on the show this morning. and now to this development, the senate voted yesterday to advance legislation to open debate on an anti-asian-american hate crimes bill. the 92-6 vote to proceed on the

covid-19 hate crimes act sets up an expected final vote later this week. the bill would fast track the justice department's review of hate crimes as the asian-american community has seen an increase in incidents during the coronavirus pandemic. six republican senators voted to block the bill from consideration saying that they were unhappy that democrats had advanced the bill directly to the senate floor without going through committee first. kurt, help me understand. >> well, mika, the obstruction from senate republicans, particularly people like josh holly and ted cruz has nothing to do with procedure. but everything to do with them continue to go double down on this white nationals platform that the republican party is seeped in. one of the things, too, that was asked of me yesterday was congressman scott perry said in a congressional hearing, for many americans, what seems to be happening or what they believe right now is happening is they're replacing native

american -- the idea that white americans have something to fear from communities of color that has contributed to the reason why we have raising hate crimes against asian-americans, why communities feel under attack and urged siege from the republican party. as this bill moves forward, pay attention to the actions of republicans. last year, congressman grace may introduced a resolution in the house to do this very same thing more than 150 republicans opposed it. the only thing that's changed between then and now is the politics of it. but what's at the core of the republican party right now is a dedicated and conservative effort to pit white america against communities of color. >> look today like the white house will be out making the case for this decision in afghanistan to bring all the troops home before the 20th anniversary of 911. we have the national security adviser jake sullivan on the show this morning and secretary of state anthony blinken just

landed in kabul a short time ago to make the case to leadership there. >> that's right. the white house is focused on explaining to the american people why they say this withdraw as key to their policies, to national security key, to the benefits of the american people as someone who covered the arlington cemetery and talked to so many military families who have loved ones, unfortunately, buried there. this was a decision that was very much focused and very much thought of by military families and the white house here is now, as you can see, sending out officials to talk about it, but also of course now going to be in the region to talk about it. so i think we can expect a robust defense of why they think this is important and why the president thought that he needed to come out yesterday and explain why this is key. >> thank you all very much for being on this morning. still ahead, our third

lawmaker of the morning, house intelligent committee chairman adam schiff joins us ahead of today's congressional hearing on global threats. "morning joe" is back in one minute. ning joe" is back in one minute the less they'll miss. but even if your teen was vaccinated against meningitis in the past they may be missing vaccination for meningitis b. although uncommon, up to 1 in 5 survivors of meningitis will have long term consequences. now as you're thinking about all the vaccines your teen might need make sure you ask your doctor if your teen is missing meningitis b vaccination. so you're a small business, or a big one. you were thriving, but then... oh. ah. okay. plan, pivot. how do you bounce back? you don't, you bounce forward, with serious and reliable internet. powered by the largest gig speed network in america. but is it secure? sure it's secure. and even if the power goes down, your connection doesn't.

so how do i do this? you don't do this. we do this, together. bounce forward, with comcast business. on my orders, the united states military has begun strikes on the taliban regime in afghanistan.

>> last year, we removed 10,000 u.s. troops from afghanistan. another 23,000 will leave by the end of the summer. after that, reductions will continue at a steady pace with more and more of our troops coming home. and as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014, the afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country. >> my original instinct was to pull out. but all my life, i've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk. >> i'm now the fourth united states president to preside over american troop presence in afghanistan. two republicans, two democrats. i will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth. >> president biden announces when u.s. troops will come home from afghanistan. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, april 15th. along with joe, willie and me,

we have a member of the "new york times" editorial board mara gay. there was another night of protests following the police-involved shooting of daunte wright. hundreds of people, most of them peaceful, gathered outside of the brooklyn center police department for a fourth night in a row. authorities say some people in the crowd were shooting fireworks and throwing objects at law enforcement. leading police to declare an unlawful assembly. protesters were told to disperse several times. by 10:30, many left. some of the remaining protesters were arrested but the night was much calmer than what we saw earlier this week. willie. >> meanwhile, the former police officer who fatally shot daunte wright has been charged with second degree man slaughter. authorities say kim potter was taken into custody around 11:30 a.m. yesterday. sheriff eps records show she

posted $100,000 bail and was released from custody shortly after 5:30 p.m. second degree manslaughter charge carries a penalty of ten years behind bars if she is convicted. let's bring in new york prosecutor charles coleman. this one, charles, i would love for you to give me your gut on the charges against kim potter and also the events that led up to the shooting of daunte wright. should they be looked at as closely as the actual shooting? >> well, good morning and thank you for having me. i think that when you saw looking at the charges, particularly with respect to the manslaughter charge, what you have to basically surmise is that the prosecution here is already playing it safe. what they are doing is they are eliminating the element of intent by making the top count

basically a charge that requires negligence, not a charge that requires intent. so basically, the statute as it reads suggests that in order for her to be convicted, they have to establish that negligent in her duty which will basically come down to a question of reasonableness of care or whatever the standard of the law is. so the question, if the indictment stays what it is, if the charges stay what they are, the question will remain, was it reasonable for a 26-year veteran on the police force to mistake their taser for their service weapon. and i think that that is what the prosecution is playing it very, very safe in this. >> you know, it's so interesting you said that. when we first get the news, and, of course, we didn't say any of this on the air. but you just assume, okay, somebody is -- there was a scuffle. somebody mistook their weapons. my original thought was oh, my

gosh, this is a terrible lack of training, this is somebody new on the police force. but the fact that this was a veteran, someone who had been around 26 years, even if it was a tragic accident, there is certainly, with a 26-year veteran, a standard of care that you would expect far differently than a rookie cop in that same position. well, it's not just that. i mean, i think you're absolutely spot on in terms of that assessment. but i would say quite frankly, we are having the wrong station about whether they should have drawn her service weapon or whether she should have drawn her taser. at the end of the day, the question remains to me, stepping back from the situation, is why was there a need to use any sort of weapon or escalate the level of force being used for what amounted to a traffic stop for warrants? this was a misdemeanor warrant that mr. wright had. he should be here today.

i'm not convinced that the situation warranted that course of action. reasonable minds may disagree on that point. however, i think it's deeply problematic when you start looking systemically at what has happened in the state of minnesota regarding police force and civilians and the use of force there. so while i appreciate the fact and agree with you that that 26 years on the force should have invoted a greater sense of awareness, i have yet to be convinced that is right for this misdemeanor washt. >> and mika talked about the change of events a minute ago. those chain of events that we look at, you question why three police officers even approached a vehicle for an expired tag.

it was a traffic violation related to an expired registration tab. from what i've understood from the public safety briefing, there was an expired registration on the vehicle. that means the tags were expired. >> deadly coronavirus pandemic has not slowed policing of these low-level offenses in recent months. minnesota law does not allow a grace period when the license tabs are expired. the brightly colored stickers are no longer valid 10 days after the month listed on the registration plate. gannon never said when with the tags were lapsed. why am i bringing this up? while the policing of such offenses are not slowed, it appears the process for getting

those renewals have slowed down. a minnesota department of services spokes woman told the star tribune last summer the agency is behind on processing mailed in tab and license plate renewals for thousands of minnesotans. >> like across the country because of the pandemic. >> at the time, she said many delays and requests were due in part because staff was telecommuting and did not have access to the mailed-in documents. there's a lot more that we could talk about there. the thing that i have just not been able to come to terms with -- and i say here all the time. you know, chauvin, he had nine and a half minutes. he knew what he was doing. he saw a man slowly die in front of him. we often see scuffles, we see police officers making terrible

mistakes. and i suspect a jury would probably have problems even charging this officer with negligent homicide. but let's step back. why -- hold on. excuse me one second. here is the question. i'm sorry it's taking me so long to get to it. why did three officers in the middle of the derek chauvin trial, ten miles away from that trial was being held in an area that had a history of problems with race relations regarding policing, why did three officers fill the need to go up to a car with an expired tab? you talk about a lack of situational awareness. it's remarkable to me. this is what we're going to do this afternoon. we're going to pull somebody over with an expired tab when we

know a lot of those tabs are expired because of covid. >> the answer to your question is police officers are doing the job that the public expects them to do. you have a couple of things going on here. in some cases, you have officers who are bad actors, who need to be brought to justice, and then in other cases, i think this is the majority of cases across america, you have a situation where police officers are essentially if i had up along with the people that they come into introduction with to have these bad iventer actions that too often end in the loss of life with black americans who should still be with us.

so we often ask ourselves, what kinds of jobs do we want police officers doing? do we want them entrusted with pulling out guns instead of take hissers at routine traffic stops? if this had happened in europe -- first of all, it wouldn't have. but the question we should be asking is why are guns so reallily available in the united states? it's not just the training. it's the culture of the way we look at police departments and the history of how we have used police departments in this country, which is heavily militarized and too-on-to police the bodies of those who are black, brown and part of labor movements. i have a lot of empathy for the officers who are put in these

situations, as well. because ultimately, sometimes they are set up to fail. and that is no excuse. there should be personal accountability, but why are we putting all of this on individual officers only? there needs to be a larger conversation, i believe, about reform that doesn't just focus on officer behavior, but also focuses on the entire process by which we have empowered people to make life and death decisions before the judge and jury have weighed in. still ahead, is there reasonable doubt in the murder charge against derek chauvin? we'll break down the latest from the trial in minneapolis next on "morning joe." minneapolis nextn "morning joe." ♪ [triumphantly yells] [ding] don't get mad. get e*trade. i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks!

( sighs wearily ) here, i'll take that! ( excited yell ) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one-gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health! ( abbot sonic ) ♪ ♪ smooth driving pays off. saving is easy when you're in good hands. allstate. click or call for a quote today. trelegy for copd. ♪ birds flyin' high you know how i feel ♪ ♪ breeze drifting on by you know how i feel ♪ [man: coughing] ♪ it's a new dawn, it's a new day... ♪ no matter how you got copd it's time to make a stand. ♪ ...and i'm feelin' good ♪ start a new day with trelegy. no once-daily copd medicine has the power to treat copd in as many ways as trelegy. with three medicines in one inhaler, trelegy helps people breathe easier and improves lung function. it also helps prevent future flare-ups. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler

for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. it's time to start a new day. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy. and save at trelegy.com. bike shop please hold. bike sales are booming. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from our resume database. claim your $75 credit when you post your first job at indeed.com/bike.

hooh. that spin class was brutal. well you can try wthe buick's massaging seat. oohh yeah, that's nice. can i use apple carplay to put some music on? sure, it's wireless. pick something we all like. ok. hold on. what's your buick's wi-fi password? buickenvision2021. oh, you should pick something stronger. that's really predictable. that's a really tight spot. don't worry. i used to hate parallel parking. (all together) me too. hey. you really outdid yourself. yes, we did. the all-new buick envision. an suv built around you... all of you.

witness testimony was focused on the cause of george floyd's death.

former maryland chief medical examiner dr. david fowler argued floyd's death should be ruled undetermined rather than homicide because he said there were several conflicting factors there. >> the knee is towards the back and the back right side of mr. floyd's neck. and the airway is around the front. it is nowhere close to his airway. >> we are talking about having an open airway. how does that affect your ability to speak? >> the ability to speak or make any other sound, and mr. floyd did groan, any of the sound requires you to take air in over the vocal cords and out over the vocal chords. >> the witness testifying that they were directly next to the car's exhaust and carbon

monoxide may have contributed to the death. here is part of that testimony followed by some of the prosecution's cross-examination. >> did you pay attention to where mr. floyd's head was positioned relative to the squad car? >> yes, i did. >> which way was his face, nose, mouth facing? >> his face was facing towards the vehicle, towards the rear of the vehicle and directly towards the area where you would expect the tail pipe or tail pipes of the vehicle to be. now, just going right to the punch line on carbon monoxide that you talked about at some length, you haven't seen any data or test results that show mr. floyd had a single injury

from carbon monoxide, is that correct? >> that is correct because it wasn't -- >> i asked whether it was true. >> that is true. >> did you see any air monitoring data that would give you any information as to what amount of carbon monoxide, if any, would have been in mr. floyd's breathing zone? >> no, because it was not tested. >> it was a yes-or-no question. you haven't seen any, have you? >> i have not seen any data. >> earlier in the day, the defense requested the judge acquit derek chauvin, arguing the prosecution failed to profits case. the judge denied that request. charles, so let's talk about what we're seeing here from the defense over these two days as they lay out their case. obviously it was a very compelling two weeks for the prosecution. they had their own medical experts who said, in fact, george floyd did die because ovs knee on his neck from officer chauvin. what are we hearing from the defense and how compelling do you think it might be for the jury? >> sure. what we saw when the prosecution

presented their case-in-chief was essentially three different phases. the prosecution began by setting the tone for the trial in an emotional way that would grab the jury and set the tone for the color, the feel and the emotions of what this was all about. and then we saw the prosecution begin to transition to what i believe is the most important part of the trial and that is focussing on the technical aspects with respect to the experts and the medical professionals who were responsible for determining george floyd's cause of death, which is a central element that the prosecution must prove in order to establish a conviction. and then we saw the prosecution transition to the emotion with respect to george floyd's brother and emphasizing some of the technical aspects. what we have seen from the defense is that on their first day of their case-in-chief, they began with essentially a cycle of witnesses that presented an opening or an introduction to each of their defenses. their central defenses were that

it was a crowd that may have distracted derek chauvin and officers during that day. number two, there were additional causes of death. and number three, derek chauvin's use of force was not actually unreasonable. so because of that, now we are seeing more and more technical attacks. that's what we saw all day yesterday. and it's important that viewers understand this. the standard of what needs to be proved, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. and so what the prosecution is concerned with, and the defense offering outside expert testimony, is they are trying to create reasonable doubt. it's not the quantity of evidence that is presented. it is the quality. they can choose to take in dr. fowler's testimony if they so choose and weigh it evenly

against all of the testimony from the medical experts that the prosecution put forward. so what the defense is attempting to do is offer their own expert so that they can say, on summation, you've heard from experts from the prosecution. you've heard from experts from the defense. it's up to you to make the decision because what they want to do is create reasonable doubt. >> charles coleman, thank you very much for being on this morning. the u.s. is set to slap new sanctions on the kremlin and russia's ongoing hacking efforts. we'll talk about the battle to protect america's elections with the former official on the front lines of that fight when "morning joe" comes right back. n "morning joe" comes right back from prom dresses to workouts and new adventures you hope the more you give the less they'll miss.

but even if your teen was vaccinated against meningitis in the past they may be missing vaccination for meningitis b. although uncommon, up to 1 in 5 survivors of meningitis will have long term consequences. now as you're thinking about all the vaccines your teen might need make sure you ask your doctor if your teen is missing meningitis b vaccination. did you know you can go to libertymutual.com to customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need? really? i didn't-- aah! ok. i'm on vibrate. aaah! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ i think the sketchy website i bought this turtle from stole all of my info. ooh, have you looked on the bright side? discover never holds you responsible for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter. why choose proven quality sleep from sleep number?

because a good night's rest is where muscles (giggling) that's my turtle. recover, and our minds are restored. the new sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing. and it helps keep you asleep by sensing your movement and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. perfect for those relaxing weekends. proven quality sleep, is life-changing sleep. only from sleep number. open talenti and raise the jar. to gelato made from scratch. raise the jar to all five layers. raise the jar to the best gelato... you've ever tasted. talenti. raise the jar. my plaque psoriasis... ...the itching ...the burning. the stinging. my skin was no longer mine. my psoriatic arthritis, made my joints stiff, swollen... painful. emerge tremfyant™ with tremfya®, adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... ...can uncover clearer skin and improve symptoms at 16 weeks.

tremfya® is also approved for adults with active psoriatic arthritis. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. tremfya®. emerge tremfyant™ janssen can help you explore cost support options.

after 20 years of u.s. military involvement in aflg, president biden announced yesterday that it's, quote, time for american troops to come home. the military spent more than a decade urging three different american presidents to stay in afghanistan with president joe biden's decision this week to withdraw all u.s. forces by

september 11th. they finally lost the battle. biden made the announcement from the treaty room, the same location where president george w. bush announced a month after 9/11 that strikes against al qaeda the begun. >> we went to afghanistan because of a horrific attack that happened 20 years ago. that cannot explain why we should remain there in 2021. rather than return to war with the taliban, we have to focus on the challenges that are in front of us. when i came to office, i inherited diplomatic agreement duly negotiated between the government of the united states and the taliban that all u.s. forces would be out of afghanistan by may 1, 2021. just three months after my inauguration. that's what we inherited, that commitment. that's perhaps not what i would

have negotiated myself, but it was an agreement made by the united states government. and that means something. so i'm keeping with that agreement and with our national interests the united states will begin our final withdraw beginning on may 1 of this year. will not conduct a hasty rush to the exit. we'll do it responsibly, deliberately and safely. >> after making the announcement, the president visited arlington national cemetery where more than 2300 casualties of operation enduring freedom are buried. joe, symbolically showing why he feels this must be done. >> right. jonathan lamere, joe biden was a skeptic of our participation in afghanistan before he was sworn in as vice president, famously having confrontation in

afghanistan with then president karzai getting -- pushing away from the table, throwing down his napkin and leaving because of corruption in that government he then was opposed to barack obama increasing the number of troops in afghanistan. so a lot of people are not surprised by this decision. >> yeah. president biden has been a long time skeptic of the americans presidents there in afghanistan. he was overruled repeatedly while vice president. but his decision didn't change. he believed that, as he laid out yesterday, that america's mission in that country was to eliminate a safe haven for terrorists. that was, of course, the country where the september 11th attacks were launched from. and as he said yesterday, that had been accomplished. he also -- and this is

interesting. for the president who has been so quick to overturn and overrule so much of what he enhearted from his predecessor, tossing out so much of president trump's policy decisions, he said that treaty that the trump administration negotiated with afghanistan was legal. it was done correctly and america should oblige by it. he pushed back the timeline slightly, of course, and now there will be a symbolic exit on the 20th anniversary of the terror attacks, but he felt like americans needed to keep their word here. there has been some criticism from the usual suspects among republicans, a few moderate democrats and some in the military establishment who feel that america's presence should still be there. and no question, there are real concerns as to what will fill that void. will the taliban roll back human rights gains? particularly for women in that

country. but biden laid out the price. this, of course, will be a wait and see game. there will be a lot of world leaders nervously watching what happens in afghanistan. but this is something that was a long time coming for this president. coming up, the chairman of the house intel xhg committee previews the hearings on the global threats facing the nation. congressman adam schiff joins the conversation straight ahead on "morning joe." joe.

- [announcer] meet the ninja foodi air fry oven. make family-sized meals fast. and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away. the lexus es, now available with all-wheel drive. this rain is bananas. lease the 2021 es 250 all-wheel drive for $339 a month for 39 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy, even a term policy, for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized that we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have one hundred thousand dollars or more of life insurance you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit conventrydirect.com to find out if you policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.

my nunormal? fewer asthma attacks with nucala. a once-monthly add-on injection for severe eosinophilic asthma. nucala reduces eosinophils, a key cause of severe asthma. nucala is not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. ask your doctor about nucala. find your nunormal with nucala. i think the sketchy website i bought this turtle from stole all of my info. ooh, have you looked on the bright side? discover never holds you responsible for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter.

my name is austin james. as a musician living with diabetes, fingersticks can be a real challenge. that's why i use the freestyle libre 14 day system. with a painless, onesecond scan i can check my glucose without fingersticks. now i'm managing my diabetes better and i've lowered my a1c from 8.2 to 6.7. you can do it without fingersticks, too. ask your doctor for a prescription for the freestyle libre 14 day system. and visit freestyle libre.us to try it for free. so you're a small business, for the freestyle libre 14 day system. or a big one. you were thriving, but then... oh. ah. okay. plan, pivot. how do you bounce back? you don't, you bounce forward, with serious and reliable internet. powered by the largest gig speed network in america. but is it secure? sure it's secure. and even if the power goes down, your connection doesn't. so how do i do this? you don't do this. we do this, together. bounce forward, with comcast business.

during a senate hearing on global threat yesterday, the director of national intelligence avril hanes called china an unparalleled he priority.

here is what fbi director christopher wray had to say. >> i don't think there is any country that presents a more severe threat to our innovation, our economic security and our democratic ideas. and the tools in their toolbox to influence our businesses, our academic institutions, our governments at all levels are deep and wide and persistent. we're opening a new investigation in china every ten hours and i can assure the committee that's not because our folks don't have anything to do with their time. >> and today is the house's turn. house intelligent committee will hold their worldwide threats hearing for the first time in more than two years. intelligence agencies leaders will testify on the current security threats facing the united states and its allies. joining us now, chairman of the select committee on

intelligence, democratic congressman adam sheriff of california, also former director of signer security and infrastructure security agency chris krebbs. good to have you both. congressman schiff, i think that the threat from china, as it's been described, and the growing threat is definitely top priority there. how are you looking at addressing them? >> you're right. it is an absolute top threat. we have been doing a deep dive on the china threat for the last couple of years. and really concluded that the intelligence community needed to re-orient its resource toes address this very powerful competitor in every domain, in space, land, sea, in the cyber realm. and so one of the points of our hearing today is going to be to flesh out what are they doing to meet this threat, but also explore new threats. the pandemic, for example, was

considered a soft threat. well, that soft threat has killed over 500,000 americans. so we're going to be examining the way these threats have evolved and make sure the intelligence community is evolving with them. >> chairman schiff, can you be more specific on china? i think people understand that china broadly is a threat. and i know this is what you'll be picking through at the hearing today. but if you're an american sitting watching this show right now, what is the most immediate threat that china poses? >> well, probably what would strike people most in their living room right now is that china has one of the most capable cyber hacking and cyber espionage capabilities. so china may be in the process of stealing your private data, they may have already stolen your private data. if you're a business owner or a business leader, they may have stole your corporate trade secrets. they may be hacking into government agencies to steal defense plans. so this is, you know, how

china's actions influence people's lives every day. it's affecting our economic competitiveness. they don't need to do the same kind of research and development we do if they can simply steal it from our innovators. but also there are escalating tensions with taiwan. there are crackdowns on peaceful protests in hong kong. there is militarization of the south china sea. any of these issues can become flash points of great concern to our country. >> chris, you look down the barrel of these threats and your job inside the government. how did you assess them at the time and how different do you suspect they are in terms of china? >> so i think the best characterization of the chinese threat was posed by rob joyce who is now the national security agency cyber security director leader. and this is at a conference a couple of years ago out in san francisco. and he said russia is like a

hurricane. china is like climate change. so russia is much more disruptive in the current moment, but china is much more subtle, much more patient. it's almost a rope-a-dope. they kind of lull you to sleep, you don't see it, they use their power very effectively. and even at the local level, they influence politics not just here in the halls of washington, which they do, but also in our local community. so they're much more deliberate and they have a longer term strategy as opposed to the russians who are trying to make an impact today. >> so what does that mean when you say china influences on a local level. so if i'm sitting in my town somewhere in america, china is putting its thumb on the scale somehow. what do you mean by that? >> absolutely. so they influence local races. if you think about some of the confushus institutes that have been established across our country at colleges and universities, it's an attempt to influence and say, hey, you know what? hong kong is part of china

long-term. it's not. and same goes for taiwan. the uighur issue, not a big deal. this is us demonstrating our own sovereignty. so they try to shape the narrative locally to their benefit. >> the white house is expected to announce a new round of sanctions today against russia in response to widespread hacking campaign efforts to interfere in the 2020 election. the sanctions include expelling russian diplomates from the u.s. and black listing more than 20 russian entities. according to one u.s. official and a second source familiar with the matter. officials say russia hacked u.s. tech companies solar winds last year and what the president of microsoft described as the largest and most sophisticated attack the world has ever seen. these sanctions come just days after a phone call between president biden and vladimir putin. the two discussed a possible summit in the coming months and russia's build up of troops at

the ukraine border which the u.s. has called deeply concerning. chairman schiff obviously we're still shifting through the wreckage of the solar wind hack. are these sanctions appropriate right now? >> they're absolutely appropriate. i think they send a powerful message that these kind of cyber hacks and cyber attacks are not going to be cost free operations. they're going to hit the russians where it matters the most in their economy. so placing sanctions on their sovereign debt capabilities will have a real impact on the russian economy. it will, i think, have a chilling impact as it's designed to. but we also need to push back hard on their election interference. the build up of troops that you mentioned along the border is deeply alarming. of course, the last time we saw that kind of troop build up, it led to the disastrous occupation forces of ukraine which the russians continue to occupy. so i think the administration is

handling it exactly as they should, but at the same time leaving the door open that where there are mutual interests, as in nuclear arms limitations, that we're going to look for opportunities to work together. >> so, chris, after the 2016 election, everything we know russia did to influence the outcome there, there was obviously heightened awareness from people like you about our cyber security and keeping a closer eye on russia and then here comes the solar wind hack right in the middle of all that attention. how did that happen and what is the lingering effect, the impact of the solar winds have on what is happening with private companies and with the government here in america? >> well, one of the things that sanction package includes is sanctions against russian technology companies that have helped facilitate various cyber activity by the russian svr, the gru and the ssb which are their cyber operators. and these are kind of flagship

companies, positive technology specifically for russia. and it shows the dual use nature of these companies, not just facilitating cyber operations, but it will have a limitation of those companies to operate in europe. one of the things that i think the sanction should effectively do is send a signal to russia that says in part what we're trying to do here, we know you're in some networks 12i8. we're hunting for you. we're going to look for you and root you out, but no further activity is acceptable. what i'm interested in is how does russia respond? presumably, they will kick out u.s. diplomates from russia, but they also may escalate, this information operations may see some proxy nationalist operators launch some attacks against the u.s. so those are the things that if i'm a private sector

organization right now, i would be thinking about what my exposure is to some sort of russian retaliation. >> all right. congressman schiff, before we go, i know some see this as long overdue and others see this as extremely complicated and both can be true at the same time. but your thoughts on the president's decision to withdraw troops from afghanistan? >> it's the right decision. it's the right time. and it's not, obviously, risk free. there is always the prospect that the taliban might overrun the country, that al qaeda might reemerge. but at present, the longer we stay, the more we put our own troops at risk. and i think after 20 years, we have to reach the conclusion that our ability to continue to shape the afghan government is very limited and that's not going to change if we stay

another 10 or 20 years. so difficult decision and one we make respectful of the sacrifices so many americans paid to keep us safe there, but the right decision. >> chairman of the house intelligence committee, adam sheriff, thank you very much. chris krebbs, thank you, as well. up next, a major show of force for voting rights. perhaps the biggest yet from the business community. that story behind this ad. next on "morning joe." it's my 5:52 woke-up-like-this migraine medicine. it's ubrelvy. for anytime, anywhere migraine strikes, without worrying if it's too late, or where i am. one dose can quickly stop my migraine in its tracks within two hours. unlike older medicines, ubrelvy is a pill that directly blocks cgrp protein, believed to be a cause of migraine.

do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. most common side effects were nausea and tiredness. ask about ubrelvy. the anytime, anywhere migraine medicine. trelegy for copd. ♪ birds flyin' high, you know how i feel. ♪

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

♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ comfort in the extreme. ♪♪ the lincoln family of luxury suvs. lactaid is 100% real milk, just without the lactose. so you can enjoy it even if you're sensitive to dairy. so anyone who says lactaid isn't real milk is also saying mabel here isn't a real cow. and she really hates that.

hundreds of companies' executives and celebrities are taking a stand against measures that could restrict ballot and and individuals such as warren buffett and arellano grande are among those who signed legislation to make it very difficult to vote. and it was organized by a former ceo of amex and current chief executive of merck. the statement, which appeared in print advertisements yesterday in "the times" and "the washington post" reads in part, for american democracy to work for any of us, we must he sure the right to vote for all of us. we all should feel a responsibility to defend the

right to vote and oppose any discriminatory measures or legislation that restrict any voter from having an equal or fair opportunity to cast a ballot. the move is the biggest show of solidarity so far by the business community as companies around the world try to navigate the partisan uproar over republican efforts tone act rules in almost every state. yet the push to change laws continues. this week in arkansas legislators approved changes that would approve restrictions outside of polling places and absentee ballots. opponents say the changes will disproportionately harm voters -- voters of color in the state. amid all of this, we're seeing a number of women past the ageof 50 pushing to protect voting rights. we're focusing on them as part of our "know your value" with

"forbes," women 50 over 50, who celebrates women who achieved significant success after the age of 50 and are also paying it forward. let's bring in randall lane, editor of "forbes" and the co-author of "earn it" and and contributor with me in this "forbes" less we're doing. and at the top of the list is 56-year-old terri sewell. >> yes, she represents alabama's seventh congressional district which includes her hometown of selma, the birthplace of the civil rights movement. so much happened there that led to the voting rights act of 1965. in 2019 she introduced the john lewis voting rights act. he was a mentor and friend to her. that bill did not ultimately

past but it is expected to be introduced to congress this year. randall, she's doing so much to keep alive the legacy of voting rights and all of the work, the late congressman has done on that end. >> as a child of selma, she was a valedictorian at selma high school. first black woman to represent alabama in congress and she's a rising star. rising star in this area and there's been speculation and pressure maybe she would run for richard shelby's open seat neext year. she recently said she's not but she has a lot of influence in this area. so they made that astute move. >> the women on this list pushing for these rights come from so many different angles. the next one, third on the less, we will talk about that add again. 70-year-old debra turner, daniella, practiced gien clothic

oncology for 35 years. these are women coming to the table with experience of knowing what it's like to be in the minority and in a subsection of voters that have a hard time on every level. >> absolutely. i think, you know, this is why this list is so important. i think she's shown that she's had many iterations, chapters in her career from her work in medicine. by the way, she practiced medicine full time and was able to reach her law degree and rose up the ranks, doing incredible rourke to empower women on the voting rights end. she's speaking out on voter suppression, advocating support of bills like hr-1. she's doing incredible work. it just shows this is the magic

of this list of women who have different reiterations, chapters in their lives and the best is yet to come in terms of empowerful work. >> yes. randall? >> the voters turned 100 years old last year. american as apple pie in baseball. but yet this has suddenly become politicized. you see debra turner fighting against gerrymandering, more transparency. these are things that seem very basic to democracy and yet they become politicized and somebody like debra turner, who as daniella said, wasn't even involved in politics when she was 50 and now is a leader for to movement. >> third on our list, we have lynne forester de-rothschild, founding partner of deluge partners. we started with this ad put in

the newspaper. a lot of businesses coming together and saying these laws don't work. we need legislation that protects voting. something mitch mcconnell said from the git-go, his gut was these businesses need to stay out of politics until he realized they all helped him in politics. i love how this 66-year-old woman, daniella, is really changing the game here. >> absolutely. she's totally pushing back on that narrative. just recently she organized sort of a convention on zoom of over 100 executive leaders on really rallying around a collaborate effort, coordinated effort to approach changes in voting rights. it's incredibly important in this moment. getting a platform to corporations to have a voice and make a stance because it is more important than ever. >> to make a stance because they're advocating for something

that maybe hasn't been said but seems obvious, protecting democracy is good for business. democracy is good for capitalism. that's why you are seeing some of these walls break down. that's why you're seeing in this meeting, again ken frazier and ken were part of it in rothschild taking a leadership role. but you see the ceo of walmart and united airlines, big, american companies who are generally apolitical, needing to take a stand because it's good for business. business needs democracy. >> daniella, just really quickly, who is our unsung hero this week? >> our unsung hero is the founder of the cybersecurity firm extreme solutions and athena acquisition corp. she's a 22-year military vet and one of the reasons she makes this list is because she's a business leader and wants to be part of the conversation. she actually reached out to her friend and investor stacey abrams and rallied again a group

of women in business, leaders, founders and investors and said how can we become part of the conversation? so it's really somebody to watch in terms of getting women, women's business leaders a platform to take a stance on voter suppression laws and future of voting rights. >> i want to -- >> set a cool profile and she talked about women needing to get in the game, not just met. >> i love it. thank you both so much. of course, go to knowyourvolume.com or forbes.com and click on 50 over 50 to learn more about all we're doing and, of course, the big buildup to this powerful "forbes" 50 over 50 list. finally this morning, this special announcement. nbc universal news group is launching a new franchise called "inspiring america: honoring people who are making an impact during an especially difficult

year." it comes off with a special primetime event posted by lester holt, savannah guthrie and hoda kotb, airing on multiple platforms, the special will reveal the 2021 inspiration list featuring the voices and stories of inspiring individuals like playwright lin-manuel miranda, nascar driver bubba wallace and becky hammon, first woman to lead an nba team. be sure to check out the primetime event premiering saturday, may 1 on nbc and telemundo. and may 2 on nbc, nbc news now and msnbc. that does it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle picks up the coverage right now. hi, there, i'm stephanie ruhle. it's thursday, april 15th. here's what's happening on this very busy morning. we're covering several breaking news stories. on the covid front, no decision yet on the johnson & johnson

vaccine. a cdc advisory panel announcing it needs more time to decide what to do after the fda ask states to temporarily pause using the vaccine over a possible link to extremely rare cases of blood clots. meanwhile, breaking news in the last hour, the biden administration announced new sanctions on russia, specifically on 32 groups and individuals who tried to interfere in the 2020 election. secretary of state blinken overseas right now and we're monitoring that. in the state of minnesota, 24 more people were arrested during a fourth night of protests in brooklyn center over the killing of daunte wright. this comes after the veteran officer involved was charged with second degree manslaughter. and just ten miles away from that is derek chauvin's child, set to resume this morning with one big question -- will chauvin take the stand? that is where we start this morning. morgan chesky,