intuit quickbooks helps small businesses be more successful with payments, payroll, banking and live bookkeeping. we have breaking news. the biden state department has completed its 45-day review of the former president's executive orders that restricted immigration from certain countries often referred to as the muslim ban. and it is officially ending those restrictions. the biden administration says applicants from the affected countries may no longer be denied on the basis of nationality, and the department has taken a number of steps to ensure that applicants previously refused visas will not have future applications prejudiced in any way. a state department official tells cnn those applicants may now re-enter the diversity visa lottery. also under current regulations, those who visas were denied prior to january 20th, 2020 may also be reconsidered but those individuals must split new applications and pay a new application fee. don't miss full circle, our digital news show. you can catch it streaming live 6:00 p.m. eastern at cnn.com/full circle. watch it there or on the cnn app anytime on demand. the news continues. let's hand it over to chris for "cuomo prime time." i am chris cuomo, and welcome to "prime time." a year ago this week, everything changed. covid came, and common sense and leadership left. denial of the reality made us sick, literally. people got sick, often really sick all over the country. schools and businesses closed. you know the story. you've lived the pain. jobs lost. often we had more people die than should have ever happened all over this country. half a million and counting. and why? you know and i. because of covid, period. right now we have more hungry kids and adults that at any time in this country since the great depression. why? because of covid. millions thrown into poverty perhaps for the first time in their lives. millions of others already struggling, thrown into deeper desperation. i know that many of you watching are among them, and you know the reason for your pain. covid. the problem is so huge and so persistent, president biden says the fix should be too. not so fast, say the right side of the aisle. a lot of this help for the poor, for the hungry, the desperate, not really about covid. so let's not do it. you think i'm making it up? listen to the leader of the opposition. >> only 9% addresses the fight against the virus itself. you get this massive bill with only 1%, 1% for vaccinations. it's stuffed with non-covid-related spending that even top liberal economists say is wrong for the recovery. >> what caused the loss of the jobs and the wages and the businesses, then? our economy still has 9.5 million fewer jobs than at this time last year. at the rate that we're growing right now, because the recovery is so great, at the rate that he calls so great, it will take us two years to get back to where we were. you think mcconnell would go give that speech in kentucky with the people who are broke and hungry there? you don't need this much help. it's not really about covid. then what is it about? tell them that that's why you delayed this process despite the fast-coming deadlines affecting millions. because you just don't think people need this much help. that is why the democrats had to muscle this through with zero republican support. the idea that this is an abandonment of bipartisanship assumes that the opposition party wants to do anything with the democrats, and you know that is not the case. so, yes, it was a cram-down, and biden will now get sole credit for bringing this country the biggest relief package for people, not just banks, in a very long time. in terms of timing, the bill should be on his desk as soon as wednesday unless the opposition party finds yet another way to slow down the process. this bill is huge for people in pain in this country. but it's more than that politically. it is a distillation of where things stand. this is metaphor for the moment. the opposition party says it is for the working class, but they refuse to do what most of you in the working class wanted. most of the country supports this bill. and for those who say, well, come on. democrats would block the same way they are -- wrong. not on this one. all senate democrats voted for trump's first stimulus bill in march 2020. and in december, nearly every senate democrat voted for passage. facts. no republicans voted for this bill in the senate. now, not only won't the opposition party help, they are now lying about the relief just to sow division. witness -- >> they had a chance on saturday morning to stop checks from going to prisoners, from going to the boston bomber, for instance. and on that vote, they declined. it just goes to show how radical their ideas are. >> no pushback. no pushback. you know why? because that's the agenda they want to get out there. senator tom cotton just admitted that he is a radical. he said those ideas are radical, right? he voted for the first two relief bills, and prisoners got money in the first two relief bills. two laws trump signed in 2020. senator cotton voted for both. neither of those bills contained any language prohibiting prisoners from relief funds. so why does it bother him now? division. opposition is the position, especially when it comes to race. now, why give it to prisoners? advocates will argue that the relief money will help those behind bars when they get out soon in an era of high unemployment. you like it, you don't like it. fair either way. you can make the argument. but cotton has no high ground except on hater hill because he voted for the same thing he now says he opposes. and what about the kids? the opposition party says it cares about kids, but it doesn't want to help them get out of poverty. listen to biden. >> this plan is going to make it possible to cut child poverty in half. let me say it again. it's significant, historic. it will cut child poverty in half. >> just think about that as a proposition. mcconnell, cotton, the opposition party -- they're opposed to cutting child poverty in half. this bill would expand the child tax credit to $3,600 for each kid under 6 and $3,000 for those under 18. households could receive payments monthly rather than a lump sum once a year, which could make it easier for families to cover their expenses. it's like forced savings or budgeting. the headline has been the $1,400 stimulus check for many americans, but this is also about helping the poor, the hungry, get schools open, get small businesses open. and, yes, a ton for vaccine distribution. now, is there pork in this bill? hell, yes, there is, like so many others. it is bigger arguably than it needed to be. but be very clear. the opposition party had no problem with pork and unfunded tax cuts when they did it for the rich. 83 cents of every dollar to the top 1%. that was their reality then. where are they now? for this state of play, let's turn to the senator that mattered the most in all of this. west virginia democrat joe manchin. welcome back to the show. >> hey, chris. good to be with you again. >> how do you feel about this? do you celebrate it as the major success that the president and the other members of your party do? >> absolutely. it was a big success. everything you mentioned, i can't -- i can't expand on that because you hit everything, chris. but the thing that we did, we targeted -- there's an awful lot of money going out, and we were concerned, or i was concerned about all of it going at one time. so we basically targeted in what we call tranches. this is the first time that cities and municipalities, counties and the state will get money this year and be able to attract money next year and be able to take care of infrastructure. the first time that a city or county will be able to fix a water project, sewer project, or internet without all of the -- without all of the regulations and all the oversight and all the bureaucracy, the hoops they have to jump through. tremendous piece of legislation that's going to create an awful lot of employment all across this country. >> why isn't that all pork? >> and the child tax credits you were -- pardon me? >> why isn't that all pork as the members of the opposition party say it is? that's all pork. none of that should have been in this, not about covid. >> i don't think there's a -- there shouldn't be a republican or democrat doesn't understand or doesn't see the infrastructure needs that we have around our country. just look in your backyard, wherever you may live. >> but don't do it now. just do the vaccine and health care stuff now. do it another time. that's their argument. >> well, the covid relief is a lot more than just putting vaccines in the arms. basically we want to get people -- that's the first and foremost thing that we have to do, and the president said there will be enough vaccine serum for us to get every adult in america vaccinated. we have to be ready to take off too, and we got criticized a little bit about that. but the economists have been telling us that the concerns that we may have is come july, that basically this economy should take off. are we going to have the workforce ready to engage again? there were concerns there we talked about and tried to work through it. >> so those concerns, i processed this weekend and watching the sunday shows how people were coming at you and on what basis. unfair to me is you saying that, we really don't know how much money should be in this bill in all these different forms of relief because there's a lot of money that hasn't been spent yet, and how are we making that calculation? i don't hold that against you. you don't have to join the pack on everything. that is a legitimate argument. how much do you need to juice the economy when you haven't put in all the money? the other part, i think, is fair criticism, but i know you have an explanation for it, and i want you to offer it now. you say, hey, man, we got to work with the other side. that's why i'm against the filibuster thing because you got to keep working with the other side. who, senator manchin? who on the right do you believe, seeing how none of them would vote for this -- who on the right in the senate do you believe would work on h.r. 1 or the minimum wage or anything like that with democrats? >> well, i think that every republican wants to raise the minimum wage. everyone's just not in sync with bernie sanders at $15. a lot of the areas already have $15. i agree with joe biden when he says anybody that goes to work every day and works full-time should be above the poverty guidelines. that's where $11 comes in. this is stuff we're not just making up or i'm making up. basically i'm talking to people as professionals who basically look into this. and you say about the economists, the economists are the ones telling us that this economy is going to take off. let's get ready to go. and you said that no republicans got involved at all in the process. i had ten republicans i worked with for about a month and a lot of the things i was able to get in the bill were things we worked with them, chris. >> why didn't they vote for it. >> the biggest thing we did was put the tranches. well, it was higher than what they wanted it to be, i guess. you'll have to ask them. but a lot of the things we talked about, they never thought it should be above a certain figure. i think they would have gone 1-1, 1-2 -- 1.9 is bigger than they support. >> what i'm saying is -- >> i want to make sure we're able to come out of this covid, and it's going to take longer than just this year. we're going to have to be facing this in 2022, and we have money that's spread out for that part. >> i don't disagree with that, and i think it was sensible to the long-term on this and not just come up with a big number to impress people politically with a big number. i don't know that you want to get caught being a proxy for republicans who aren't willing to vote for something but will work through you to get it done. look at h.r. 1. i really think that's going to be a tough -- i've known joe manchin a long time. this is going to be tough because h.r. 1, if you guys don't have federal legislation on it, senator manchin, you are not going to be able to stop a wave of what you know are really strict voter suppression laws all across the country. listen to what your colleague, senator graham, said about this bill. >> so h.r. 1 will come to the senate, and it will die in the senate because we have the ability as long as democrats work with us to make sure that you need 60 votes, and not one republican is going to vote for h.r. 1 because it's a federal takeover of elections. >> the democrats are going to come to you and say, we need this bill. otherwise, you're going to set back voting 40, 50 years in this country. now what? >> well, first of all, chris, i think you said i'm a proxy. i've been around this for a long time. >> i did not say you are a proxy. i did not say you are a proxy. i said you don't want the republicans to use you as a proxy, all due respect. >> hey, chris, you know me a long time. no one uses me at all. i'm my own person. i'm more of a moderate, centrist type of person, always looking to bring people together. that's where i come from. it's how i was raised. with that being said, i believe i'm a pure optimist. i believe people want to work together, and they should. i believe everybody -- and i will fight for everyone to have the right to vote. but i believe voting is a state by state issue. always has been. tenth amendment is there for a purpose. it's the states' rights. but we have to basically make sure that no one is denied the right or obstructed from voting. we've got to make sure. can we find that? i haven't really dove into h.r. 1. i have not seen it yet. we've been so engulfed in this bill that we haven't gotten on it. i'm sure i'll be brought up to speed this week on it. >> but i'm just saying you heard senator graham, and i'm sure he hasn't looked at the bill either. he's just saying he doesn't want to get involved with the states. but there's always been a federal override through the voting rights act that you can't pass laws that are designed to violate the constitution like equal protection. >> correct. >> that's exactly what's happening in waves across the country in these states. and what happens if it comes down to the filibuster and no republicans want to vote for it, and they want to stall it? >> the only thing i've said -- let me tell you from the filibuster. we are -- we are an unusual body of government, the senate. it was designed to be unusual, and i think you and i have spoke been this before. but the bottom line is don't you -- you know, if you're going to have whether it's going to be h.r. 1 or whether it's going to be infrastructure, don't you think you ought to give us 30 days to go through the process to see if there's going to be obstructionist or not, to see if there's any pathway forward. >> yes. as long as it's not a emergency, i think you should give people time. i think you should be able to let them make their case. then i think the numbers should rule. and that's the way i think it was designed. and anybody who abuses the process beyond that, especially where -- look, i know that you have a lot of respect for senator byrd of west virginia and setting up the byrd bath and this rule. but since jim crow, the filibuster is not exactly known for being used to do great things. but it is not fair to have you assess a bill that you haven't had time to digest yet, and i'm sure it's going to change. senator joe manchin, you are always welcome to make the case. >> let me ask you this, chris. why does every state have two senators no matter how big it is or how -- >> equal representation. >> why are they treated the same? >> equal representation as a deliberative body. >> how come it's the only body? why is the congress different -- based on population. >> because it was assumed like the house of lords there would be better minds. they would be more collegial and be more active and compromise. >> let's see if we can get there again. >> i love the optimism. i'm just hearing what they're saying on the other side. >> i'm going to keep trying, my friend. >> i know you will. and this will always be a platform for you to make the case. i promise you that. good luck and congratulations on getting it done. >> thank you, my friend. >> all right. so, look, joe manchin was in a position -- this i do know. he was not looking to be in this position. i get it. it sounds like he might, right? wow, all this power to him. this is great. this is not a position he wanted to have, and there is nothing wrong with being a romantic for bipartisanship, especially in the senate. but you saw what just happened on this vote. tough spot for manchin. tough spot for the opposition party. so let's bring in what we now know about the state of play as we saw in this bill. let's bring in the better minds and figure out where we are. the harry's razor is not the same our razors have 5 german-engineered blades designed to stay sharp so you can enjoy lasting comfort and we never upcharge you for high quality these folks, they don't have time to store go to the post officecom they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the services of the post office plus ups only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. keeping your oysters business growing has you swamped. you need to hire. i need indeed indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a resume data base claim your seventy-five-dollar credit when you post your first job at indeed.com/promo advil dual action fights pain 2 ways. it's the first and only fda approved combination of advil plus acetaminophen. advil targets pain. acetaminophen blocks it. advil dual action. fast pain relief that lasts 8 hours. that's why at america's beverage companies, our bottles are made to be re-made. not all plastic is the same. we're carefully designing our bottles to be one hundred percent recyclable, including the caps. they're collected and separated from other plastics, so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles. that completes the circle, and reduces plastic waste. please help us get every bottle back. very interesting dynamic unfolding in our senate, and i think we're going to see a lot more of it because there's some really big trials ahead. joe manchin, senator of west virginia, took a lot of heat. he's a centrist. other centrists in the democratic party will become more relevant. what does this mean about what democrats want to get done, what they promised voters? let's get after it with our better minds. the professor, ron brownstein, and michael smerconish. first of all, michael, big win for biden. this is the largest package of its kind that we have seen in our lifetimes. how does it play politically in terms of getting it done? >> well, i think it plays to his benefit. and, you know, as i'm listening to the conversation with senator manchin, i'm thinking that if he didn't exist in the senate, president biden would want to invent him. i think he is a great foil for president biden because he acts as a governor in the sense that he keeps at bay those more progressive influences of the party that i don't know that president biden is always on the same page with. another observation, if i may. it's fortuitous to be on with ron brownstein, whose work i have such respect for. i remember fondly when at the national journal, he used to take the ideological pulse of the house and senate every single year. joe manchin and what he represents used to be mainstream. there used to be a lot of joe manchins in the senate and the house. today all gone. and isn't it nice, at least i say, that power can be vested in the hands of an independent thinker? >> now, a lot of democrats want to beat smerconish over the head right now, ron, because they thought that manchin was like dynamite, trying to blow up the process, making it about him. i think a lot of the criticism was unfair, but that's party politics. so what does this tell you about the state of play in the senate and the significance going forward? >> well, first i think the toll, the changes that manchin exacted for his support were really minor by historic standards. if you look back at the 1993 clinton bill, economic plan, the 2009 obama economic plan or the 2001 bush tax cut, which may be the most relevant precedent, also in a 50-50 senate. two republican senators made him cut it by 25% to get their support. can you imagine if joe manchin had demanded a 25% cut in this bill? i think he asked for only relatively minor changes. the big question is the one that you discussed with him. is he willing to constrain the use of the filibuster, and i thought the signals he sent to you, as he did this weekend, were pretty clear. he's going to try to work with republicans, but he's not going to work with them indefinitely if they look to be just simply obstructing. i think that's going to cheer a lot of democrats, what they heard from him tonight. >> quick bounce, ron. wasn't the original byrd bath, and the senator byrd from west virginia who, you know, obviously joe manchin is showing some deference too, wasn't it different and a lot more restrictive than what it is now? >> i can't really answer how they've used it over the years. the reconciliation goes back to the 1974 budget bill. it was part of congress reasserting control over like with the war powers act, that era of trying to undo the imperial presidency. but certainly as the filibuster has become more common, chris, you've seen both sides try to squeeze more and more into reconciliation, you know, and pretzeling themself as people say. i think joe manchin is basically signaling the way out here. rather than 60 votes needed to break a filibuster, he's basically signaling support for the 41 required to sustain a filibuster. what norm ornstein, the political scientist, has been pushing and we'll see if republicans are willing to literally stand on the floor hour avenue hour, day after day, on an issue like denying americans an increase in minimum wage. >> you heard lindsey graham. the numbers on this one, the country wanted this bill. they see the direct connection to covid. they don't have to be convinced of that like mitch mcconnell. so what does it mean going forward? >> well, i think it's a very important win just one-plus month into a brand-new administration. look at it in the alternative. if the biden administration had not been able to get this done at this moment, i think it would have boded poorly for the way the next four years are going to unfold. it was a much needed victory, and they're getting it. that's the point. >> what do you think happens with h.r. 1? not you, ron. let smerc get the last word. i appreciate it. i'm short on time. i owe you. >> not as popular. will be caricatured from both ends of the spectrum. i think much more in doubt than what we just saw with covid relief. >> that is a bill that may have to be trimmed to just the essential purpose of setting what is fair under federal law and not when it comes to voter guidance in states. we'll see. it's going to play out and pretty soon. professor, thank you as always. michael smerconish, always a plus. a year into the pandemic. wow, a year into the pandemic. the cdc is finally offering a guide to how to deal with the vaccine. they're also giving you a guide on how to survive an apocalypse, which is almost the same thing based on what we put ourselves through. what is going on with the cdc, especially at a time when you know you have to give people assurances and incentive to take the vaccine? did they make the right move? let's unpack it next. to support local restaurants, we've been to every city. including little rock and even worcester. and tonight... i'll be eating the chicken quesadilla from...tony's tex mex...in... katy. (doorbell) (giggle) do ya think they bought it? oh yeah. for weeks now, people have been getting vaccinated, and they're pumped, right? and they've been wondering what can i do now? what can i do now? waiting for the cdc. the cdc was taking a long time. why? part of it because it takes time to develop science and this is all new territory. but maybe there was some politics also. but people wanted to know, what can i do? what can i do? now they have their answers, okay? what you need to know. what was in the meantime. how to prepare for a zombie apocalypse. the cdc had time to put that up. now, they've been putting it up since 2011. my point is they find creative ways to engage with people to know and think about what they want them to know and think about, right? so they'll play with the idea of how to get ready for a zombie apocalypse. but where is that on this vaccine? where is it? look, they created that by the way. just to kind of engage you. now you have to engage the public to want this vaccine, understand the science behind it, why it's safe, and what it does for you other than keep you from dying. that should be enough. it won't be. people want convenience. how do you think we got into this pandemic? so the cdc finally came out with its guidance for them today. it was slow, but, again, let's blame that on science. let's discuss -- science takes time. let's bring in dr. sanjay gupta and talk about the guidance. my criticism would be this, sanjay. first of all, i love you. it's great to see you. >> thanks. you too. >> the science is developing. i poked our friends from operation warp speed, and my reporting is this is the safe lane. what they put out today, you still shouldn't travel. you got to wear a mask around other people who aren't vaccinated. they say it's not science. they don't know for a fact what the parameters are. but this is playing it safe. did they need to play it this safe when balanced against the equities of wanting people to want this vaccine? >> you know, it's a critical question, chris, and i think, you know, this is as much about messaging as it is about the science. i talked to andy slavitt today. you know him well. i think that's basically what they're saying is like, we'll fully admit, they say, that we are underpromising and overdelivering, and that goes with messaging as well. they're being cautious here. there's a couple things that really jumped out at me. one is that you heard the term "first step" over and over again during that press conference, making it clear there's going to be many other steps. the other thing is that it's always been presented as binary, chris. do this, not this. but now you're starting to hear a little change in language. low risk, medium risk, high risk. it gives people more a sense of autonomy. i'm going to gauge the risk myself based on what i know. then finally this idea ultimately that as we get more people vaccinated, right now we're at 10% roughly fully vaccinated. once we get to 20%, which could be in the next 10 to 14 days, the recommendations are likely to change again. the recommendations are tied directly to the percentage of the country that is vaccinated. and that's, you know -- we're going pretty fast. you know, another 30 million people in the next couple weeks is quite likely, and i think the recommendations will change again. >> that's how slavitt shuts me up by the way. he says that that's -- these are the recommendations now because you don't have enough people who are vaccinated. once we get to the part that i'm afraid of, which is convincing people to get the vaccine who don't want it right now, he said we're nowhere near that. we have a supply issue right now. by the time we have a demand issue, we'll have different level of prophylaxis in the society. we'll know more about it. we'll be able to be more certain about what you can do. you buy that? >> yeah, i do. i really do because i think everyone's been sort of focused on this idea of herd immunity. basically that's part of this binary thing. until we get to 70%, 75%, 80% of the country vaccinated, nothing changes. i think people in the scientific community have been saying for a long time, that's not quite true. it's sort of a curve or at least a downward slope in terms of the things that people can actually start loosening up the guidelines as more and more people get vaccinated. it's not just we get to herd immunity and the switch flips. all along the way we're improving. we're still in a demand than supply sort of frame, but even as that changes, we're going to see further liberalizing of the guidelines. people are going to be able to do more things long before i think we actually get to herd immunity. >> do me a favor, sanjay. stick around with me because i experienced something that i've never experienced before. i've never been a royal watcher. i went there to cover the big wedding a bunch of years back, but i was doing the security angle on it. but hearing markle talk about mental illness gave me hope of opening up a discussion that has been squelched in this society. i want you to stay and talk about what you heard and what it could mean if you will. >> sure. >> look, everybody's talking about the interview. there are lots of reasons for that. but there are two that pop out to me. why is there so much pushback on what meghan markle said about how race played a role in the respect of that family toward their own child from the right? why? and her talking about mental health and her pain and her husband saying how it was hard for him to accept that she needed help. what degree of openness could that provide to the rest of our society? let's talk tough stuff. the role of race here and mental health. jemele hill is going to join us with sanjay gupta next. these folks, they don't have time to go to the post office they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the services of the post office plus ups only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. my audible library is just like scroll scroll scroll scroll scroll scroll, it's a lot. i downloaded audible and really, really enjoyed it. and then it kind of just became a lifestyle after that. audible allows me to find a space for myself. you just get way more than you pay for, one of those rare things in life. oh, the audible plus catalog is awesome. it's like having a streaming service, but just for audio content. there's audible originals... there's podcasts... i've used some of the meditations, it helps me relax. mythology, anthropology, a lot of the -ologies. audible recommended the right audiobooks at the right time. they pretty much have whatever you like. it's really enriched my life in so many ways. i can put on an audiobook, or a podcast, and be transported somewhere that is impossible to go, that is why i love audible. to start your free 30-day trial, just text listen 8 to 500500. the harry's razor is not the same ♪ because some of us are not the same ♪ our close shave comes from our 5 german-engineered blades designed to start sharp and stay sharp. and we never upcharge you for high quality. so for those of us who don't want just the same, harry's razors are here. harry's. not the same. available in store and at harrys.com. the prince harry and his wife meghan markle interview with oprah winfrey was a huge deal. that's not a big surprise. but what surprised me was what resonated with me. everybody knows oprah is great and she put out great television, and it would be smart and incisive. but did you hear this part? >> i just didn't want to be alive anymore, and that was a very clear and real and frightening constant thought. and i remember -- i remember how he just cradled me, and i was -- i went to the institution, and i said that i needed to go somewhere to get help. i said that i've never felt this way before, and i need to go somewhere. and i was told that i couldn't, that it wouldn't be good for the institution. >> right there, what an important thing to acknowledge. one, never easy, right? but to say that you wanted to ask for help and that there was pushback. forget about the royals. it happens in families all over this country all the time. and i wondered -- first of all i thought it was so authentic and there was so much power in that. but i wonder if it could make a difference for the people, the millions and millions of you who watched last night, about how it should be okay. let me bring back sanjay gupta for this. thank you, brother. i know you're not a mental health expert but you are a brain doctor, and you know the stigma. you've been dealing on this issue for a long time. what do you think it could mean to hear a meghan markle say what so many in this country feel, and to hear her husband, by the way, the prince, say, god, i didn't really want this to be true. i didn't know how to handle it. >> right. >> that really goes to the root of our struggle here, does it not? >> it -- chris, you sort of focused on the same thing that i heard. and two things really struck me. one is that she said it, right? because there is so much stigma against mental health. one in five americans roughly deal with some sort of mental illness, and almost all of them, if you look at organizations like the national association of mental illness, they all have suffered some sort of stigma, you know, as a result of it. it's really astonishing. but it was that second part. you asked for help, and you couldn't get it. the institution, she said, did not want to allow that to happen. that's why i'm so glad you're talking about this because i think that's the impression a lot of people are left with is that, okay, i know there's a lot of stigma around this, so if i ask for help and then it is not given to me, that just exacerbates this problem. that was -- it's a really, really tough position to be in. and frankly, chris, you know, i mean i think that us talking about it like this is so important. but the parity between mental health and physical health still doesn't exist. >> mm-hmm. >> i mean we don't think of mental illness like we think of physical illness. we don't think of it that way, and our policies don't reflect it that way. i work in a hospital. i know there are fewer resources for mental illness than there are for physical illness, fewer beds and just fewer resources to take care of patients. that's not parity, and that further exacerbates the stigma. so, you know, i think the media, conversations like we're having right now, if we get something wrong, i hope people call us out on it because if we do it unintentionally in terms of language, people should call us out on it. >> i don't know about calling out. you know, part of the problem that we have -- and i know what you mean. this cancel everything that we don't like is a mistake, especially when it comes to this issue because people are so afraid of being judged on this. example. i talk about a lot of different stuff on the radio show on sirius radio than i do here. i'll talk about all my aches and pains and the things i'm getting physical therapy on all the time. i talk about my therapist, talk therapy, my psychologist, i get crushed. i get crushed. i knew you were crazy. i knew this. i knew that. i'm talking about all other kinds of things, my prostate, my this, my that. everybody wants to chime in. you talk about getting talk therapy? i didn't even acknowledge an illness. they crush you. that's our culture, and it literally makes people sick. she was talking about suicidal ideation, not i'm a little blue or i'm afraid to cross the street. this is heavy stuff, and a lot of people are like markle. >> yeah. look, chris, first of all, i'm sorry that that happens to you. >> you should be because i knew you were one of those callers one time. you're using some other name, but i recognize your voice, sanjay, and it hurts. it hurts. >> one of these days you'll get my name right. >> sanjay guptha just like your mom. same way she says it. >> people who admit that they see their -- people who are dealing with mental illness, often times they won't concede the fact they're seeing a therapist or psychologist because they themselves know that there's stigma and in some ways, not intentionally again, i think they are probably exacerbating that stigma because they won't admit it. look, i definitely was not one of the people calling you. i applaud you for talking about it, and i know it sucks that you get crushed on it, but i'm glad you do it still because it makes it better for other people out there, chris, that you maybe will never meet. >> and me getting a proper therapist has freed up some more of your time so that i don't call you with my problems all the time. but the reason i do it is the reason everybody does it. it's not your specialty, but your specialty is people. you're a beautiful guy. you're a great friend, and you do what all of us need to do. when somebody is hurting and they reach out or you reach out, see how people are doing, check in, make it all okay. i've stopped talking about illness. i just talk about pain. do you have pain? maybe you have pain in your back. maybe you have pain in your heart. maybe you have pain in your head. they're all the same. it's all pain. we have to treat it the same. i wanted to bring jemele hill in. she's having trouble with her connectivity. i'm going to pick up the conversation with laura coates in the next segment and move into some trial news also about the "i can't breathe" case that's going on. sanjay, thank you so much. appreciate you. >> love you, chris. take care. >> one quick thing. a lot of you are mocking markle online for her suicidal thoughts. oh, so dramatic. oh, like your life could be so bad. look how much your house costs. stop it. and i'll tell you why. i don't care what you think about meghan markle, but think about who's reading and hearing what you're saying. people in your life are struggling, i guarantee it. now, you'll say, if it were them, i wouldn't mock them. how do you think they hear your words? how do you think they read your tweets? think about it because they may not reach out to you, and that could make the difference in their own wellness. think about it. also think about the jury selection that's going on in the death of george floyd. got under way a little bit, and then they added a charge. now, that may be a key case in where this case will eventually go. these are very rare occasions. why? what does it mean? what are the parameters? we have our best, laura coates, next. her strength respected. depend. the only thing stronger than us, is you. jackson hewitt knows your job description may have changed this year. to say... account manager... third grade teacher... and senior vice dog-walker. don't add tax preparer. let jackson hewitt do it for you, so you can be certain your taxes are done right, guaranteed. when i noticed my sister moving differently, i didn't know what was happening. she said it was like someone else was controlling her mouth. her doctor said she has tardive dyskinesia, which may be related to important medications she takes for her depression. her ankles would also roll and her toes would stretch out. td can affect different parts of the body. it may also affect people who take medications for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. we were so relieved to learn that today, td is manageable. learn more at talkabouttd.com. new projects means new project managers. we were so relieved to learn that today, td is manageable. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a short list of quality candidates from our resume database. claim your seventy five dollar credit, when you post your first job at indeed.com/home. nicorette® knows, quitting smoking is hard. you get advice like: try hypnosis... or... quit cold turkey are you kidding me?! instead, start small. with nicorette®. which can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette® you know when your dog is itching for a treat. itching for an outing... or itching for some cuddle time. but you may not know when he's itching for help... licking for help... or rubbing for help. if your dog does these frequently. they may be signs of an allergic skin condition that needs treatment. don't wait. talk to your veterinarian and learn more at itchingforhelp.com. two big court decisions on our watch. the first decided by scotus supreme court, rejecting another maybe final bid by former president trump to nullify his electoral loss in wisconsin. more than 60 losses and just one narrow win that didn't have anything to do with the legitimacy of the return. the move brings an end hopefully to that campaign. meantime, a second legal battle is kicking off in minneapolis. we will cover it in-depth on this show. jury selection in the murder trial of derek chauvin, the officer who leaned on george floyd's neck for nine minutes, the i can't breathe case. top legal minds laura coates here. laura, i have to ask something very difficult for you. will you wear a political hat for me as well? i don't want to ignore one thing that came out on the meghan markle thing and i want your perspective. >> chris, i have a meghan markle hair style today. i'll be happy to join you. >> good to have you, then. the thing that struck me is the aftermath of meghan markle, i feel like so much of it is familiar to us here and we're just a little freaked by being the royals are like everybody else in terms of how they regard the color of the skin. there's all this discussion even within the african-american or black community about color and some kind of, you know, supposed superiority. but the right has been all over meghan markle in this country today. i don't believe her, why didn't she name names? she threw the whole family under the bus. why would the political right, home to the 1776 again, baby, why would they be protecting the monarchy? >> well, it is shocking to think that because we're talking about the fact that we did not want to in part of america be beholden to a monarchy that we're going to protect the colonialism, the idea of the history, the reason why you do so is shocking. but i think this is really a death by a thousand micro aggressions and the idea that every black woman watching meghan markle last night, i hate to generalize, but could see a bit of themselves in what she was saying and the idea being told, no, what's happening to you happens to everybody else. someone is being rude to you. there is a distinction and added layer we recognize in the law about when race is an aspect of it, and politics as well. the idea of how it can exponentially increase already existing tensions, existing -- exacerbate the problem. i look at that and thought, why on earth would people go so far as to dismiss her and dismiss her credibility in a world where we're often talked about and told that we must believe women, that we must have the credibility lead, and have the idea of leading with the opportunity to speak and use one's voice. when it came to meghan markle, i guess she needed to be silenced because she had the audacity to point out the very things our founding fathers rejected when they came across the old pond and founded the united states of america. he put the word "founded" in quotation marks for obvious reasons. >> also why would she lie? i thought she did them a favor. it's not a favor for her to talk about this issue to the royals, but she didn't name names. she could have. most people on oprah winfrey would because she's so compelling in terms of how comfortable she makes you feel and her greatness was on display here. very interesting. i wanted to get your take on that. >> i think she went out of the her way, to that point, she went out of her way to point out who she thought was a good person may be very damaging to them. she could have easily done so. the fact that the truth can be inconvenient does not automatically make it a lie. >> yes, 100%. look, i could see a race play in it, i do. i'll put it out there, you can attack me for it. forget about the supreme court thing. we know what that's about. that should be over now. the third degree murder charge in the chauvin trial to me was huge. one, i don't know why they removed the charge in the first place. but adding that is very important why? >> well, first of all, the reason they took it out in the first place is because it was unclear whether the precedent in minnesota would allow for somebody to be charged with third degree murder, and if they directed their reckless behavior to a single person. the classic case of a sort of third degree charge would be driving down a sidewalk in a car because you don't have an intended victim. it's just general wreaking havoc. but once you have a focused person, the case law and press suggests perhaps it wasn't intended for that and used something else. it's important to add in and clarify, what is meant by the statute? could you use the statute for people who have an intended victim and engage in reckless behavior? it gives the jury options. as a prosecutor, you want to be able to give the jury beyond all reasonable doubt all the elements to be satisfied. you also want to give juries who can be unpredictable, at times fickle, at times empathetic in ways you did not expect and say, i'd like to have some middle ground if i can't prove this. higher charge the lower. they nestle this in between as a contingency of sorts. that's an option available to them as well. >> laura, thank you very much. we'll cover it in-depth when i can have you, great. when i can't, send me your notes so i can cover it the right way. laura coates. thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back. the sun. it makes our lipton tea leaves better. which makes the smooth tea taste better, and time together even better. and drinking lipton can help support a healthy heart. lipton is a proud sponsor of the american heart association's life is why campaign. these folks don't have time to go to the post office they use stamps.com all the services of the post office only cheaper get a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. get a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale i think the sketchy website i bought this turtle from stole all of my info. ooh, have you looked on the bright side? discover never holds you responsible for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter. the harry's razor is not the same ♪ because some of us are not the same ♪ our close shave comes from our 5 german-engineered blades designed to start sharp and stay sharp. and we never upcharge you for high quality. so for those of us who don't want just the same, harry's razors are here. harry's. not the same. available in store ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ hey limu! harry[ squawks ] same. how great is it that we get to tell everybody how liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need? i mean it... oh, sorry... [ laughter ] woops! [ laughter ] good evening! meow! nope. oh... what? i'm an emu! ah ha ha. no, buddy! buddy, it's a filter! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ start the year smiling at aspen dental where new starts happen, every day. get exceptional care at every step, unparalleled safety at every visit, and flexible payment options for every budget. now, during the everyday smiles event new patients get a full exam & set of x-rays with no obligation. no insurance? no worries, it's free. plus, now all patients can get 20% off their treatment plan. find every reason to smile. every day at aspen dental. call 1-800-aspendental or book today at aspendental.com