>> announcer: this is "new day" with alisyn camerota and john berman. >> we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and all around the world. this is "new day." and this morning, there are positive signs for how the united states can navigating the pandemic. for the first time, more americans have been fully vaccinated against coronavirus than have been infected by it. it was exactly one year ago today that dr. sanjay gupta told us right here on "new day" that the u.s. was entering a new and very dangerous phase. cnn is now calling the outbreak a global pandemic. our senior medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta joins us to explain why. what makes it a pandemic, sanjay? >> there are criteria that are somewhat defined to call something a pandemic. let me preface by saying this terminology we're going to start using now isn't so much to cause panic but rather to really cause a focus on preparedness. >> can you believe how close we were sitting to each other. >> that was a striking thing. we were right next to each other. i can't imagine being that close to a non-family member. >> what were we thinking? on that day just 22 americans have died from the virus. a year later, that number is 525,000 americans. >> this morning the cdc is releasing guidance for what is safe to do after being fully vaccinated. yes, go hug your grandchildren. but still concerns about travel. the cdc director warns the next eight weeks will be crucial for the direction of the pandemic and preventing another surge. joining us now, you heard from him moments ago cnn chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta. most remarkable how close you and i were sitting and you haven't aged a minute despite not sleeping. >> i'm still just as far away. >> despite not sleeping a minute over the last year. you know, i don't like to do it too often, but to think about what we've been through the last year, to think about what you were saying then. you didn't want to cause a panic. on the other hand what came to pass was certainly worthy, i think, of being majorly concerned. >> yeah. no. i think that's exactly right. that was a monday. march 9th last year. and i remember being up all weekend that weekend writing this article thinking about it, looking at the data and, you know, it was heady stuff. remember the cdc had not declared this a pandemic. the world health organization had not declared this a pandemic. president was still saying this is just -- it's going to go away, just a few days. so, to go out there and say it was a pandemic, you know, we -- it was a different phase, as you mentioned. but it was correct because that's what the data showed. but i got to tell you, honestly, at that point it was still very much a prepare for the worst but hope for the best sort of feel. the idea that it could have gone from 22 people who had died at that point to 525,000, like you see on the screen, there's no way i could have -- i think anybody if they're being honest could have anticipated that. even in sort of the worst case scenario. so it felt like it was a different phase and the phase was up of preparedness but all the actions, at least the immediate actions after that really weren't following. that was sort of the great tragedy of all this. >> sanjay, i want to read what you wrote back then because it was so preshent. now is the time to prepare for what may be ahead. that could mean quarantines, closed schools and cancelled events in your town. it might mean strain at work or taking a break from hobbies that usually bring you joy. it might mean putting off a family vacation or catching up over the phone instead of getting together. i mean, you predicted it all. it was all right there. you didn't say zoom meetings, but you might as well have. and it sounded like you were just really out there at the time and all of that came to pass. >> yeah. you know, and there were people who, you know, in the infectious disease community who were sort of raising the alarm on this for some time. but it was such dissew innocence going to the white house, talking to the president, interviewing other people and they're saying do not make a big deal about this. this is going to go away. all it's going to do is cause panic. and on the other hand, again, i think one thing that we've tried to really always do here especially at this network is lean into the evidence. the data. the facts. you know, in terms of what we were seeing. and the thing about pandemics, the thing about lots of illnesses is that you don't always see it before it strikes you. by the time it actually starts manifesting, you're late. so, you have to sort of be predictive of these things ahead of time but people are going outside, as many people said on your program and looking outside and saying, hey, sky is clear. things look graeat. what are you talking about? that's a tough position to be in as a doctor, reporter, yeah, looks good right now, but you've got to take warning here and be careful. so, here we are, one year later to the day. >> that's the rear-view mirror. let's look forward now. we have this new cdc guidance what they think is safe to do and that's been chewed over for 24 hours and you've got new reporting, sanjay, from the white house who in some ways helped run the vaccinations, getting shots in people's arms. what are you hearing about what we can expect? >> there's no -- what we're hearing is there's no question that they're being cautious. you've heard that over and over again. i heard peter hotez talking about it last hour. they are being cautious. a lot of people are coming on saying, they're being overly cautious. why can't vaccinated people do more. we're purposefully underpromising, hoping to overdeliver. but two other things i think were really important. one is that you don't hear things as binary as you used to. can't do this, can do this. you're going to start hearing things framed low risk, medium risk, high risk, giving people little more choice. second thing is that the recommendations that we hear are going to be directly tied to the percent of the country that is vaccinated. so 10% roughly of the country fully vaccinated right now. 2 million roughly, 2.5 million per day will be vaccinated. so you'll get to 20% of the country within the next few weeks, 30% by the end of march. my point is each time that happens you're going to hear a loosening of the recommendations coming from the cdc. and by the way, the recommendations again and andy made this point from the cdc, those were cdc recommendations. those weren't cdc recommendations where hhs or the white house then changed the recommendations or dropped things on to the cdc's website. so that's it. but i think they are being cautious right now because of, you know, how this last year has transpired. >> sanjay, how about travel. why are they being so cautious about travel? haven't airlines made all sorts of safety provisions that have changed and made airline travel safer over the past year? >> yeah. no. and i think -- look, i think that one is going to change and i think that one will change, that recommendation will be loosened within the next couple of weeks. we have not seen large outbreaks on airline travel over the last four days, 4.5 million people traveled. we have been tracking airline travel for a year now. people have still been traveling. have there been distinct outbreaks linked to that. we haven't seen that. there have been a few isolated cases of transfer on planes over the last year. but this gets back to the caution thing. if you look at the guidelines specifically, hey f you're vaccinated, you're pretty good to go. you're not going to get sick and you're very likely to transmit the virus. if you go into a household where people are young and not having some pre-existing illness, it's unlikely to be a medium or high risk situation. that's a low risk situation. on an airplane, they're saying, look, could there be somebody on the plane who vulnerable, not yet vaccinated and increased risk despite the fact that you're wearing masks and have good ventilation, they still want to be cautious here. i think that's going to change by reading the tea leaves and talking to lots of people and i think that will happen in the next couple weeks. >> there's a difference between shouldn't and can't. not like cdc police grabbing you by the collar and dragging you off planes. we are not yet sanctioning this as something we think is completely safe yet. sanjay, thank you. fascinating to take a look back and we'll talk to you again later. >> okay. you got it. the house of representatives preparing to vote on the $1.9 trillion relief package, a huge, significant, historic piece of legislation likely to pass without a single republican vote. we're going to speak to a key legislature who helped get this over the finish line next. ♪ ♪ these days you n need more than an education. so thahat's what we give you. introducing career services for life. learn more at phoenix.edu if these beautiful idaho potato recipes are just side dishes, then i'm not a real idaho potato farmer. genuine idaho potatoes not just a side dish anymore. always look for the grown in idaho seal. research shows that people remember commercials with exciting stunts. so to help you remember that liberty mutual customizes your home insurance, here's something you shouldn't try at home... look, liberty mutual customizes home insurance so we only pay for what we need. it's pretty cool. that is cool! grandma! very cool. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ see every delivery... every yikes... and even every awwwwwwww... wait, where was i? introducing self protection from xfinity. designed to put you in control. with real-time notification and a week of uninterrupted recording... all powered by reliable, secure wifi from xfinity. gotta respect his determinatio. it's easy and affordable to get started. get self protection for $10 a month. xinjiang. xinjiang. the house of repres gearing up for a final vote on the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief plan by tomorrow. the revised bill passed the senate without a single republican vote over the weekend. and it turned out to be far from a shoe-in for democrats either. many of whom had to spend a lot of time con joeling one of their own. joining us is one of those con joelers, angus king of maine. senator, great to see you. it sounds like on friday it was sort of touch and go in the senate with this bill and senator joe manchin, you know, wavering there. so can you just take us inside your conversations with him. i know you had many. what was going on? >> i think in a 50/50 senate that every single vote is a crucial swing vote. and joe had some reservations and had been expressing those reservations for some time about cost and about how the funds were allocated, what the guardrails would be on the expenditure of the funds. you know, he was being responsible. and finally there were some efforts it came down to an issue of the unemployment compensation and how that provision was going to work. and my role, along with others, i'm a good friend of joe's was to basically keep him talking. and they finally did reach a resolution, as you know, late in the day on friday. we went ahead and moved the bill with joe's support. but it was just a question of joe had to get to a place where he felt comfortable. he always -- he has a great line. he always says if i can't explain this to the people of west virginia, then i don't know how i can do it. he had to get to a place where he felt he could make that commitment. >> he needs to do a better job of explaining to the governor of west virginia who doesn't like it. let me just play for you he thinks that joe manchin made a mistake. listen to this. >> i still believe that we needed to go big or not go at all. you know, because we still got too many people that are out there across especially west virginia that are hurting, but what was written in the law was written in there primarily by joe manchin. he doesn't care about you. he doesn't care about the people of this state. >> so, senator, explain this. why was senator manchin so stuck on wanting $300 unemployment benefits instead of 400. $1.9 trillion relief bill why nickel over $100 for the people of your state? >> well, i think the concern was you got to find a balance in unemployment. i think this was on joe's mind. you don't want to get -- have unemployment be so high that people have a disincentive to go back to work. i think that was one of the things that he was concerned about. and i think he was concerned about the way it was structured. he wanted to make it go longer if possible. listen, i got to disagree with the governor. i've never seen anybody more devoted to his constituents than joe manchin. i'm not making that up. i mean, that's absolutely true. he refers -- he's from a little tiny coal mining town, farmington, west virginia. he identifies with his constituents as deeply and thoroughly as anybody i've ever worked with. for the governor to say that is nonsense. he knows better. joe was trying to do what he thought was right for west virginia, which is where he always starts and for the country. >> senator, why no republican support? >> oh, there was huge republican support. that's been a big -- the reporting has been all wrong on this, alisyn. this bill was supported by 60% of republicans across the country, 70% of the people. the only place there wasn't republican support was in the united states capitol. which i got to tell you, i don't get. because all the major provisions in this bill had already been voted on positively by the republicans several times last year. so, suddenly they say, well, you know, why are we doing this and why are we doing that. these are things we voted for. probably only -- i will correct myself. they didn't like state and local aid, but that was in the cares act which they voted for i think pretty much unanimously. so, all of a sudden things that were okay last year aren't okay this year. i honestly don't understand their calculation from either a public policy point of view or a political point of view. the idea -- the bill is really simple. the idea of the bill is to crush the virus and raise the economy. and those are two very important goals. and, yes, it's a lot of money. i'm uncomfortable about the amount of money, but if we undershoot and the recession lingers into next year, then it's going to cost the treasury more than the bill will cost. so, i think it was an important step. and, you know, everything in there i didn't necessarily agree w i'm sure nobody did. but by and large it was a really important bill. and i don't understand my colleagues going home and saying, well, i didn't really want to provide checks for you or unemployment extensions or money for the schools. i just don't get it. >> senator, because your on the intelligence committee, we also want to ask you about what russia is doing right now. we understand there's evidence of another disinformation propaganda campaign against the coronavirus vaccines that the u.s. is using. what are you seeing? where's the evidence of this? >> well, there's pretty substantial evidence of russia basically using anti-vaccination -- you used the right word by the way, propaganda, on their various media outlets. and what they're doing, they don't have to invent this issue. of course there are people in the u.s. that are anti-vaxxers and the russians are sort of amplifying it. alisyn, they've been doing this since the '30s. the russians are very skilled, part of their play book going back, you know, almost 100 years, of propaganda and disinformation. they just have better techniques of doing it now. but they also, i think, have a commercial interest. they're denigrating pfizer and moderna. they have their own vaccine that they're selling in europe and around the world. so this may be just good old, you know, economic competition. but in a new form and in an insidious form. we don't need the russians to tell us how to handle -- whether or not our vaccines are safe. that's why we hired the fda. >> well, it's a great warning for everybody listens to be aware of when they see something that doesn't look quite right, some disinformation online to know writ might be coming from. senator angus king, thank you. great to see you. >> thank you, alisyn. good to see you. prince charles making his first public appearance since harry and meghan's explosive interview. so how did this go? we have a live report from london. some people say our trade-in process feels too easy. they can't believe it's 100% online and gives them a competitive offer that won't change for 7 days. an offer that they can put toward their new car. some people can't believe our friendly advocate will come to them as soon as tomorrow. drop off their new ride and whisk their old one away. because we make trading your car unbelievably easy. all so you can say... told you so. experience the new way to trade in your car with carvana. find your rhythm. your happy place. find your breaking point. then break it. every emergen-c gives you a potent blend of nutrients so you can emerge your best with emergen-c. you packed a record 1.1 trillion transistors into this chip. i invested in invesco qqq. a fund that invests in the innovators of the nasdaq 100, like you. become an agent of innovation with invesco qqq. ♪ keeping your oysters business growing become an agent of innovation whas 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 happening now, prince charles just made his first public appearance following prince harry and meghan markle's bomb shell interview with oprah winfrey. max foster joins us now. surely the prince used this opportunity to clear the air and answer these important questions that were raised during the interview. what did he say? >> reporter: well, we've been waiting for the palace response, haven't we? i've been reporting on the palace for a while. i think in part this is their response. so what you see is prince charles continuing with his diary commitments. he's here at a vaccination popup. and the fact that he appeared is this message keep calm, carry on. we are not changing our diaries, our engagements. we are carrying on as usual. you could also look at it in the prism of another palace saying, which is never complain, never explain. i'm getting the impression from buckingham palace the sort of people involved in discussions there that they will not be rushed into a formal statement in response to the harry and meghan interview. so, i think this is what we've got in terms of optics. we can wait around for a statement. the palace is going to carry on with what they do normally. interestingly this morning someone came in in defense of the royal family today and there's accusations of racism. that was the duchess of sussex's father herself. >> i don't think the british royal family are racist at all. i don't think the british are racist. this thing about what color will the baby be or how dark will the baby be, i'm guessing and hoping it's just a dumb question from somebody. >> reporter: what we do know this interview created a lot of division here in the uk and i'm sure in the u.s. as well. so, until we get that response from the palace, the formal statement, i think it will trundle on and be more pressure on them to come out with it, but at the moment, keep calm and carry on, guys. >> thank you so much, max. keep us posted. joining us nous host of quest means business richard quest and tv presenter and journalist trisha goddard. richard, isn't this the problem? isn't this what got the palace in trouble to begin with silence when meghan comes and says i need help with mental health. silence when prince charles is asked a direct question, sir, what did you think of the interview? so, isn't this silence revelatory in its own way? >> you're playing by a different set of rules here, john. that means we can't really fathom how they think. they will be viewing this as we're not going to be rushed into a response. we're not politicians. we don't resign. we don't suddenly get fired. it's an institution that goes back 1,200 years. now, in a social media age where you want a quick response to an accusation, that is not going to happen. and the palace -- you and i may sit and fume about the way they do it over there, but the reality they will turn around and say, yes, we have been doing this way in 1,000 years and a measured response at the right time will be the way forward. it's not satisfying for a 24-hour news cycle, but that's the way they will regard it. on the issues that have been raised of all the issues that have been raised, probably the most serious is the mental health in terms of the palace because one level this goes to the hypocrisy of every change ever been brought in since diana. they now sort of basically not listening to anything people would appear to be saying. >> trish sha, not only is it a different set of rules in the uk, it's a different perception. certainly by talk show host, morning show hosts. so here is piers morgan talking about his impression of what harry and meghan had to say. >> this is a two-hour trash afof everything the queen worked so hard for. and it's all being done as prince philip lies in hospital. they trash everybody. they basically make out the entire royal family a bunch of white supremacists. >> your thoughts? >> so over the top but that's kind of piers. there's an audience to be played to here. and i think what people maybe don't know in america and people definitely forget in britain that i believe one of the biggest catalysts to this acura moeny, if you like, between the media and the sussexs is when they decided to sue a newspaper, the daily mail. now recently judgment has been handed down against the daily mail. and you know, it may be a coincidence but things seemed to ramp up. one of the things that prince harry actually talked about was this weird symbiotic relationship between tabloid media and the royals. he seemed to suggest -- well, he said that the royals lived in fear of what the tabloids might say about them. you keep your head down, do your job, turn up and smile and we'll be nice to you or else. well, it's very clear that harry and meghan did not want to play by those rules. that's when things got extra difficult for them as far as journalism, quote unquote, because it's not. it's not journalism. most of this is opinions. things are stated as facts when we genuinely don't really know what goes on behind closed doors. >> richard, you say that i and we to an extent are playing by a different rules, i'm playing by human rules. emotional, actual, genuine feelings rules. that's not a bad thing. there have been those who asked, is this an existential crisis for the palace at this point. it does beg the question, are people now asking what's the point of this? >> they may ask the question what's the point of it. they asked the question in the 1930s in the abdication and d diana 1990s. john, hear me out here. seen from the palace's point of view, i can certainly -- i'm not defending it, but i can see a way in which somebody asks about the color, the dark skin of the baby on the grounds that, well, we may have to answer questions about this in the future. we may have an issue that we have to talk about. and suddenly -- they ask about this and what is racist and clearly inappropriate in any other vehicle or environment within the confines of the royal family becomes something that they are believing they are preparing themselves for the future. this is how they think. think think about ensuring they've dotted every i, crossed every t, considered every contingency. and they've been doing it that way for 1,000 years. and in the process they managed to trip over themselves royally, so to speak. >> what do you -- how do you interpret that? >> i'm absolutely -- i would absolutely agree with that. the whole idea of britain's monarchy is built on, you know, going back in history, taking over nations and especially african nations and what have you. one of the things that's cropped up has been very interesting because i've been talking about this with u.s. networks as well as uk networks and australian networks. the biggest difference is slavery in america happened on your soil. in britain, we didn't have that on our soil. you know, we did it in other countries. so, for instance, i wouldn't use the term systemic racism in britain because people wouldn't understand what it means. but i can use it in the states. so when i talk about the monarchy, it is built on systemic racism. that doesn't mean they have gone out and beaten up people of a different color. but i absolutely agree they wouldn't know how to deal with any of this. they wouldn't -- they think in terms of exotic and how would we deal with this and what have you. and someone like meghan markle coming from the states where you can openly talk about systemic racism would go, you what? you know. >> yes, yea. >> so what shocked people in the america, the british are shocked that the americans are shocked at that. >> that's really interesting. that is such helpful perspective because oprah did express shock, but it's helpful to see through the british lens. thank you both very much. >> i actually love this transition i'm about to make in a million different ways. coming up, president biden's dogs have been sent home away from the white house what happened to major and champ next? >> well done. did you enjoy that. >> yeah. much elect rale cloud as the king and queen do. in verizon 5g quality. and in parts of many cities, we have ultra wideband, the fastest 5g in the world. this is 5g built right. only from verizon. psst! psst! allergies don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily stops your body from overreacting to allergens all season long. psst! psst! you're good. some say this is my greatest challenge ever. but i've seen centuries of this. with a companion that powers a digital world, traded with a touch. the gold standard, so to speak ;) do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy, even a term policy, for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized that we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have one hundred thousand dollars or more of life insurance you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit conventrydirect.com to find out if you policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance. if these beautiful idaho potato recipes are just side dishes, then i'm not a real idaho potato farmer. genuine idaho potatoes not just a side dish anymore. always look for the grown in idaho seal. so you're a small business, or a big one. you were thriving, but then... oh. ah. okay. plan, pivot. how do you bounce back? you don't, you bounce forward, with serious and reliable internet. powered by the largest gig speed network in america. but is it secure? sure it's secure. and even if the power goes down, your connection doesn't. so how do i do this? you don't do this. we do this, together. bounce forward, with comcast business. republican congressman adam kinzinger unwelcome in his own party, but he's on a mission to get the republicans to leave the former president behind, and he's willing to risk his own career to do so. cnn's jeff zeleny with an inside look. >> yeah. could be a kamikaze mission or the thing that saves the republican party. >> reporter: adam kinzinger believes the first step to saving the republican party is extracting from the grips of donald trump. >> any time in the history of the party there have been competing visions, except for now. it's just been donald trump's vision and nobody else has said anything else. we have a right and a responsibility to offer competing visions to republicans. >> reporter: the republican party is at a cross roads. yet it still trump country in this stretch of illinois. where flags wave for the former president and these signs make clear not all republicans are searching for a new vision. elected to congress a decade ago with the rise of the tea party. >> it is time to grow up to be adults here. >> reporter: kinzinger is now one of the most outspoken republican trump critics. fraught with political risk. >> even if i don't survive long in the job, the reality i be part of good history. >> even if i don't survive. that's a very real possibility. >> it is. it is. and i think until you're willing to put your job on the line, you know, like in warfare, until you're willing to put your life on the line, when you're willing to put your job on the line, then you're free. >> he joined the air force in 9/11 and still plays as a national guard pilot. his escalating battle with trump offers an early test whether more republicans will restreet or join his mission. >> i've probably been the most outspoken. >> you voted for donald trump in november. >> yeah. i think there were two defining areas in this. number one was the night of the election saying it was stolen. and of course january 6th was the other huge thing. >> reporter: that day was a turning point. >> shouldn't we be willing to give up our jobs to uphold that constitution? >> reporter: of the 17 republicans who supported impeachment, kinzinger stands alone as trying to use it as a rallying cry to turn the page. and promote himself. >> join the movement at countryfirst.com. >> kinzinger outperformed trump by eight points in illinois's 16th congressional district stretches from the wisconsin border beyond the far western chicago suburbs and back toward the indiana line. it includes the town of dixon, the boyhood home of ronald reagan who inspired a young k kinz kinz kinzinger. >> moral clarity, optimistic he had that kind of stuff americans are desperate for. >> reporter: across his district, the congressman is making a name for himself in ways good and bad. >> i'm glad there's somebody like an adam kinzinger that's got the courage to speak out. >> but some people are angry what he did. >> no question. no question. >> reporter: jeff and angie phelps are among them. >> i was surprised with kinzinger. in the future, i probably will not vote for him. >> he's looking out for himself. >> reporter: yet trump loyalties here and in red states across america run deep and many republicans don't believe their party is broken at all. >> what if it doesn't need saving or what if it doesn't want to be saved? >> and that i think is the question. if it doesn't want to be changed, that's a decision the republicans get to make. if that's the case long-term, i think we will lose elections. >> now, kinzinger says he would like to restore conservatism to the republican party rather than what he says is fear and divisiveness it's become consumed with during the trump era. some voters in his district called what he's doing brave and others found it politically calculating but his efforts and the extent to which other republicans join him or not will help answer the question if the gop remains the party of trump. john? >> i'll take it, jeff. really interesting to take that closer look at kinzinger. thank you very much. >> sure. so this morning, president biden's two german shepherds are back in delaware. sources tell cnn the dogs were removed from the white house yesterday after a biting incident involving a member of the security team. this is not the first time in the doghouse for the president's rescue pup named major. and cnn's kate bennett has this reporting live in washington with more. so what happened, kate? >> reporter: so alisyn, major is a younger dog about three years old. i want to say that i'm a dog person. this is a new environment for dogs. we know that dogs behave -- it can be scary, i'm sure to be in the white house with new people, new faces, security, all sorts of things. but there was an incident with major biting a member of the security team. i've spoken to a few people who said that major is, you know a bit on the wild side. that he barks. that he's been known to charge. that he feels a bit unruly between the two dogs, champ, who is much older at almost 13 years old and has problems with his mobility at this point. but major is the one that has been a bit of an issue at the white house since they moved in at the end of january. you know, the first lady dr. biden said herself that getting the dogs settled has been a number one priority. making sure everyone is calm and, you know, not jumping all over the furniture. she said to kelly clarkson on her talk show. but seriously, this is an issue when you have a dog, you have multiple people, staff members, secret service, maintenance workers and, you know, just the general public, the press. these are dogs that are used to a certain kind of life and moving them to the white house has definitely been a change in their environment. going back to delaware i don't think anyone should see as a punishment but helping to mitigate the issue with major. >> well, it sure looks like president biden is going to miss the dogs. >> caller: i mean, the dogs are definitely part of the biden family. he's referenced -- he got champ right before he became vice president under president obama. major was a rescue dog from a delaware shelter. it's the first shelter dog to be living in the white house in white house history. so, certainly we hope to see them back soon but right now no sign they will be returning to the white house. >> kate, thank you very much for all of that reporting. >> look, i don't want to say partisanship is at play here, barny, the bush dog bit a reporter and was not sent home, albeit it was at the end of his administration. wasn't much time left. >> important context. >> this is different treatment. >> thank you very much. all right. so it's official. one side is passing covid relief while the other is talking dr. seuss and mr. potato head. this is a reality check you need to see next. 50% more cleaning power, so you don't have to. its food-seeking enzymes brerek down food into particles so small they can flow right down the drain. plus, it's powerful enough for the quick-wash cycle. new cascade platinum with 50% more cleaning power! find your rhythm. your happy place. find your breaking point. then break it. every emergen-c gives you a potent blend of nutrients so you can emerge your best with emergen-c. ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ hey limu! [ squawks ] 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 ♪ senate democrats just passed president biden's covid relief bill while many republicans are still talking about dr. seuss. john avlon here with a "reality check." >> because a week is a long time in politics, i want to take you back to trump's second impeachment trial where the ex-president's lawyers argue d congress should be focusing on more important things. >> we will not take most of our time today in the hopes that you will take back these hours and use them to get covid relief to the american people. >> i've got good news for them. the senate did just pass a massive covid relief bill and it got precisely no republican votes. now that's despite broad bipartisan support and this is a big bill beyond its $1.9 trillion price tag. biden's american rescue plan could cut poverty by a third and childhood poverty by nearly 60% according to columbia university. that could change people's lives, especially after decades in which income inequality has gotten worse. the bill contains not just $1400 checks and stimulus for americans making less than $75,000. it expands child tax credits, boosts small businesses. and this matters because this bill is reversing the reagan equation. making the case that government can be the solution, not the problem. now republicans say it's too expensive, but fiscal conservative card doesn't carry the weight it did before donald trump ballooned the deficit and debt and republicans didn't say boo. now we've got something like a controlled experiment as well because trump's signature tax cuts also totaled around $1.9 trillion and it also passed along partisan lines in reconciliation. but the bulk of its benefits went to the wealthiest merps and corporations. the biden bill takes a more bottom-up approach. as a chief economist told us, giving money to households is more stimulus because those families are more likely to spend it quickly. the laws of economic gravity suggest deficits and debt can't be ignored forever unless government growth sparks inflation. but you can tell a lot from political winds. maybe it's because this bill is so popular or biden has much higher approval ratings than trump ever did. but the response on the right has been to deploy culture war distractions. get this. over the past week, fox news mentioned cancel culture more than twice as many times as covid relief bill. and their attacks have backfired. like tom cotton slamming it for making prisoners eligible for relief checks, but trump's did as well and cotton voted for it. it promises to be a big deal for working families who have been getting squeezed for decades and have born the brunt of this pandemic. that shouldn't be a partisan issue. and that's your reality check. >> thank you for that, john. really appreciate it. as we mark one year of the coronavirus pandemic in this country, questions remain over the origin of the virus. a new book reveals warnings from u.s. diplomats of risky experiments at a wuhan lab in 2018. joining me now, josh rogan, the author of "chaos under heaven, xi and the battle for the 21st century." it's a terrific read. congratulations. wonderful work and it deals with the now, i think, as well. insofar as the now goes. the w.h.o. is investigating now, the origins of the virus. they visited a wuhan lab and put out a statement saying it's highly unlikely that the virus originated here. your ground-breaking reporting from over the last year, which you expand on in the book, it really casts doubts on what the w.h.o. is saying. how and why? >> well, that's right, john. even the biden administration has said that they have deep concerns about the w.h.o. investigation that went to wuhan because of some conflicts of interest among the staff but also because the chinese government refused to put forth the data that they would really need to figure it out. so suffice to say the w.h.o. investigation, according to the biden administration, will not be the end all and be all, which means we still don't know how the virus originated. and that's not just the issue of blame. that's an issue of tracing the origin in order to prevent the next pandemic, which will surely come. and what i'm adding in this book is a lot of warnings that were ignored at the beginning of the trump administration by diplomats who visited some labs. it doesn't prove or disprove it but just points to the need for more investigation. that's exactly what the biden administration is calling for. i'm going to break some news on your show right now. the -- i'm going to have an article later today in "the washington post" that will respect that the biden administration is actually not disputing some of the trump administration's claims about this very lab. namely that the researchers there got sick in november 2017 with covid-like symptoms and they were involved in some undisclosed research with chinese government and chinese military. these are some of the claims the trump administration made. and while the biden administration is not endorsing any theory about the origin, they don't know. you don't know, i don't know how this started, they are saying some of the information about the lab the trump administration put forward is accurate, from u.s. intelligence community sources, and we need more information. we need more investigation. >> let's talk a little more about the undisputed facts then. the biden administration not disputing there was a lab in wuhan where there are -- the trump administration said there was an accident there. you reported extensively on diplomatic warnings from u.s. officials who were concerned about the possibility of accident in a lab where a virus, a sars-like virus specifically, could end up getting out and being a threat. what more are the undisputed facts? >> right. and we have to be very precise lear here because we want to be accurate. the biden administration is not saying there was an antccident there. all that means is that we need to look at that theory more and that they want us to look at that more. what i reported is that four years ago, a bunch of diplomats who went there warned of safety concerns. they warned of the risky research this lab was doing about bad coronaviruses and they called for the u.s. government to give them more support and give them more help to get their lab up to snuff. when i first reported these cables in april 2020, the issue of the origin was very highly politicized. not at least because the trump administration politicized it, okay? they went beyond the facts. and they went beyond what we know to make allegations. i'm not making those allegations. i'm saying we don't know how the virus originated. but what i'm saying is these warnings when you take out the trump administration, you take out their unsupported allegations, leave a big question mark that even people inside the biden administration want to solve. and that's as far as we should go, and that's as far as we can go. and what we need is an investigation of all the possible theories full stop. >> it may be as far as we ever get because as you note there may never be a smoking gun was the chinese worked hard to hide any evidence of anything. i want to flip this all on its head because you talked about the beginnings of the virus in the united states. there was a statement and you write about this in your book, when president trump in the early days of finding out about this talked about what he thought would happen with the virus in the coming weeks and months. listen. >> now the virus that we're talking about having to do, you know, a lot of people think that goes away in april with the heat, as the heat comes in. typically that will go away in april. we're in great shape, though. >> who did he mean by a lot of people at that point? he meant someone very specific. >> chinese president xi jinping told the president of the united states, donald trump, in two specific phone calls in february and march that the virus would go away when it got warmer. they had it under control. herbal medicine worked to heal it and lots of other lies. and we don't know if president trump believed that or just wanted to believe it or is repeating it because he felt at that moment it was in his interest. but these lies became part of what was going on inside the president's head and, therefore, what came out of his mouth. and it was mixed with a lot of other things he was getting from a lot of other conflicting sources like his own health experts and own national security experts. can you imagine what it must have been like for them as they're hearing the president of china is giving the president of the united states bad information, and that garble is why we saw such a garbled response by our government which exacerbated the suffering, delayed the response and inevitably caused much more sickness and death than otherwise would have been necessary. >> josh, what was the reaction when people in the administration heard the president parroting the chinese leader? >> they worked very hard to convince him that wasn't the case. in some cases, they succeeded. in some cases they failed. not all of them agreed, too. his political advisers wanted trump to play down the virus because they wanted his -- the economy to stay good because they were hoping it would all work out and he'd get re-elected. the national security health officials are like, no, this is serious. this is more important. they largely failed to convince him until the end. by then it was too late. what's ironic is his failed response actually probably cost him the election. if he'd listened to the experts and not the chinese president, he would have been much better off. >> "chaos under heaven." josh, it's terrific. the real challenge, now more or less agreed upon challenge that china poses to the united states and what needs to be done going forward. terrific work. >> thank you. "new day" continues right now. >> finally, guidance for the fully vaccinated. >> grandparents have been vaccinated, they can visit their family, even if they have not been vaccinated. >> house lawmakers are now expected to vote wednesday on his $1.9 trillion relief package. >> every public opinion poll shows that people want this. >> british tabloids hit back after an explosive royal interview. >> this is a two-hour trash-a-thon of our royal family. >> he's protecting his family. he wants to keep the press from hounding them. >> this is "new day" with alisyn camerota and john berman. >> welcome to our viewers in the united states and all around the world. this is "new day." it was one year ago this morning that there were 22 deaths from coronavirus in the united states. 22. but the reality of what was about to happen was clear to dr. sanjay gupta who came on "ne