he hasn't, not at all. i wrote the bill. on the environment. but don't let up now. pay them more. if it grows the economy. >> our friends at the >> happy to have the air tonight. this is from the judges order. it says quote, part of the mission of the minneapolis police department is to give citizens voice and respect. here mr. chauvin, rather than

pursuing the npd mission, treated mr. george floyd without respect. and denied him the dignity owed to all human beings, which he certainly would've extended to a friend or neighbor. in the courts view, 270 months is the appropriate sentence. today, former minneapolis police officer derek chauvin was sentenced to 270 months, 22 and a half years, in prison. for the murder that are last may of george floyd. mr. chauvin has been in prison since april, since a jury found him guilty of second degree murder, third degree murder and second degree manslaughter. all for him holding his knee on george floyd's neck until mr. floyd was rendered unconscious and then he died on a minneapolis street corner. mr. chauvin was eligible to receive a theoretical maximum sentence of 40 years in prison for second degree murder. but the theoretical maximum associated with any particular crime is put up against state

base sentencing guidelines, and considering the fact that mr. chauvin had no criminal history, the minnesota state guidelines for sentence in this case actually recommended a presumptive sentence of about 12 and a half years. now, judges can depart from those sentencing guidelines and in particular, they can depart upward if they're aggravating factors that make the crime worse than a base level offense that that my presumptive sentence might have applied. to the judge in this case ruled there were four different aggravating factors that made this case essentially worse. that made it worthy of a longer sentence than 12 and a half years. but it was nevertheless striking today to see the judge go a decade beyond that present have guideline here, with this 22 and a half year sentence. in the sentencing order today the judge spelled out his reasoning for issuing a more severe punishment than the guidelines would have suggested

at baseline. he said he issued the sentence because mr. chauvin abused his position of trust and authority. because they treated george floyd with particular cruelty. because children were present during the commission of the offense. and because mr. chauvin committed the crime as a group, with the active participation of three other individuals. all those four aggravating factors to the judge, justified a departure from the presumptive 12 and a half year sentence, up to the 22 and a half years that he handed down. but that last point, that last aggravating factor, committed this crime as a group with the active participation of other individuals. that is a important reminder that the legal fallout from floyd's murder on that minneapolis street corner, last year, it's not over. the three other police officers who were present for the murder of mr. floyd, have also been charged in state court for aiding and abetting that killing. they are set to strand trial early next year. there are ongoing legal consequences beyond that for

those other three officers and for derek chauvin, to. earlier this year, the u.s. justice department brought federal charges against chauvin and those other three officers. that chart trial has not yet been scheduled. but with this 22 and a half year sentence today, derek chauvin becomes only the second police officer in minneapolis history, excuse me, modern minnesota history, to be put in prison for murdering someone walmart on-duty as a police officer. nationwide police officer sent to prison after comey committing a crime on duty is less than 15 years. but here we are today, the actual incentives to 22 and a half years. today in court, during derek chauvin's sentencing hearing, several members of george floyd's family gave your are called victim impact statements. statements for people who are affected by this crime. the first of those victim impact statements came from george floyd's seven year old daughter who is allowed to give her statement, but not present

because of her age. it's a cell phone video. it was played in open court today. and you can see her here. she's speaking to someone off camera, talking about her father. >> what do you miss most about your dad? >> well, i ask about him all the time. and that's kind of it. >> yeah. when you ask about him, what are you asking about? >> i was asking how did my dad get hurt? >> do you wish that he was still here with us? >> yeah. but he is. >> through his spirit? >> yes. >> yes. and when you see your daddy again one day, what do you want

to do when you see him? >> i want to play with him. >> what kind of games do you want to play with him? >> i want to play with him. how fun. go on a plane ride. and thus it. >> yeah. >> we used to have dinner meals every single night before we went to bed. my daddy always used to have me brush my teeth. >> do you miss him helping you brush your teeth? >> yes. >> how do you hope that the world remembers him? >> well, they help him because some people did something to him. >> if you could say anything to your daddy right now, what would it be? >> it would be i miss you and i

love you. >> all right, thank you gianna. i really appreciate you asking answering questions today. >> that victim impact statement was the first time that seven-year-old gianna floyd's voice was heard in that courtroom. after her statement, the core also heard from george floyd's cousin and from his two brothers. they testify today in person. and then the defense, mr. joe chauvin side, call just one packed victim, derek chauvin's mother. who can proclaimed his innocence and asked for leniency on his behalf. chauvin himself also gave brief remarks in which he offered his condolences to the floyd family. he also said somewhat cryptically to the floyd family's, there's going to be other information in the future that would be of interest. and i hope things will give you some peace of mind. he directed that to the floyd family. i'm not sure what he meant. your judge top all of those

statements into account before handing down what is the longest sentence of any police officer in modern minnesota history. one of the longest sentences ever handed down for police officer for use of force case on the line of duty. the case against chauvin was initially brought, minnesota's governor essentially took the job of prosecuting chauvin away from the county prosecutor, who would normally have overseen a case like this in the normal course of events. governor wallace took the case out of the traditional system that has led to so many failed indictments and negligible sentences. not just in minnesota, but everywhere across the country. he took that away from the county prosecutor and he gave this case to minnesota's attorney general, keith ellison. and it was ellison who assembled the team of prosecutors that ultimately obtain not only a conviction here, but now as of today, and historic sentence as well. shortly after the sentence was handed down, attorney general keith ellison made a statement alongside those prosecutors. alongsid>> the outcome of this s

critically important. but by itself, it's not enough. my hope for our country is that this moment gives us pause and allows us to rededicate ourselves to the real societal change that will move us much further along the road to justice. i'm not talking about the kind of change that takes decades. i'm talking about real change, concrete xinjiang, that real people can do now. >> that is minnesota attorney general keith ellison, who joins us now live exclusively. in the wake of this sentencing decision, today. >> mister attorney general, thank you so much for making time. it's an honor to have you here tonight. >> thank you, thanks for having me. >> you made remarks today talking about this being not justice, but something on the way towards justice. overall, what do you think people in this country should think about this sentence today?

how do you view it numerically in terms of the balance between what was proven and what was within the courts power? >> it was a historically long sentence for this offense. but at the same time, no matter how much time judge cahill gave derek chauvin, it would never restore george floyd. and that beautiful child that you just showed, her daddy won't walk her down the aisle one day. won't be at her sweet 16 birthday party. those brothers of his will now not be able to plea -- laugh about the old times. because he's gone. that means to me that there's really no sentence vest truly satisfying. but this sentence is historically lengthy. it is a stiff sentence. though the judge did not want to, and did not intend to send

a message, there was a message that was sent. which is that if you commit a murder, whether you wear a badge or not, you can face a very serious consequences. and your role as a state actor is not going to shield you from responsibility and accountability. >> it was interesting today to see the judge talk about the aggravating factors that he used to justify northward departure, an upward departure, from what had been otherwise 12 and a half year sentence under minnesota sentencing guidelines. one of those was that he acted in a group with other individuals who were involved. i know that the judge, that the case of the other three officers, the state charges against the other three officers, for aiding and abetting this murder -- that trial has been pushed. it was otherwise going to be an august. it has been pushed to early next year. in part because of concerns in the court that there's essentially too much heat.

there's a desire on the part of the judge but some distance between the chauvin trial and that next round. what should the people of minnesota and the people of this country expect from that next trial of the other three officers? and ultimately, what is your perspective on the federal charges that are still pending against all four of these short officers? >> rachel, i'm a little bit limited on what i'm allowed to say. but what i will see is, those three individuals are presumed innocent. but there is probable cause for the charges of aiding and abetting the second degree murder, third degree murder and manslaughter against them. and we expect to put their case in front of 12 jurors of their peers, and present evidence. and we expect that the charges that we made will be found to be true by that jury. but that remains to be seen. they're presumed emerson. they have the right to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. and we're moving forward to

hold them accountable as well. >> i'm sorry to interrupt you, before he speaks to the federal charges, do you support the decision to move that trial to early next year rather than hold at the end of the summer? >> no. that was a decision by the court, on the courts when prerogatives. we were ready for an august trial. and we were getting ready for it but the court within its own judgment felt it would be better to move it. so, we don't contest that decision. but moving on to the federal charges, there are different in nature. so, as a state were vindicating our duty to make sure that people don't have to be favorable -- the federal government is making sure that people civil's rights are vindicated. so, these are civil rights charges. they are very serious charges. and if you look at the federal

sentencing guidelines, when death is a result of a serious civil rights violation, you can be facing life in prison. so, those are serious charges. and beyond that, a lot of federal authorities handle that. i think they're proper, they're appropriate. and i'm glad the justice department is taking this seriously. justi>> i want to ask you about something that happened in court today. i'm not sure anybody knows exactly what it means. i'm not sure if you know what it means. but i wanted to get your reaction to it. the defendant today, before he was sentenced, mr. chauvin gave very brief remarks in which he addressed mr. floyd's family. he said that there is going to be some other information in the future that would be of interest, and i hope will give you some peace of mind. it seemed both a little strange and potentially ominous. do you have any insight into what mr. chauvin was talking about? or alternately, do you have any reaction to what he said there?

>> well, i only have speculation, rachel. obviously that was the first what he said was the first time i heard it. we obviously took our own guesses. but we don't have any solid information on exactly what he meant. i will see i think it is good that he offered his condolences. i think when you take a loved one away from someone, is the least you can do is say that. but there's clearly more that could be said. but i can't say that i definitively what he was referring to. >> keith ellison, who was in the singular position of organizing this prosecution which resulted not only in the historic verdict but in today's historically along sentence for derek chauvin. mister attorney general, this has been an exhausting process and there's lots more still to come. thank you for helping us understand tonight. >> thank you.

>> we've got more news ahead tonight, stay with us. ght, stay with us. can we be besties, simone biles? i guess? yessss! should we dismount now? (upbeat music) - [narrator] this is kate. she always wanted her smile to shine. now, she uses a capful of therabreath healthy smile oral rinse to give her the healthy, sparkly smile she always wanted. (crowd cheering) therabreath, it's a better mouthwash. at walmart, target and other fine stores. hearing is important to living life to the fullest. that's why inside every miracle-ear store, you'll find better laughs at family barbecues. you'll find a better life is in store at miracle-ear, when you experience the exclusive miracle-ear advantage. including innovative technology, like the new miracle-earmini. so powerful, yet it's nearly invisible. we're so confident we can improve your life, we're offering a 30-day risk-free trial. call 1-800-miracle today and experience the miracle-ear advantage.

many supplements offer a single nutrient call 1-800-miracle today and experience to support immune health, but is that really enough? qunol immune combines 7 key nutrients to help support immune health. the brand i trust is qunol. feeling sluggish or weighed down?

it could be a sign that your digestive system isn't working at it's best taking metamucil everyday can help. metamucil psyllium fiber, gels to trap and remove the waste that weighs you down. it also helps lower cholesterol and slows sugar absorption to promote healthy blood sugar levels. so you can feel lighter and more energetic metamucil. support your daily digestive health. and try metamucil fiber thins. a great tasting and easy way to start your day.

look...if your wireless carrier was a guy, you'd leave him tomorrow. not very flexible. not great at saving. you deserve better - xfinity mobile. now, they have unlimited for just $30 a month. $30 dollars. and they're number 1 in customer satisfaction. his number? delete it. deleting it. so break free from the big three. xfinity internet customers, take the savings challenge at xfinitymobile.com/mysavings or visit an xfinity store to learn how our switch squad makes it easy >> the prosecutor starts off to switch and save hundreds. with some immediate trauma in the presentation. it's one of those presentations that goes big right out of the gate. which is good provided it all rose out smoothly. but here's how it goes. prosecutor stands up adjusts the mic and says this is a case about greed.

but not greed for money. great for power. the judge. i'm sorry, i'm going to interrupt. [laughs] what? i'll interrupt, pull the mic way up close are not going to hear a word. you can start over, if you'd like, because i didn't hear you. [laughs] the prosecutor in this case, like, you've practiced the whole first line, right? the whole point of this part of the trial is like seize the moment, take the floor. this is a case of -- just start over. adjust the mic. she starts over. prosecutor, this is a case about greed. but not greed for money, greed for power. for prestige, for importance. it's about this man, stephen caulk who wanted a powerful government title and gave out millions of titles and bank loans to try and get it. he was the chairman and ceo of a bank called the federal savings bank. he pushed his bank to lend $16 million to paul manafort, a

political lobbyist. why did he do it? he gave out millions because manafort gave him things that were even more valuable. a high profile spot on the presidential campaign. and manafort's help in getting him a top government job. in other, words he took a bribe from paul manafort. manafort gave him political favor and colleague gave him bank loans. this for that, loans for influence. ladies and gentlemen that's what this case is about and that is why you are here today. because the head of a bank to pay bribe from paul manafort because he used that are in short banking oversaw as is personal piggy bank to try and buy himself prestige and power. you are going to learn in this trial that in july, 2016, paul manafort came to the bank and asked for a loan. at the time, he was running the presidential campaign for donald trump. the bank had agreed to make the loan, and manafort put stephen calk on the trump campaign. you are going to learn the

manafort alone had all sorts of red flags at the bank but stephen calk didn't care. he pushed the loan forward. you're going to learn the bank made two loans to paul manafort. the first loan closed shortly after election night. once it became clear manafort could help stephen calk because trump had won the election. the second alone was approved five weeks later. once stephen calk knew manafort could try and help him get that top government job. a little interruption from the judge at the top, kind of steals the thunder, but bang right back into it. that's how the trial opened this week in a courtroom, federal courtroom in the southern district of new york. the allegation of the heart of this trial is that on the donald trump or president campaign, the campaign manager, campaign chairman was offering consideration for high-level u.s. government jobs in exchange for cash. in exchange for millions of dollars paid to him in the form of loans from a small bin western bank.

loans that definitely would not have gone to him. that he definitely did not qualify for. had he not -- he would not have received them from that bank kathy not been offering to make the bank presidents literally secretary of the army, provided the dude coughed up. she and her colleagues at the bank learned manafort's cuts were had recently dropped several hundred points to a point where it was so low, quote, most lenders are not lend who someone with a score like that. she explains her surprise at learning paul manafort had an unpaid 300,000 dollar balance on a credit card. that's something the bank had

to discover on its own because paul manafort didn't disclose it to them when he went to them for his loan. in september 2016 she gets an email from somebody else at a bank that says this. quote, and fyi, looks like these guys are in default to genesis. here's how that went on the stand. question, let's start with genesis. did you know who genesis was at the time? answer i believed it was another lender. what does it mean manafort was in default to genesis? it means he took out alone from this other lender and did not pay. question, why is it relevant to your bank manafort failed to pay a loan to a prior lender? answer, because if they didn't pay a loan to another lender, that makes us believe they won't pay our loan back either. rick so, surprise! turns out credit way below what they would lend anybody for. surprise, threw in $2,000 on a credit card he didn't tell you about. and surprise, actively defaulting on another loan. she explains how she and her colleagues then learned that

manafort had proposed to put up a property that he said he owned as collateral for the loan. they were surprised to learn there is a lean against that property, a mechanic saline because paul manafort had apparently hired somebody to work on that property and he didn't pay them either. and they found out actually he doesn't really own that property anyway. he neglected to mention he doesn't on the property outright which he had led them to believe. in fact, he has a two and a half million dollar mortgage out on that property already. he wants to use this property as collateral for the lone. it's got a two and a half million dollar mortgage against it. but, sorry, turns out he also forgot to mention another additional million dollars he had also borrowed against that same house. not again what is going to be the collateral for him getting millions more dollars in those from this bank. this bank that starting to figure out that this loan might not make sense on its face.

prosecutor, question, do you understand what he's saying here when he says what the hell? how could he be 1 million dollars off? answer, yes. what is he saying? answer, he is saying how could he have mistaken two and a half million for -- it to be three and a half million! when you say he, who is that he who made the million dollar mistake? answer, i believe it would be paul manafort. question, can you please read what he wrote in this message to your bank all colleagues? yes. i wrote, quote, he is so in debt. question, and who did you write this? to answer, i wrote it to the head underwriter at the bank. and this email, your comment to the head underwriter positive or negative about the manafort loans? are you saying a good thing or a bad thing about the loans to the head underwriter? answer, i'm saying a bad thing. quote, it became very obvious that this was a bad loan. the head underwriter and myself

were, quote, exasperated by the amount of negative information coming in about the lone. question, did you have any basis for knowing the underwriters fuse other than these emails that we've seen? yes, he and i spoke on the phone. question, do you remember anything he told you about the manafort loans? answer, i don't remember specifically. we were both in agreement that this loan was not good. question, did he provide you any advice on what to do? answer, yes. what advice did he provide you? answer, he told me to hold on to all the emails, or say all the emails because the fbi will be looking into this. [laughs] the defense pops up, objection. you know she was right. the fbi did ultimately end up looking into this, and the emails are handy. you know, it's something to have the employee from this bank, they are on the witness stand saying i did not believe

that the borough or paul manafort had the ability or the will to repay the loan. she said given the prospect of what this means for stephen calk i understood of my life experience that no matter what this loan would be made. she said, quote, i believe that the bank making this loan would result in stephen calk receiving some kind of appointment or advantage with the trump administration. quote, i believe there was no way that stephen calk would not make this loan because that would mean he would not get a position within the trump administration. trum this case is underway now in the southern district of new york. again, banks are federally insured. there is a federal government interest in making sure that banks don't get ripped off by people who are using banks as pick events to pay for government jobs which are not supposed to be able to buy. if you are supposed to buy, then you shouldn't be able to buy them by giving them money to paul freaking manafort. one of the things the former

presidents now pardoned campaign chairman said by federal prosecutors to have done is allegedly -- a dangle of a high ranking job in the trump administration for the low cost of $60 million. otherwise totally indefensible loans he never should have gotten and never would've qualified for. hot but the guy who he was offering, federal government positions to, if the guy would only pay paul manafort. the guy put in writing what exact jobs he wanted. in exchange for his bank's money, which she was stuffing and paul manafort's pockets. he made a list. quote, ambassadors i would like in rank order. [laughs] number one, united kingdom, france, germany, italy, spain, japan, ireland, australia, china, united nations, the eu, portugal. portugal after the eu? come on. he in addition to the ambassadorships you would like in rank order, he also had a

whole list of what he labeled's perspective rules in the trump administration, which goes to show you for one thing, the man could spell neither the word perspective nor the word roles. >> nevertheless. he thought paying donald trump's presidential trend campaign chairman millions of dollars would mean that he would be qualified for not only any one of those 12 different ambassadorships. he thought his number one perspective role was that he should be the top civilian official in charge of the united states army. in fact, after the dude of greed to pay up, the trump transition in fact interviewed him to potentially be secretary of the army. we got that confirmation on the witness stand from a very well-known witness. do you remember anthony scaramucci? the mooch. he spent like five minutes as white house communications director one summer. he testified this weekend as a

witness for the prosecution. scaramucci testified this week that that perspective rolls bank ceo guy, who was shortening the lifespan of all the employees at his bank by sending all the banks money to paul manafort, he is so indebted. scaramucci testified that he did take lots of communications, calls, texts and emails about getting stephen calk, that job. and in fact mr. calk did interview to be secretary of the army, although his name was never put forward as a nominee for the position. mr. scaramucci did kind of offer that the dude could be under secretary of the secretary if he would be good with that. mr. scaramucci on the witness stand, this week, in the southern district of new york, is reading text messages for the court prosecution. december 21st, 2016, seven 46% pm. scaramucci writes, reading out these text message in court. quote, would he take undersecretary of the army? are we double sure? and he says, if so, i think we

can get it done. prosecutor says if you cannot read this response from mr. manafort starting with the time and the message. scaramucci says, december 21st, 2016, 8:15 pm. quote, yes, he will death take it. question from the prosecutor. will mr. prime metaphor goes he will definitely take. it who did you understand him to be referring to? scaramucci says, stephen calk. stephen calk, the guy who just grabbed his back by the proverbial ankles, flipped it upside down so all the money would fall out into pale paul manafort's pockets. scaramucci didn't know, as far as we can tell, right, that manafort was getting paid by this guy. but this is the way the trump campaign work. manafort was the campaign chairman. so he's gonna make this guy undersecretary of the united states army. sure, why not? because that's what the trump campaign brought to the table. in addition to mr. scaramucci, who served as communications

director, also served in the trump transition. another trump transition official this week testified about how the vetting process worked around this guy who is involved in the alleged bribery scheme with manafort. honestly, a normal administrations, i think former officials will sometimes have little reunions, little get togethers. you know, how is your family? he still living in d.c.? let's catch. up in the trump administration, they're all just going to meet up at all the criminal proceedings they're going to be witnesses and now. a, haven't seen you since the rudy disbarment hearing. hey, you're going to be at the grand jury next week? you are in their, to? let me know how it goes with a subpoena. i know. i know, so hard to keep in touch. i keep having to get new phones, too. darn fbi. taking all my stuff. [laughs] being an ex trump administration official is a busy thing in a way that isn't true for other recent administrations going back to watergate. other than anthony scaramucci,

it worked -- his a.b. is corey like offer. he'll east now is still working in politics. he now works for the arizona republican senate leader who said at the scam audit of the arizona presidential election results. which i guess is another kind of work these folks can find for themselves. questioning the election results from 2020. today, the new york times was first to report that lorries for -- [inaudible] [inaudible] trump university was ultimately shut down and trump had to pay $25 million to settle that matter. then it was the trump foundation. trump's fake charity that was pursued also as a front scheme.

it, to, was shut down by new york prosecutors and trump was forced to pay millions of dollars. now it's the trump organization. it's his core business. and as early as next week, the trump organization itself looks like eight may be criminally charged. ht mayas well as potentially individual employees or executives. of the trump organization. now, whether or not the former president ever faces potential criminal charges himself in this matter. and there's no sign of that at this point. what this nevertheless represents is the right very real prospect that the former president will be forced out of business, with criminal charges that could come as soon as next week. think about how that arrives right now. think about the mindset that might be at play here. this word that the trump organization's lawyers actually met with prosecutors yesterday. they're trying to talk them out of filing these criminal

charges. prosecutors apparently made then made it known to them criminal charges are like lee and sun in a matter of days. that news arrived within a day of the presidents personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, having his license to practice law suspended in new york state. for a new york court found was his repeat take no in lines to the public and to the courts about trump's fantasy that he somehow didn't lose the last election. that news arrive yesterday within a day of michigan senate republicans, publicly debunking trump and giuliani's claims about the election being stolen in that state as well. last night, we learned that the effort to quote, audit the election results in the state of georgia, that effort is getting turned back by a state court in georgia. it looks like the trump supporters fantasy of doing to the presidential vote in georgia what they're doing to weigh in arizona, looks like that will not happen tight thanks to judges ruling, yesterday. today, we've learned that the u.s. justice department is

suing the state of georgia for voting restrictions that republicans passed into law in that state on the basis of all the supposed fraud that trump has been proclaiming happened in that state, in that election, which he lost. that justice department decision to sue georgia over that law is a huge deal. we're gonna have more on that coming up in a couple of minutes on the show. but like i said, take these things together. right? put these things together as bricks in the same wall. things are not going well in trump world right now. in a way that is, i think, worse than anything since the first week in january. i mean, from the trump campaign criminal bribery trial in the new york courtroom this week, which is turning into a little reunion of former trump officials appearing as witnesses for the prosecution. to the brick walls that trump is starting to hit with his election fraud fantasy about him somehow being reinstated as president. one thing if he would was quietly nurturing the hope. he's been crowing about it now for months. as it starts to become impossible and humiliating.

his public statements that he will be reinstated are things that he's up against himself, in terms of having to reconcile those two his supporters. you ever heard him say i was wrong? it turns out that's not going to happen? really? wr>>ong? and then there's the cold, hard consequences that trump world is starting to bash into in court. from losing his law license to these potential criminal charges against trump organization next week, which really could shut down his business. this is all quite bad, if you are donald trump. putting his business out of business, this is existentially challenging stuff to him. all of this stuff is piling on top of each other, in fairly short order. and i put these things together -- i can't predict the future and neither can you. and i know they said this one other time this week. but i just feel like it is worth having a heads up on this. you know, they say when things get weird, the word turned pro. wet things get quite this bad,

things also tend to get weird and radical. i'm not sure anybody can predict what is going to come next out of trump world, given all of the different pressure they're facing on all of these different sides. we do know the former president trump is planning some kind of political rally and lorraine county, ohio, tomorrow. we do know that another one of these crazy election conspiracy theory movies is going to be released this weekend. the big cyber ninjas audit that trump supporters have been running in arizona, it was supposed to end yesterday. but it's still happening. there are apparently still just keeping it going and nobody knows why or exactly what they are still doing. even as trump as his supporters proclaimed that the results of that will be that the vote is decertified and he is reinstated as president. they said on their own terms that they would be done, in april. then they said it will be done yesterday. they're not down. they're still doing something. and nobody knows what. none of this is good. but with this much pressure on

trump world right now, i do sort of think that anything is possible. i am hoping, for a very boring we can. i always am. lliance. 100% stain removal, 24 hour stain resistance to lock in your whitest smile. crest. the #1 toothpaste brand in america. announcer supermodel cindy crawford doesn't just walk the red carpet. she rocks it! and today, at over 50, she still steals the show. even vogue magazine exclaims, “at 52, cindy still looks as good as she did at 25!” us weekly calls it “proof that cindy does not age” what's cindy's secret? meaningful beauty supreme! the groundbreaking anti-aging system that has kept cindy's skin looking so surprisingly youthful for so long. ellen pompeo when you see the pictures of cindy at age 31 and then now at 52, her skin actually looks more radiant now then it did then. so... whatever she's doing is doing, i'm down to try. announcer with

meaningful beauty, frown lines appear diminished in just weeks! crow's feet are visibly softened, and under eye areas appear lifted. horizontal necklines appear dramatically diminished! blanche people definitely say, what are you using? and i say meaningful beauty. and they say, okay, well i guess i gotta go get some. announcer and now is the perfect time for you to experience meaningful beauty supreme because this special offer is cindy's best deal ever! normally $139 dollars, you'll pay only $49.95 for all five concentrated super treatments. and we'll even include free shipping. but wait. order right now we'll add cindy's glow and go trio, over $80 dollars' worth of bonus extras, free! first, the sensational glowing serum, cindy's secret to an instant, red-carpet-ready glow. next, the amazing triple exfoliating treatment and, cindy's incredible ultra lifting and filling treatment. april walker i'm about to turn 50 and people absolutely can't believe it. they say there's no way, there's no way. announcer meaningful beauty comes with a 60-day money-back

guarantee. take advantage of this amazing offer. only $49.95 for everything you see here. ellen pompeo these creams and serums are amazing. my skin appeared firmer even a little lifted, that's a great feeling! announcer call 1-800-358-5572 or go to meaningfulbeauty.com right now! when it comes to laundry, or go to meaningfulbeauty.com everyone thinks their way is the right way. i wash on delicate. i just stuff everything in. you have to wash on cold, because it saves energy. the secret is, tide pods work no matter how you wash. so, everyone is right. that is 22 and a half year it's got to be tide.

sentence being handed down former minneapolis police officer derek chauvin in the killing of george floyd. it is also a reminder of all the ways the federal governments, u.s. justice department, has stepped up so far on policing issues since the biden administration started. the federal investigation a pattern in practices investigation with the minneapolis police department. the federal charges brought against chauvin and three other officers on a trail yet to be scheduled. another pattern in louisville or breonna taylor was killed. federal hate crimes charges brought against three georgia men believed to be involved in the death of ahmaud arbery. before today it's interesting. we have seen a lot of action by the justice department when it comes to policing. civil rights issues. before today we had seen comparatively little action from the biden justice department when it comes to the other major responsibility of its civil rights division which is protecting voting rights.

you will remember the justice department sent a stern letter to arizona republicans last month warning them that their audit of the presidential election results in arizona might violate federal laws. they said -- no follow-up action besides that letter itself. a couple weeks ago attorney general garland gave a speech in which he said the justice department would look at restrictive voting laws around the country as well as these crazy audits and threats to election officials. that was just a speech. today we did finally see some action. first memo from the deputy attorney general announcing the creation of what appears to be a quite substantive task force inside the justice department that will respond to and look to threats against election officials and workers around the country. that's a substantive thing. that matters. but also landing like a cannonball in the deep end of the pole today, was the justice department announcing a major

lawsuit against the state of georgia for its recently passed bill to dramatically scale back access to polling places in that state. >> today, the department of justice is suing the state of georgia. our complaint alleges that recent changes to georgia's election laws were enacted with a purpose of denying or abridging the right of black georgians devote on account of their race or color in violation of section two of the voting rights act. >> our complete challenges several provisions on the grounds they were adopted with the intent to deny or a bridge black citizens equal access to the political process. >> here is the government complaint referenced there by attorney general garland and by kristen clark the recently confirm head of the civil rights division of the justice department's. a substantive complaint. 46 pages, very readable. the thing that leaps out even

if you are not a lawyer is the justice department is saying here about georgia is not only have they taken these draconian and unjustified steps to radically restrict the ability of some georgians to vote, the serious allegation here is that it wasn't incidental. it was done with intent. as a complaint of the lawsuit states plainly passage of senate bill 2:02 it was motivated by discriminatory purpose. the justice department lists the ways in which the georgia law harms voters of color disproportionately. and they say this, georgia legislator enacted senate bill 202 with knowledge of the disproportionate effect that these proficiency and together would have on black voters ability to participate in the political process on an equal basis with white voters. with knowledge of the disproportionate effect. the justice department mincing no words when it comes to going directly at the discriminatory intent of republicans in georgia when they passed that

bill the justice department. lawsuit today on the first to accuse georgia of exactly that. and the question i asked what happens when this big justice department action going after the state, and all the other entities that have already started suing georgia over this exact fact. interesting future here. hold that thought. we will be right back. l be right back. ♪well, the names have all changed♪ ♪since you hung around♪ welcome back, america. it sure is good to see you.

front desk. yes, hello... i'm so... please hold. ♪♪ i got you. ♪ all by yourself. ♪ go with us and get millions of flexible booking options. expedia.

it matters who you travel with. did you know prilosec otc can stop frequent heartburn before it begins? heartburn happens when stomach acid refluxes into the esophagus. prilosec otc uses a unique delayed-release formula that helps it pass through the tough stomach acid. it then works to turn down acid production, blocking heartburn at the source. with just one pill a day, you get 24-hour heartburn protection. prilosec otc. one pill a day, 24 hours, zero heartburn. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ just two pills for all day pain relief. aleve it, and see what's possible. in march similar to radically restrict voters in georgia.

still rights groups like the naacp's legal defense fund and the aclu sued the state over that law. their lawsuit they argued their restrictions and that georgia law have a pronounced desperate impact upon voters from historically disenfranchised community. as a result so clear that it can only be intentional. can only be intentional. now almost three months later those groups are being joined by heavy, the u.s. department of justice watch today announced that on behalf of the american people, it will sue georgia to block that. miss nelson, it's a pleasure to have you here tonight. thank you so much for making time. >> a pleasure to be here. >> i hear the echo in your lawsuit from march and the justice department's action today talking about intentionally targeting voters of color. that language in your lawsuit

today. the justice department saying the law was motivated, meaning intent was discrimination, motivated by discriminatory purpose. for us not lawyers, can you help us understand the gravity of that charge, and how important it is to whether or not this law is constitutional? >> absolutely. to allege that a law is intentionally discriminatory requires you to prove the legislators acted with intent. that they were aware of the consequences of their actions and the intended for that consequence to be so. we know that in the case of georgia, the particular provisions of this 90 plus-page law that evolved over time from something that was just a few pages to this tone that ultimately is one of the worst voter suppression laws that we've seen is a result of legislators effectively examining what worked for black voters in this last election

where there was historic turnout in both the november 2020 elections and the subsequent runoff elections. and then crafting a suppression bill that addresses the very ways in which black voters were able to exercise their fundamental right to vote so robustly. what we see in this 90-page law is a restriction on the time in which you could request an absentee ballot. we see restrictions on the ability of election officials to voluntarily send out absentee ballots to eligible voters to enable them to vote through this well used mechanism that people used across the country for many decades without incident. it limits the ability of people to cast ballots outside of their designated precincts, and have those ballots counted for the races that have nothing to do with where that precinct is

assigned. there are particular ways if you look at the exact provisions of this law. you can see a road map to how black voters were able to exercise the right to vote and now how that right to vote will be fundamentally denied and abridged. il>> do you expect the justice department may intervene an your lawsuit? or in some other way we'll see these lawsuits essentially become joined? you are aiming at the same target here. >> rachel, there are seven lawsuits now with the department of justice. one additional lawsuit. many of the lawsuits overlapping their claims but we represent individual plaintiffs and groups that have distinct interest. the department of justice is operating as we know on behalf of the united states government. and they have a distinct interest in ensuring that our elections are free from racial discrimination. we also have a distinct interest as an organization

that has worked for over 80 years to protect the rights of black voters, to ensure they can exercise the franchise free and fair discrimination. so we have brought claims of intentional discrimination. we brought claims about the effects of this law on black voters. and especially voters who have disabilities. let's not forget many of these provisions affect individuals who may face particular challenges in light of the pandemic, in light of limitations that they may face and that these restrictions make it much more difficult for persons with disabilities to exercise their right to vote. we represent a very broad class of plaintiffs side is distinct from the interests of the u.s. government. but we are delighted they have filed this lawsuit. that they are bringing their artillery to this fight. we need all hands on deck, and i think the number of organizations that have sued on this law is a reflection of how dilatory us and offensive it is

to our general norms and expectations about how we should treat the right to vote in this country. the fact some of the groups are alleging racial discrimination should be -- how clear it is to so many of us who care so deeply about the right to vote. >> moïse director counsel of the naacp legal defense fund, thank you for giving us that perspective. i had not heard it put into those terms in terms of these different suits and how they speak to different aspects of this. thank you so much. keep us surprised. >> you are welcome. thank you. >> we'll be right back, stay with us. , stay with us. with a fresh face for a fresh start. for a limited time get a 5th cartridge free. hearing is important to living life to the fullest. that's why inside every miracle-ear store, you'll find better bedtime stories. you'll find a better life is in store at miracle-ear, when you experience the exclusive miracle-ear advantage. it starts with our free hearing assessment.

plus innovative products that fit your needs and budget. with free service and adjustments for life. we're so confident we can improve your life, we're offering a 30-day risk-free trial. call 1-800-miracle today and experience the miracle-ear advantage for yourself.

♪ ♪ call 1-800-miracle today and experience ♪ ♪ just two pills for all day pain relief. aleve it, and see what's possible. gillette proglide. five blades and a pivoting flexball designed to get virtually every hair on the first stroke. so you're ready for the day with a fresh face for a fresh start. for a limited time get a 5th cartridge free. >> did i tell you i've been

doing this for 13 years now and i'm still absolutely terrible at it? i just barreled through, i think two, maybe three commercials. that's totally illegal and cable news. but i just today. i've never done this before. [laughs] 13 years into. this i