sure. but at least will be a gun in every holster if not a couch in every living room. that's our broadcast for tuesday night. thanks for being with us. on behalf of at the heart of the story, it's the headline new grand jury seated for next stage of trump investigation. new york prosecutors have convened a special grand jury that consider investigation into former president donald trump's business dealings. seven minutes after that, it

was abc news that also independently matched the key point in this new recording. manhattan district attorney convene special grand jury and trump probe. a special grand jury has been convened to consider the possibility of criminal charges against president trump. now does this mean that former president donald trump is going to be indicted? does it mean he's going to be criminally charged? i don't know. and neither do you, and anybody who tells you they know the answer to that for sure it's someone you might enjoy hearing stories from but don't necessarily assume they're true. we don't know. you can't have an indictment unless you have a grand jury but having a grand jury doesn't guarantee that you're gonna have an indictment. a jury, as you know, a group of citizens that gets called for jury duty, sits in a courtroom and listens to all the evidence

in the witnesses that's laid out for them in the course of a trial. they keep everything according to the rules, they guide the jury on the basis of which the jury makes their decision but they decide amongst themselves. the jury issues there verdict. that's a jury. a grand jury is a different thing altogether. it would've avoided a lot of non lawyer confusion over time if they had come up with a different term for it but a grand jury it another group of regular citizens who get called for jury duty, in this case grand jury duty. but as part of a grand jury, they don't sit there and watch a trial unfold. a grand jury sits there and washes a prosecutor and looks at evidence and listens to witnesses who answer questions. and the grand jury's decision at the end of the day is not which side won the trial, they're not watching a trial.

the grand jury's decision at the end of the day is whether or not a person is going to get charged with a crime. whether an indictment is going to be issued, so that a defendant can face criminal trial. that's why the grand jury does. a regular grand jury, one called by state prosecutors in new york, they usually sit for about four weeks. they set for about four weeks under convened one or maybe two days per week for four weeks. and any charges that state prosecutors want to bring against anyone in that time, any indictments they want to seek, they bring that evidence and those witnesses to the grand jury and the grand jury are the normal course of events in new york and they meet over the course of four weeks and the take case after case after case, one after the other making a decision in each instance as to whether a person is going to be indicted. whether criminal charges are going to be issued. well, in this new reporting about potential charges for

trump, they're talking about a potential variation and that grandeur a structure. it's what they call an extra grand jury or a special grand jury. the washington post initial reports tonight says the special grand jury and the trump case will be convened to meet not for the usual four weeks, but for six months. and this special grandeur is not going to meet one day a week, maybe two days a week. they're going to meet three days a week for a solid six months. and again this is a direct her grand jury. this is being convened on top of the usual grand jury that's in session in the normal course of events and the new york state legal system. that special that, is this unusually intense and long running commitment that they've asked these grand jurors to make them, why is that? why is this being headed by special grand jury that's being so much more intensely than a normal granary?

again, i don't know. neither do you. and anyone who tells you they know for sure is not being straight with you. grand jury proceedings are secret. and i mean they are considering whether or not people are going to be criminally charged. those deliberations and everything that happens the grand jury room has to be secret as a basic tenet of fairness, because at the end of those proceedings, the grand jury decides that someone should or should not be charged. that criminal charges should be brought. it would be very unfair for everything that happened in the grand jury room to be dragged out into the public eye, right? person didn't get charged then they should not have a -- test on them. you either get charged or you don't. it's secret what happens in that room. prosecutors lay out their case against the person wants to indict and charge them. that's the public part of the case. the grand jury proceedings are secret. we don't exactly know what's going on there and we don't know exactly what's going on with a special grand jury that's been convened to hear

the case related to trump. the washington post does say and it's reporting tonight that the special grand jury is not hearing trump related stuff alone. they're also handling some other matters, some other cases. so who knows. but it is unusual to have a special grand jury meeting this intensely and the speculation is that the new york state prosecutors want to special grand jury available to work with unusual intensity three days a week for an unusually long period of time of six months. because they're asking the grandeur to consider particularly complex or otherwise intense set of decisions about whether or not former president trump and other people and his orbit are going to be indicted. and this feels like a big deal tonight because it is a big deal. it's not out of the blue zone. the timeline here is grounding in terms of us keeping this

context, keeping this perspective. making sure we're focusing on what we know and not speculating about stuff we don't know. the way this is come about, the public reporting that has led us to this point has been pointing in this direction for a while. as long ago as the summer of 2018 that the new york times was reporting that trump might end up facing criminal charges from new york state prosecutors. as long ago is last summer, summer of 2020 the times is first to report that the scope of those prosecutors investigation of trump appeared to include several different types of alleged fraud, tax fraud, bank fraud, insurance fraud. in december, december 2020 was reported that those prosecutors that hired a big very capable forensic accounting firm, consulting firm that's very good at going through not only financial evidence but they're particularly good at going through large volumes of financial evidence. that was in december of 2020. in february 2021, this year, it

was reported that that office pursuing potential charges against trump had brought in a ring or. they had brought in an outside, their former prosecutor who had left that light behind and got into a private practice in the da's office recruited him back into the public service is specifically that he could run point on the trump organization -- on the trump investigation being pursued by state prosecutors. he's a lawyer who has considerable experience with white collar crime and fraud cases. he also has some high-end and fairly glory mafia prosecution experience as well, for what that's worth. but just days after we learned that they brought in that wringer prosecutor as well as the forensic accounting firm to handle data. just days after that became publicly known, we've learned that both of those things, the consulting firm and the

prosecutor would come in particularly handy in the trump case because the supreme court ruled in late february that millions of pages of trump's financial business in tax records would be handed over to the prosecutors. good to have an experienced white collar lawyer working on running points on that investigation. also good to have the consulting, firm the forensic accounting for that's good at handling huge amounts of data. in late february, they got huge amounts of data on trump and his business interests. and then, earlier this month we got this unusual public statement from the attorney general office in new york saying that part of that offices civil investigation into trump had been moved into the same state prosecutor's office because that had morphed from a civil matter into a criminal matter. so we've seen from the initial reporting from criminal charges

from new york state prosecutors based on the da's office in manhattan, from that initial reporting going back to the summer of 2018 we've sort of been putting up to today. the timeline of all of those steps, potentially facing charges. opening criminal investigation and that adding a lot of resources to be able to handle a lot of information. being given criminal parts of other investigations that started in other offices. it's all been leading towards this revelation today in the washington post. that timeline leading up to the reporting today makes this not a surprise even though it is still kind of a shock to see it in black and white but the washington post reporting tonight is 24 paragraphs long. you have to get 22 paragraphs into the 24 paragraph long story before they know sort of as an aside, oh by the way,

know former u.s. president has ever been charged with a crime. oh yeah, right, this is never happened before. this is kind of a big deal. but even the presidents allies in confederates have seen this coming to a certain extent and we know that because two different news outlets separately reported in recent weeks, first the new york magazine and politico.com separately reported that florida officials have recently been meeting to discuss the possibility that trump might be indicted while he's at his house in florida. while he's at his mar-a-lago resort. they've been meeting to discuss the prospect that if a warrant was issued for trump's arrest for him to face criminal trial in new york, could florida's republican governor ron desantis tried to intervene to block trump's extradition to new york? i mean, they've been having these live discussions. this isn't like a party game. this is something they've been trying to come up with

contingency plans for. expecting that an arrest warrant for president trump might be issued. so again, not necessarily a surprise i guess since a lot of this was foreseeable and a lot of people have been preparing for this in observable ways but it's still shocking. and for all of these sort of unimaginable itty of former president facing criminal charges with this particular former president, there is a lot of these previously unimaginable prospects to keep an eye on. i mean, this is reporting tonight about new york state prosecutors convening a grand jury to consider a potential invite indictment for it. but the same president is also facing the possibility of a criminal indictment in the state of georgia, where they're investigating his efforts to interfere with the administration of the presidential election in georgia last fall. also in that investigation, a grand jury has been convened to

hear evidence. even back up in new york, in the civil part of the case that's ongoing, that made big news when we learned that part of that case had been hived off of a criminal matter in the da's office. but the civil part of that investigation continues and that's nothing to sneeze at. off, and the attorney generals office brought a devastating civil case against trump's sham, fraudulent trump university. that resulted not only the trump university being shut down, it also resulted in trump having to pay $25 million. that same office brought a devastating civil case against trump's sham fraudulent authority. it resulted in the also being shut down and having to pay millions of dollars in penalty. that's the same office that's still pursuing a civil investigation of the trump

organization of its business. even though it -- for criminal prosecution and seconded to its prosecutors from the attorney generals office one going over to the da 's office to collaborate with them and work on that criminal case. all of these things are questions of serious potential liability for the president. and then there's the question of what's happening as a federal level. the prospect of federal criminal charges against former president trump, and every time we report on this i feel a little cycle in my ear that tells me attorney general merrick garland has eaten another fistful of mint flavored tubs. i get a little notification here when that happens. it's just absolutely possible that attorney general merrick garland and the new york justice department wants absolutely nothing to do with the potentially criminal trailing ends of the last

presidency. they just don't seem like it. but they can only pretend so hard for so long and that's something that's been left for them to deal with. i mean, this is all happening at once. here tonight is this news of state prosecutors of new york convening a special grand jury to work intensively over a period of six months, meaning three days a week to weigh potential criminal charges against trump and those connected to his business. that's dramatic, right? but at least that's state and not federal but the federal thing keeps creeping up on the biden justice department and i'm not sure how long they're going to be able to avoid the question. i mean, within the last 24 hours with what's happening in new york the potential federal cases is rearing its head. all of this stuff is happening at once. within the last 24 hours, we learned that don mcgahn, trump's former white house

counsel, the star witness for the allegations that he might have committed felony obstruction of justice multiple times, we just learned last night that he's going to testify against that alleging behavior. he's gonna be testifying for the first time. don mcgahn spoke to prosecutors in the mueller investigation, which is why we know he's the main witness for the most serious allegations when it comes to obstruction charges. but mcgahn has never testified about any of it. while trump was still in office, he blocked mcgahn from getting testimony. now that trump is no longer in office, mcgahn is not going to be blocked from testifying and it's a funny story as to why. it has to do with money and someone who's feeling a little cheap around the edges these days. this is from charlie savage at the new york times.

immediately after -- a lawyer for mr. trump had conveyed and that the former president trump intended to intervene in the case. former presidents can't invoke executive privilege and he could've sought order blocking him from testifying. but late last week, that same lawyer for trump said that actually trump would not be intervening after all. trump's lawyer is said to provide no reason for the above phase. while he was president, mr. trump vowed to stonewall all congressional subpoenas and taxpayer funded lawyers with the justice department fought lengthy court battles that succeeded in running out the clock on the possibility that congress would obtain the information they were seeking before the 2021 election. now that mr. trump is no longer president, however and therefore no linger hats access to taxpayer funded lawyers, there is at least one major difference in how he's approaching this matter now.

quote, to keep living litigating over the matter now, mr. trump would now have to pay the legal costs. he'd have to pay himself for lawyers to try to block mcgahn from testifying? himself? we all know that the myth is not like to pay for things himself. and so he will no longer try to block don mcgahn's testimony. he would have to pay lawyers in order to try to do that. and so don mcgahn is going to testify to congress next week. don mcgahn is going to testify to the potential obstruction of justice next week. he's going to testify for the first time on that matter and put all of that alleged criminal objects obstruction of justice and put him back in the eye and play. none of those things are things that happened outside of the statue limitations. why was trump never criminally charged in conjunction with those very serious allegations already? turns out the kind of a funny

story about that as well. the mueller report laid out hundreds of pages of detailed evidence of trump committing obstruction of justice. on the mueller report came out, as soon as it was submitted that -- bill barr immediately volunteered to the public and to congress about the oath that despite all of that evidence laid out so carefully by mueller. no trump would not be charged with obstruction of justice. was that because the justice department has a long-standing policy that says a president can't be criminally charged? is that why trump won't face charges? now. barr told the public that he told congress explicitly no. barr said, when the mueller report came out, that it was immaterial it. didn't matter at all that trump, because he's president, is immune from being prosecuted. barr said that didn't even come into play. he didn't even have to factor that into his decision because he said trump didn't need immunity.

he said trump was innocent. he consulted with justice department lawyers about all the evidence that was laid out by mueller and he concluded on the basis of that evidence that none of that was a crime. none of that was all that series and there was nothing to prosecute. trump didn't need immunity. he was innocent. earlier this month, a judge in washington d.c. issued a scathing ruling that basically said that's not what happens. in a case about whether the justice department has to release something about the internal documents of whether to prosecute trump, the judge ruled that the way bill barr described that decision, his supposed exoneration of trump, is not actually what happened. she ordered the justice department to release their internal memo about the potential prosecution of trump for obstruction of justice. she gave that justice information yesterday to either release that documents or appeal her ruling.

late last, night after we were off the air the justice department told that judge that they are going to appeal her ruling. they still fight to keep secret that stuff about potentially bringing federal criminal charges against trump and how the justice department came to its decision on its matters. and listen, i understand why bill barr and the trump trust is department wanted to keep the reasoning about whether or not to bring federal criminal charges against president trump. that's easy to understand. why is the pro justice department under biden doing the same thing though? i'm honestly not sure. i don't, know you don't know either. anyone telling you they know for sure either doesn't really know where they work from their garland at the justice department right now in which case they shouldn't be talking to you about this. but i'll just finish with this, with two things to know about the justice department under merrick garland making a

decision to appeal this judges ruling, to try to continue to keep secret the document that trump slush justice department prepared about whether or not to charge him with criminal obstruction of justice. the first thing to know about the justice department now appealing the judge is ruling in fighting to keep this document secret. the first thing to know about it is that the brief file here, the reasoning explained is humility a leading. it's objects and humiliating. throughout the brief filed with the court late last night the justice department the current justice department is just crawling and scraping about how they didn't mean with a sudden how sorry they are in that it looks the way that the judge thought it looks but they didn't mean for it to look that way and now in retrospect they can see how misleading their previous statement seem to the court but really please couldn't they be forgiven for all of that? and i know you think i'm being hyperbolic but this is the

actual language from the brief that has now been filed with the court. quote, in retrospect the government acknowledges that it's briefs could've been clear and it deeply regrets the confusion at cost. but the government's counsel did not intend to mislead the court. we regret the language that was in precise and the government's brief and the confusion that it's caused. quote, we regret that we didn't make this distinction clear in our briefing. the government now recognizes that several statements in his briefing were susceptible to an interpretation. these passages could've been clear, and the government regrets they were not. the second insert third sentences cove have been ordered differently to avoid confusion. with the benefit of hindsight, the government regrets that it's declarations that briefs did not state expressly -- i mean, this is gross. this is humiliating. this is the justice department now, under merrick garland as

attorney general, bending over backwards like this to try to make it seem like the justice department under trump was acting in good faith and doing their best, and all the false and disingenuous things told the court about former president trump's liability to potential criminal prosecution. the false and disingenuous things they told not just the public, but also the court. it should all be forgiven. because we're so sure that they didn't mean it to be as bad as it seems. i can see the justice department under bill barr, the trump justice department making these kinds of representations about themselves and their own bad behavior here but why is it that the karlyn justice department trying to make this go away? trying to clean this up. we didn't really mean it. does it seem like we lied? we didn't mean to lie. we recognize it kind of looks like a lie but look at, us we would never lie.

that's one thing to know about it. the other thing to know about it or at least ask about is however this resolves with the justice department and what gets released to the public and what doesn't and this question of why the new attorney general is trying to paper over what barr did to protect trump and to try to a clue -- the question of trump's potential criminal liability. regardless of how that resolves, the question that's not live and kind of red-hot is whether not are not trump now is liable to federal prosecution for obstruction of justice by the justice department, right? whether or not he's liable for prosecution right now for the instances of alleged obstruction of justice that were laid out. none of those things are so far in the past that they were in the statute of limitations. unequivocally the barr era justice department never did

substance doubly consider obstruction charges. despite all the evidence laid out against, him and lying to the court and saying they looked at the evidence very clearly. they did not. it was never looked at. we never know. the question of whether or not trump should face federal criminal charges is no longer constrained by him being sitting president and therefore immune for prosecution. that nor longer applies and the question of potential prosecution of him for obstruction of justice has never been substantively looked at despite the detailed pages of evidence about those alleged crimes that was made public in the mueller investigation. so will the garland arab justice department now consider those charges? on top of everything else. hold that thought.

tonight... i'll be eating four cheese tortellini with extra tomatoes. [full emphasis on the soft a] so its come to this? [doorbell chimes] thank you. [doorbell chimes] bravo. careful, hamill. daddy's not here to save you. oh i am my daddy. wait, what? what are you talking about? ♪ [truck horn blares] (vo) the subaru forester. dog tested. dog approved. my name is monique, i'm 41, and i'm a federal contract investigator. as a single parent, i would run from football games to work

and trying to balance it all. so, what do you see when you look at yourself? i see a person that's caring. sometimes i care too much, and that's when i had to learn to put myself first, because i would care about everyone all the time but i'm just as they are. botox® cosmetic is fda approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. see for yourself at botoxcosmetic.com (computer beeps) (shaq) of serious side effemagenta? i hate cartridges. not magenta, not magenta. i'm not going back to the store.

magenta! cartridges are so... (buzzer) (vo) the epson ecotank. no more cartridges! it comes with an incredible amount of ink that can save you a lot of frustration. ♪♪ the epson ecotank. just fill and chill. when you're born and raised in san francisco, you grow up wanting to make a difference. that's why, at recology, we're proud to be 100% employee owned with local workers as diverse as san francisco. we built the city's recycling system from the ground up, helping to make san francisco the greenest big city in america but we couldn't do it without you. thank you, san francisco. gracias, san francisco. -thank you. -[ speaks native language ] let's keep making a differene together. in business, it's never just another day. it's the big sale, or the big presentation. the day where everything goes right. or the one where nothing does.

with comcast business you get the network that can deliver gig speeds to the most businesses and advanced cybersecurity to protect every device on it— all backed by a dedicated team, 24/7. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. it's been a whole different comcast business powering possibilities. show planned tonight.

this is one of those things where the news sneaks up on you, but we're now following these two big stories that are both sort of land it is a bit of a surprise. washington post first proposed that the prosecutors office running a criminal investigation into trump and his business. they're reporting that they've convened a special grand jury that's expected to meet -- excuse, me that's expended to last for six months. they're considering potential criminal charges in conjunction with the trump case. a six month throw is far longer than a typical grand jury needs which is suggesting that this is a complex case for which prosecutors need an intense amount of focus over a prolonged period of time from that grand jury. also, simultaneously because anytime you're wipers are on, your headlights should be to. also we're following this puzzling story of the justice department now under president biden obviously appealing a judges order to release documents about the potential

federal prosecution of former president trump on expressed shun of justice charges. i say these stories are both a bit of a surprise but one group that did see this last part coming where the democrats in this that it of the judiciary committee. they were a letter to mary garland, the head of this decision telling him not to appeal the judges order in this case. telling him basically it's a terrible idea to appeal the judges order. you should release those documents about potential prosecution and president trump. do not fight to keep them safe secret from the public. attorney general garland nevertheless did decide to appeal the judges ruling. and so joining us now is rhode island u.s. senator sheldon whitehouse. he's a member of the judiciary committee. he's one of the senators who signed that letter telling karlyn not to do this. i should tell you he's also a former federal prosecutor for the state of rhode island. senator, thank you for joining

us. it's great to see you. >> thanks. wonderful to be with you. >> what was the basis of your case to attorney general merrick garland that shouldn't appeal that ruling from the judge, that he should facilitate the public learning about what the former justice department to potentially charge president trump. >> well obviously it was very controversial decision at the time and there was a lot of anger about what's going on with the department of justice. and then along comes the decision from judge jackson that required the report be disclosed and in doing so she made some powerful findings. particularly from the legal counsel had been dissing genuine to the court which had

brutally strong language from a federal prosecutor it to a senior prosecutor high up in the department of justice. they filed under oath already here, were so inconsistent with the evidence that they're not worthy of credence. that's an unbelievably strong comment from a federal judge. it's not the first harsh commentary of legal counsel so at this point it really to us made no sense not to just clear the air of this, go with the judges decision with the department and every reason to pursue it. but then they'll drag the department through the nightmare of its own statements and misleading statements to the court. we're right to read all of that apologetic makeup stuff that we've tried to do but the department of justice should never be there in the first

place. that's why you're the department of justice. it's not so the judge is disingenuous to the court and they can file the affidavits that are inconsistent with the evidence they don't merit credence. >> in terms of what the justice department to do now, obviously you disagree with this decision to appeal the judges ruling they think that this material should be made public and that would be a source of continued litigation it will be decided in court ultimately. but what about the substantive question that's at the heart of this which is that the justice department under the previous president being confronted with pages of detailed evidence of being potentially coming being obstruction of justice while he's president? we now know it's because of this litigation that the justice department never substantively considered that evidence. should they now substantively

consider that evidence? >> if you said that you didn't consider the policy that a sitting president can't be indicted so that's not your reason for not proceeding and you have considered whether to proceed or made the decision not to proceed on the merits i think it's a question that you then have to be prepared to defend. what it looks like is they really never made that decision. part of judge jackson's anchor i think is that they were treating it as pre-decisional so determination about the president's culpability, what was actually strategic public relation framing of how they're going to roll out the performance that they're engaged in. and she, i think, properly said i think that's not decision

when what you're doing is trying to talk about why you telling the public. so i think they have a lot of problems that the case opens up that near pursues. if the fire was absolute that the sitting president can't be indicted and that's past. that's the decision for garland to have to make and the longer that he keeps us open, the more alive this is going to stay. the more the pressure is going to feel the real decision at this point the department has not made a real decision on whether or not trump committed obstruction of justice and were entitled i think to that decision and to a credible defense. >> sheldon whitehouse, thank you for joining us. you're in a unique position to be able to help us understand the context here. thanks for being with us

tonight, i really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> we've got much more ahead tonight, stay with us. y with us. this is the checkers game where grandson and grandad will bond. this is the kitchen where the new boyfriend will unofficially become family. these are the vrbo vacation homes

waiting for your family. feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin. and 24-hour relief from symptoms caused by over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. try claritin cool mint chewabls for powerful allergy relief plus a cooling sensation. live claritin clear. 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.

this academic year has been, um, challenging. but i think there's so much success to celebrate. woman: it's been a year like no other. man: yet, for educators across california, the care, compassion, and teaching has never stopped. woman: addressing their unique needs... man: ...and providing a safe learning environment students could count on. woman: join us in honoring the work of educators. together, we will build a better california for all of us. together, we will build a better all of this started when we discovered the benefits of local, raw honey for our family. and then we said "hey, you know what? this is a business right here." we went out and started to sell it. to help us get going, we got the chase business complete banking ℠ account. it's more than a bank account. it comes with quickaccept, which lets us take card payments anytime, anywhere, and get same-day deposits at no extra cost. it's more than honey. it's about building something for our family that will endure. vice president harris swore in

the new chief of the civil rights division, kristen clark to vote to confirm miss clark to place earlier today in the senate just one republican susan collins of maine joined all the democrats in the senate to confirm kristen clark here but becomes the first african american woman to ever become the civil rights chief at the u.s. department. what a moment to take over that job in that place. kristen clark's swearing incomes today as people gathered in minneapolis outside the corner store where george floyd drew his last breath exactly one year ago today. we'll have minneapolis police

officer knelt on his neck for more than nine minutes while mr. floyd pleaded for his life. mr. floyd's death sparked months of mass protest around the world and the murder conviction of the officer who killed him notwithstanding, his death prompted sustained and serious calls for systemic police reform. today, on the first anniversary of george floyd's death mr. floyd's family visited the president and vice president at the white house and met with congressional leaders. they're attempting to use the momentum from the anniversary to try to move the george floyd justice and policing act. this is a bill that's passed the house, and is stuck in the senate. mr. floyd's family and the white house are trying to do everything they can to get unstuck, to get it passed. cheryl leads the educational fund at the naacp also is marking the anniversary today by among other things

reflecting on the progress toward police reform that's happened since floyd's death. the progress that's been made possible by the outcry and the protest that's happened ever since floyd was killed. she said this today online, she said quote, much will be said about where things stand a year after the murder of george floyd. did protests make a difference? has everything changed? yes. is there much more to do and are we facing a strong backlash? yes and yes. joining us now is cheryl, miss eyeful it's an honor to have you here tonight on this big day. thank you for being with us. >> thank you rachel. >> tell me about the progress that you see is having been made in the past year and what you think made that progress possible. yes it's important to take a moment and to recognize what

shifts have happened because the truth is black people are still being killed by the police. they're being killed by police during the derek chauvin murder trial after the derek chauvin murder trial and so i don't and anybody want to suggest that were out of the woods at the kinds of shifts that need to happen have happens, but i also want to be clear about the fact that some really important shifts have happens. one of the most important, rachel, is just the narrative in the conversation that we're having about the nature of policing. we're not just talking about individuals or even individual cities. we are talking about reimagining public safety and talking about being on mental health calls. we're talking about the need for supporting the social services that we've starves and use law enforcement and its place in terms of dealing with the homeless and addressing

issues of poverty and mental illness and so forth and so the whole conversation gets shifted but there's also been a policy shifts. there are multiple states require officers to intervene when they see misconduct happening. multiple jurisdiction have ended qualified immunity from police officers including new york city and colorado and mexico. maryland passed a huge bill ending the law enforcement officers bill of rights and requiring transparency of records, of police officer misconduct in new york city repealed the famous law 50 a that prevented the disclosure of disciplined records of police officers and many more. they're jurisdictions that it removes schools from police. there is jurisdictions that have stopped them from engaging in certain kinds of conduct. there's certain jurisdictions that are saying that mental health professionals will be the first line of defense for mental health calls.

we don't want to forget that those changes are happening because we saw the last ever in the united states last summer. >> i know the kristen clark's nomination is something that is close to your heart and she is an alum of the organization on her confirmation is a landmark moment, first african american woman to hold that post. it's also critically important is going to hold that post. i wonder if you could talk a little bit about how you think the justice department under merrick garland has done so far. on civil rights issues and on issues of police reform and even advance of miss clark taking her position tonight. >> it matters who leads the department of justice and we see that already. the department is already opened an investigation into minneapolis police department

which floyd was killed. they've opened investigation into the louisville police department where breonna taylor was killed. we are already seeing that really important see change and it will intensify i think in weeks and months. she's not only the first black woman to be confirmed for this post, she's the first woman to be confirmed for this post. and that's because of the derailment of the nomination of lonnie, many years ago in the early 1990s. she was addicted to the smear campaign that they tried and kristen clark. they tried on anita cup to who is now associate attorney general. but i'm really proud of the community for fighting back, for fighting for these two extraordinary women who are going to be bringing the swath of civil rights experience in the department of justice. and so organization lot more changes happening. now they've got their hands full. it's not just placing, let's be clear.

we just did an extensive segments this week on voting rights, what's happening in arizona with the audit. there's a lot of work for the department of justice to do the civil rights division during bill barr and jeff sessions as opposed to matt whitaker's tenure as attorney general. so there's a lot to do to pull the department up. it's already happening and it's going to i think defy -- they've been dear friends of mine but i'm going to be pushing them from the outside as government lawyers and i'm gonna be in my role as a civil rights lawyer. >> i have absolutely no doubt about that whatsoever and it is heartening to hear you say and to hear you say it with that smile on your face knowing how much you mean it. cheryl eiffel, legal defense and educational fund it's a really big day today. thanks for being here.

>> thanks so much rachel, good night. >> we'll be right back, stay with us. with us. aleve is proven stronger and longer on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. ♪ na na na na ♪ na na na na... ♪ hey hey hey. ♪ goodbye.

♪ na na na na... ♪ hey hey hey. ♪ goodbye. ♪ na na na na ♪ na na na na... the world's first six-function multipro tailgate. available on the gmc sierra. i was drowning in student loan debt. i was in the process of deferring them, paying them... then i discovered sofi. completely changed my life. lower interest rate. my principal is going down.

sofi is a place where you can start to tackle those money goals today. compared to where i was three years ago, i'm kinda killing it. ♪♪ with relapsing forms of ms... there's a lot to deal with. not just unpredictable relapses. all these other things too. it can all add up. kesimpta is a once-monthly at-home injection... that may help you put these rms challenges in their place. kesimpta was proven superior at reducing the rate of relapses, active lesions, and slowing disability progression vs aubagio. don't take kesimpta if you have hepatitis b, and tell your doctor if you have had it, as it could come back. kesimpta can cause serious side effects, including infections. while no cases of pml were reported in rms clinical trials, it could happen. tell your doctor if you had or plan to have vaccines, or if you are or plan to become pregnant. kesimpta may cause a decrease in some types of antibodies.

the most common side effects are upper respiratory tract infection, headache, and injection reactions. ready for an at-home treatment with dramatic results? it's time to ask your doctor about kesimpta. cal: our confident forever plan is possible with a cfp® professional. a cfp® professional can help you build a complete financial plan. visit letsmakeaplan.org to find your cfp® professional. ♪♪ in business, it's never just another day. it's the big sale, or the big presentation. visit letsmakeaplan.org to find your cfp® professional. the day where everything goes right. or the one where nothing does. with comcast business you get the network that can deliver gig speeds to the most businesses and advanced cybersecurity to protect every device on it— all backed by a dedicated team, 24/7. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. comcast business powering possibilities. still to language he confesses

to everything they told to confess to. you see the marks on his forehead, also his nose appears to be a little out of whack. his father told reuters that since his son has been in custody the shape of his sons knows his change. he says he thinks it was broken. he said it looks like they've applied a lot of makeup to his son's face as well to cover up. he would know better than anyone, right? with the face of this 26 year old journalist looks like, right? because it is that. not long after the passenger plane was forced down that this 26-year-old kid was arrested by

the regime in belarus, u.s. secretary of state complaint damn the arrest of the journalist said that the united states government demands his release. lots of other european nations have echoed that demand as well but that was two days ago. he is still in custody in belarus. they apparently have no immediate plans to let him go. i don't know how this is going to end but it must. more ahead tonight, stay with us. us this is the epson ecotank color printer. no more buying cartridges. big ink tanks. lots of ink. print about... this many pages. the epson ecotank. just fill and chill. ♪ when i was young ♪ no-no-no-no-no please please no. ♪ i never needed anyone. ♪

front desk. yes, hello... i'm so... please hold. ♪ those days are done. ♪ i got you. ♪ all by yourself. ♪ go with us and find millions of flexible options. all in our app. expedia. it matters who you travel with. what makes new salonpas arthritis gel so good for arthritis pain? expedia. salonpas contains the most prescribed topical pain relief ingredient. it's clinically proven, reduces inflammation and comes in original prescription strength. salonpas. it's good medicine.

feel the cool rush of claritin cool mint chewables. powerful 24-hour, non-drowsy, allergy relief plus an immediate cooling sensation for your throat. feel the clarity, and live claritin clear.

another day, another chance. it could be the day you break the sales record, or the day there's appointments nonstop. with comcast business, you get the network that can deliver gig speeds to the most businesses, and you can get the advanced cybersecurity solutions you need with comcast business securityedge. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. get started with a great offer, and ask how you can add comcast business securityedge. plus, for a limited time, ask how to get a $500 prepaid card when you upgrade. all right, that's gonna do it call today.

for us tonight. my big plan is that no news is going to happen tomorrow which will allow us to do the whole show that we had planned for today before the news blew it up. we're just carrying it over, assuming that news will still be fresh tomorrow, right? good plan? why not. i'll see you again tomorrow night, we're all be doing yesterday's news. now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell, good evening lawrence. >> rachel i'm actually planning to do a short script that i wrote for monday night tomorrow night. it's still newsworthy, it's a nice little story. but who knows, i was planning to do it tonight. that's off. we are now going to have to stock up on our list of former assistant manhattan district attorneys as it seems with the impaling of the grand jury