we are now just hours away from the house taking its final vote on president biden's landmark $1.9 trillion covid relief legislation. final passage tomorrow expected along party lines. of course doubtful any republicans will support it. the president says that he'll sign the bill into law as soon as it gets to his desk. stimulus checks will be in the hands of needy americans over the next few weeks. and queen elizabeth releasing a statement saying the royal family is saddened at harry and meghan's bombshell allegations of racism and neglect. joining me now, cnn political analyst astead herndon and political commentator amanda carpenter. good evening to both. astead, you're first. we are likely just hours away from president biden's massive covid relief bill passing. that means $1,400 checks to struggling americans. billions of dollars for vaccines and covid testing. as biden once said to the former president barack obama, this is a big f-in' deal. >> this is a key piece of legislation they knew they wanted to kick off this administration with, and he's going to get it done. there's a couple important things here to know. one, he did not have to scale down the scope and size of this agreement. it remains at its kind of $1.9 trillion investment, which is what the president proposed. it did lose some pieces. it lost the $15 minimum wage. it pared down some of the unemployment insurance benefits. but this remains a massive victory for both the white house and to be clear, for the american people who were crying out for that covid relief. we can say kind of unequivocally that those georgia races had a huge impact on the scope of legislation that was able to be passed because this required such a democratic kind of unified effort. it would not have happened, of course, without those special elections being won back in january. >> so, amanda, this bill has the bipartisan support of american people but not a single republican lawmaker is supporting it. the gop get rolled? they just haven't realized it yet? >> yeah. i think this bill is so massive. i mean we pay attention to the $1,400 checks because that's what we think of as covid relief. but, man, you look at the details of this bill. joe biden got a lot. this is practically fdr-level type of reform that he's getting. there's $86 billion union pension bailout. there's a complete transformation of the child tax credit so it becomes sort of a direct payment in the form of a monthly allowance. there is an expansion of obamacare. i mean when you talk about a massive victory for the democrats, it is not just the relief checks that are going out. there is so much more in the details. i actually think, you know, the republicans -- because the democrats chose to pass this with a 50-vote threshold, they essentially took a pass. like where was the debate on all of these other details? they were talking about dr. seuss, and i think it's going to take them many, many weeks to realize how much they actually got rolled by not choosing to engage in this debate. >> but, listen, you mentioned dr. seuss. you know, they're complaining and calling this bill socialist. but instead of trying to amend it, right, they were busy talking about those issues like dr. seuss and mr. potato head and all the culture wars. i mean that's -- that's seemingly what's important to them right now. but instead, you know, i'm not sure if it's a fair characteristic to say that just because it's not the $1,400 checks or it doesn't have anything to do with shots going directly into people's arms, amanda, that that still has nothing to do with covid relief because a lot of businesses are struggling. there's going to be -- >> sure. >> children need help. there are many aspects of american culture and society that are going to need help recovering because of covid. >> yeah, and a lot of the bill does deal with that. but $86 billion pension bailout, the problems with union pensions far pre-dated what happened with covid. transforming the child tax credit, listen, maybe that should be done. andrew yang should be dancing in the streets. it might be a good idea to do that. is it related to covid? probably not. but this all got jammed through, stuffed in. i think democrats should be happy about it, but there's a lot to unpack here. >> yeah, maybe you're right. republicans don't realize how they, as you say, that maybe they got rolled, right, or they're -- >> big-time. >> they're going to look back and go, ooh, why were we talking about those things instead of focusing on the issues? >> astead, president biden is about to make a big push to convince americans that these benefits should be permanent, not just this onetime thing, starting with this prime-time address on thursday night. what does he need to say given that we know certain aspects of this bill are broadly popular and bipartisan? >> this is going to be the first step of democrats taking credit for these efforts. there's a couple things that the party has learned from 2009 with the stimulus package that president obama passed. one was about kind of cutting out republicans and kind of going for the full scope of reform, keeping that big price tag to make a fuller investment rather than pare it down for those trying to get the susan collins, lisa murkowski type of vote. the second is about this type of messaging. they think democrats didn't take enough credit for the good they did in 2009 for the economy, and that hurt them in the 2010 elections. we're going to hear a drumbeat of democrats say over and over and over, this is what the party gave you. it's delivering on its promises. they hope that helps them in the midterms. a quick word on the dr. seuss/mr. potato head. republicans are focused on this not just because it's an issue that motivates their base, but they think their base is motivated by that long-term question of who has societal and cultural power? that is what this stuff is really about. it's not really about the gender of the potato or the canceling of the book. it's about who gets to have a say in what is popular and what is not, what is mainstream and what is not. they think their base is worried about the long-term loss of power from the kind of traditional and white and mainstream -- what we have determined has been the power centers of america, and that is what republicans think motivates their section. that's what the kind of cancel culture debates are truly getting at. >> in these virtual times, i must say i appreciate both astead and amanda for giving us good brick wall tonight. you guys give good brick wall. thank you very much. now i want to bring in jaime har harrison. thanks for joining. experts are saying that this covid relief bill could cut child poverty in half. i know this is very personal for you. you grew up in poverty. what would this bill have given a kid like you and your family? >> well, don, it's good seeing you, man. listen, i often tell stories, i remember times growing up looking for a bowl of cereal and going to the fridge to get milk and there wasn't any, not because somebody didn't get it but because we couldn't afford it. so i had to put water in my cereal. this bill is going to have a dramatic impact on the lives of low-income kids across this country. they say about 93% of children in this country will be impacted because of this. just think about it, don. we are increasing the child tax credit in this bill from $2,000 -- you've got a kid like mine that's under the age of 6. i got a 2-year-old. that will go from $2,000 to $3,600. for a poor family that is struggling right now because of covid, that's a game-changer. there's so many provisions in this bill that's going to make life easier for a lot of low-income and working people in this country. >> okay. listen, let's be specific here. what are the most concrete ways, jamie, people will see the impacts of this bill in their lives? >> money in pockets. people will get to stay in their jobs. vaccines in arms. and kids get an opportunity to go back to school. you know, there's so many provisions in here. let me even say in red states, don, where medicaid has not been expanded, states like south carolina, there's a provision in here that will pay for the next two years of medicaid expansion at 100%. so, in essence, that's $600 million to the state of south carolina. there's a lot of good in this bill that will improve the quality of lives of the people in this country. and let me tell the american people something. democrats were unified in supporting this, and not one republican voted for this. so in essence, they turn their backs on the american people in a time in which they needed the help the most. >> well, this bill also includes $5 billion in aid to pay off the debt of disadvantaged black farmers and to help fund racial equity commission in the usda. senator lindsey graham, who ran against -- you ran against in november, is calling this reparations. here it is. >> let me give you an example of something that really bothers me. in this bill, if you're a farmer, your loan will be forgiven up to 120% of your loan, not 100%, but 120% of your loan if you're socially disadvantaged, if you're african-american, some other minority. but if you're a white person, if you're a white woman, no forgiveness. that's reparations. >> well, so, jaime, that takes some mental gymnastics. just because this helps black farmers, somehow senator graham thinks this is reparations. >> well, what you got right there was an example of a senator who doesn't work for all of his citizens, don. you know, lindsey should be ashamed of himself. donald trump during his administration gave out $28 billion to farmers and asked how many black farmers in south carolina benefited from that. he was as quiet as a church mouse. this guy is reprehensible in terms of who does he actually represent? he doesn't represent all of the people that he's supposed to represent in the state of south carolina, a state where almost a third of its population is african-american. it's far time that we get rid of the dead weight in the senate like lindsey graham, and let me tell you there's plenty of it in 2022. and we are targeting them, and we're going to make sure that folks get somebody who's going to fight for all of their people, not just select people. >> jaime, thank you, sir. >> thank you, my friend. >> i'll see you soon. so talking about race may be the last taboo in britain, but it seems like everybody is finally talking about it in the wake of harry and meghan's blockbuster interview. well, not everybody. >> can i ask what did you think of the interview? to brain bett? unlike ordinary memory supplements— neuriva has clinically proven ingredients that fuel 5 indicators of brain performance. memory, focus, accuracy, learning, and concentration. try our new gummies for 30 days and see the difference. so the coinciqueen is respo to harry and meghan's interview saying the issue raised particularly that of race are concerning -- the issues, particularly of race, are concerning. while some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. harry, meghan, and archie will always be much loved family members. but as cnn's salma abdelaziz explains, the racism meghan says she experienced after joining the royal family isn't surprising for many british people of color. >> did you leave the country because of racism? >> it was -- it was a large part of it. >> reporter: it's the interview stirring emotions across britain. reactions ranging from shock to vitriolic rants by a popular white tv host. >> this is a two-hour trash-a-thon. they portray the royal family as racist, and it's a very incendiary charge, and i don't think it actually is fair to the royal family. >> to angry and protective tabloid headlines. so why does the mention of racism provoke such defensive reactions in britain? in the months after prince harry and meghan stepped back as senior members of the royal family, britain faced its own moment of racial reckoning. >> say his name. >> george floyd! >> reporter: black lives matter protests in the u.s. spread to the uk. tens of thousands directed their anger at the country's elite institutions of power. toppling icons of bruitish colonialism that ignited a national debate. yet the topic of race is considered culturally awkward if not outright taboo. >> the british like to think of themselves as quite liberal with a small "l." and the british get quite offended if they're accused of racism. there's something about black women, i think, that some people in this country find particularly triggering. i don't know why. and meghan came into that in spades. >> reporter: from the moment meghan's relationship with a member of the royal family became public, her race become the subject of constant tabloid fodder and discontent. during the couple's engagement, the queen's cousin's wife apologized after wearing a controversial broach many considered racist when she met meghan for the first time. the couple's multi-cultural royal wedding offered hopes of societal change. but soon after, the racist backlash continued. meghan endured attacks for things as mundane as avocados while her white sister-in-law by comparison was praised. when meghan became pregnant with her first child, a wave of racist online abuse followed from social media trolls. after her son was born, one television presenter was fired for liking him to a picture of a chimpanzee. through the barrage of racist attacks against his wife, harry says he came to terms with his role in historically white institution. >> my upbringing in the system of which i was brought up in and what i've been exposed to, it wasn't -- i wasn't aware of it to start with. sad as it is to say, it takes living in her shoes. >> reporter: there is only one person in the world who knows what it means to be a british royal of color -- meghan. >> growing up as a woman of color, as a little girl of color, i know how important representation is. i know how you want to see someone who looks like you in certain positions. >> cnn's salma abdelaziz joins us now. hello, salma. so what was the response -- what has the response been to the palace's statement? what's that been like from the public? >> reporter: hello, don. in some ways, it is finally a relief to see a statement. many people had been waiting for them to break the silence. this is coming directly from the queen, so that is significant. and it seems to show a sense of understanding, that there's something there that needs to be discussed. but for those who want to criticize the statement or those who might see the view of meghan and prince harry, they will tell you this is not a familial matter, don. this is an institution. there is a reason why prince harry and meghan did not name any specific individuals. they talked about a system, about an institution, about a firm, about the day-to-day life of the lived experience of meghan markle as the first royal of color. and so you have to ask, what does that mean for this larger institution that holds on to these traditions so dearly? how are they going to address these questions of systemic racism entrenched within that institution, and how do they begin to adapt to that, especially when, again, it is an institution that prides itself on that colonial tradition? so the question is does the monarchy, by putting out this statement -- is it saying that it is starting a conversation that could lead to change, diversity, an adoption of a more inclusive mind-set, or will they remain steadfast? will they remain tied to the past, and how will they fit with the modern britain if they do, don? >> salma, thank you for your story. put it all into context for us. i appreciate that. joining me now is cnn royal historian kate williams. thank you so much for joining. this is a very carefully worded statement from the queen claiming that they didn't know the full extent of what meghan went through. but meghan says that she spoke up and even went to buckingham palace h.r. about it. this was not a secret. >> yes, exactly, don. well, the statement is so short. it's 61 words, and what it's aiming to do, of course, is to draw a line under the conversation gooabout the revelations in the interview, particularly about the concern raised about archie's skin tone that you were just discussing there with salma, and also meghan's revelation that she had this severe mental health crisis. she was in real distress, particularly about the racist coverage of her. she went to the palace h.r. she wanted to go to hospital, and she was told, no, it will make the institution look back. and this statement really, i think, is significant for what's not said. there's a lot not said, and that i think is quite ironic, isn't it, because the couple said they couldn't speak. and oprah said, were you silent, or were you silenced, is it the latter? and meghan couldn't speak out about her mental health, about how she was suffering from this barrage of racist abuse she was getting. this has not really been dealt with because the institution was told. the institution was begged for help. it wasn't given to her. and, you know, in the 1980s, diana was desperate. she was isolated. she too had a mental health crisis. no one helped her. you know, the question we're asking now is that if in 20 years' time, one of the younger royals, the children of will and kate, charlotte or george or louis, wishes to marry a person of color, is this going to happen all over again? the racist abuse, the isolation, and indeed the lack of recognition just as you and salma were saying? is this going to happen again in. >> you mentioned the statement. i said it was masterful earlier because it addressed the problem without really addressing the problem. it acknowledged it was aware -- that they're aware of the problem, but it didn't really address it. thank you, kate. i appreciate it. so i wrote something that i hope can help a lot of people, especially with these issues. it's my new book. it's called "this is the fire: what i say to my friends about racism." it is coming out next week, so you can pre-order it now. i hope you will check it out. so we've got a lot more on the royal family fallout and which famous host predicted trouble ahead before the wedding. that's next. - grammarly business turned my marketing team into rock stars. (diana strums guitar) maya swears by grammarly business because it keeps her work on brand and error-free. fast and easy. - [announcer] learn more at grammarly.com/business. the statement by queen elizabeth acknowledges harry and meghan's allegations about racism, but the statement is short and very carefully worded. joining me now to discuss is tv presenter trisha goddard. trisha, good to see you again. thanks so much for jouining us once again. what do you think of buckingham palace breaking their silence? they aren't denying what prince harry and meghan alleged. they seem to chalk it up to a difference of interpretation on how things went down. >> i'll tell you what's very scary. i did an interview first thing this morning, and i was asked what the queen -- you know, how the royal family should deal with this. and i actually said, this whole thing is about pain. it's about a couple who have been literally screaming out for help from the word go and haven't had any help. i said, the first thing you need to do is bite your tongue, whether you think they're right, wrong, whatever, and say, i hear you. i feel your pain. and we might remember things differently, but let's sit down and talk. and i'm not saying i advise the queen, but we were absolutely gobsmacked as we say in england when that came out. this is pretty quick for the queen. i know in america and especially in this day of digital, you know, and online responses, you might think it's a long time. this is actually really quick for the royal family. i actually think they've done the right thing by keeping, you know, if i was to advise them in damage control, in keeping the message short. and i think it's very powerful that it comes from the queen because as you might remember, in the interview harry said that he's always had a very close relationship with the queen, and it sounds like he's been communicating with her all the way through. so i think that's really powerful. so, you know, but it's -- here's the thing. one of the things, let me just say that i have really noticed talking about this issue here in the states, in the uk, and i've done some australian television. i cannot use -- i don't use the term "systemic racism" in britain because it goes over 90% of people's heads. in england, racism is someone coming up to you in the street, calling uyou the n-word and punching you to the floor. i have so often had -- i've been lectured by white people about what racism is. >> they don't understand that a system that is the monarchy that's based on whiteness and bloodlines, that that is part of a systemic racist system? >> you would not get that far in the sentence. >> let me ask you another thing because i know when you say you're doing television, you're also doing television over there as well, across the pond. and you said you're doing australia. do you think they're paying attention to american television? you think they are watching cnn in a sense and trying to understand how it's being perceived in the united states? >> they think -- and this is a big generalization. in my mind, the majority of brits mistake hollywood for america. >> wow. >> oh, yeah. and so this is -- you know, too touchy and feely, and they're over the top. i'd say that the conversation about racism is more overt and more direct here in america than in england. i use very different language when i'm talking directly to a british broadcaster. >> maybe they think oprah is too touchy-feely will you the interview has caused them to have to come out with a statement. speaking of the united states and our, i guess, television system if you want to call it entertainment or not, i want to play something. this is from john oliver talking about meghan markle. this was ahead of the wedding in 2018 that has since gone viral after the oprah interview. here it is. >> i would not blame her if she pulled out of this at the last minute. i don't -- i don't think you need to have just seen the pilot episode of "the crown" to get a basic sense of she might be marrying into a family that could cause her some emotional complications. >> this generation seems like nice people, right? they're all nice now, right? >> yeah. i mean there are -- they're an emotionally stunted group of fundamentally flawed people doing a very silly pseudojob. that's what she's marrying into. so i hope she likes it. it's going to be weird for her. >> i -- i love john oliver. so, listen, what do you think of that given what has unfolded because he said this at the time that a lot of people, a lot of americans were really -- including myself were very optimistic about how the marriage could maybe help modernize the monarchy a little bit? >> well, they definitely had the opportunity. if you remember when meghan told australia and all of those countries and what she did for the grenfell disaster and the locker flats that burned down. she was an absolutely ideal way of shoring up, if that's what the royals wanted to do, shoring up the commonwealth. and they kind of lost that. they really did lose that. and i don't -- i think it's a case, and it's in general with a lot of british people, they -- they do it without even seeming to realize, and it's so embedded. let me just put it this way. you have to remember the slave trade in america was on your doorstep. everybody knows about or should know about redlining, about all of the terrible things that happened, the stories. it's embedded. it happened on your soil. britain, on the other hand, they went to other countries and did it. so they didn't kind of get their hands dirty. so brits weren't brought up seeing all of those terrible things. so they have nothing to deny because nothing happened on their soil. so i find it very, very different, the approach to racism where, americans, it's out there. they either say get over it, we don't care, or they recognize it and they want to change it. in england, it's like, we don't have a race problem. and it's there like a layer cake. it's embedded so deeply. unless they've beaten somebody over the head with a bat, you know, running up and touching some hair as they do -- you know, i've had my natural hair, when it's out, touched, and someone comparing it to pubic hair. now, that happens all the time. and people say, we're just curious, you know? and why are you getting upset with it, you know. >> well -- >> it's embedded. it's very different. >> well, this has been an interesting conversation, trisha. how vivid. >> i'll tell you, every brit of color who has gone through that, i'm telling you. i've been inundated. everybody coming out with that same story, and it's like get over it. >> that's a first for me. thank you. i'll see you soon, trisha goddard. so trump's got a new grift, and it could be at the expense of the republican party. plus, why are these two biden nominees facing so much pushback from republicans? 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. the former president is out of office, but it doesn't seem like he is giving up the grift. the republican national committee is ignoring trump's cease and desist letter after his demand they stop using his name and likeness in fund-raising efforts. instead, the twice impeached former president has his own ideas about where supporters should send their money. you guessed it. he's telling them to donate it to his own save america pac, writing, and i quote here, no more money for rinos, republicans in name only. they do nothing but hurt the republican party and our great voting base. they will never lead us to greatness. adding in another statement, quote, so much money is being raised and completely wasted by people that do not have the gop's best interest in mind. joining me now to discuss is tim o'brien, the senator columnist for bloomberg opinion and the author of "trump nation." tim, it's always a pleasure to -- wow, that picture on the cover is -- it looks like a -- >> you know, there's a story on that, don. >> it's like a trump ken doll. >> he wanted to see the cover of the book before the book published. you know, i spent a lot of time with him on that book, and i said, sure, we'll make sure you see the cover art. although he ended up hating the book, he sued me for it, he called me -- i was at "the new york times" at the time, and he called me at work, and i said, i love this cover. it makes me look like superman. i look like some kind of a superman. and he wanted the original and everything. true story. >> he sued you, but he loved the cover. >> yeah. >> tim, listen, he wants these donations flowing in to him instead of the rnc and other gop committees. he said this is for the good of the republican party. what are the odds here that this is going to be used for political purposes? >> i think the odds are nil. i think there's ample evidence before of how he rolls around these things. i don't think trump understood the world of pac money and how he could turn that into another grift, another opportunity to monetize the relationship he has with his base and with his voters until he started propagating the big lie around the election being rigged. and remember he set up the donald trump defense fund right after election day, and he claimed he needed funding from his supporters to pay all the massive legal costs he was going to encounter having to fight this illegally rigged election. in very short order, he raised 200 million -- at least $200 million. about $14 million of that actually went to his legal defense. and i think all the light bulbs went off in his head, in his children's heads that, oh, this is actually something you can rinse and repeat and rinse and repeat. and i think he was going to move into his post-white house years doing, you know, large -- i think the only thing he was going to do on the road were large-scale stadium events and then do direct mail fund-raising, and he was going to keep this going for as long as he can. then suddenly he discovered, oh, the gop is using my image, and that's going to get in the way of the money pipeline, and i'm going to jump on that as quickly as i can. >> yeah. maybe the gop should use the image from your book and he'll be happy and won't mind. listen, does this go beyond money, tim? how much of this is about holding the party's pursestrings and making sure that they stay tied to him even after his 2020 loss and incitement of an insurrection? >> i think it is that too. it's always multiple things with him. i think it's his desire to exercise control over the party, to -- there's very few things that are on his mind as frequently as vengeance. and he has got a lot of revenge planned for members of the republican party who didn't support the insurrection he incited on january 6th. and of course democrats. but i think what he really wants to do is get into red districts and back candidates who are opposing candidates that people like mitch mcconnell are going to put up. and he knows that he'll be able to do that effectively, he's going to need money. but if he can't get the money as you noted, he's going to also throw as much sand in the machinery as he can. >> yeah. always a pleasure, tim. let's put the book back up. >> thank you, don. >> tim's book just to get a look at it. there you go. "trump nation: the art of being the donald." thanks. i'll see you soon, tim. false, misleading, and expensive. two biden nominees on the receiving end of particularly harsh attacks and critics say it's because they have one thing in common. so you want to make the best burger ever? then make it! that means selling everything. and eating nothing but cheese till you find the perfect slice... even if everyone asks you... another burger truck? don't listen to them! that means cooking day and night until you get... [ ding ] you got paid! that means adding people to the payroll. hi mom. that means... best burger ever. intuit quickbooks helps small businesses be more successful with payments, payroll, banking and live bookkeeping. a month and a half into his presidency, and joe biden is still trying to get nominees for key government positions confirmed by the senate. critics say hard-line republicans are being particularly aggressive in trying to block women of color. more tonight from senior political correspondent abby phillip. >> reporter: two of president joe biden's picks for top justice department posts, both women of color, are on the receiving end of some of the most expensive and intense attacks by conservatives of any of his nominees. >> she supports defunding the police, led a group that wants to reduce punishments on white supremacists, even terrorists. >> reporter: in false and misleading multi-million dollar ads like this, vanita gupta and kristen clark, both seasoned civil rights attorneys, are being painted at radical choices. >> your record is one of an extreme partisan advocate. your record is an ideologue. >> reporter: in her confirmation hearing today for position of associate attorney general, gupta defended herself. >> as a lifelong civil rights leader i have committed my career to ensuring that the promises made in the constitution are kept and that our federal laws are fairly and impartially applied. i do not support defunding the police. >> reporter: republicans have also accused simp civil rights lawyer kristen clark of reverse racism and anti-semitism, even using her words against biden's attorney general nominee, merrick garland. >> i find it particularly troubling that during the hearing and in response to questions he advocated for both vanita gupta and kristen clark, both of whom he barely knows. >> reporter: their supporters see a pattern. >> there has almost been a barrier that has been erected by the right that you have to go through a gauntlet if you have devoted your life to civil rights legal practice. >> reporter: for decades, republicans have worked to stop the civil rights nominees of democratic presidents using a similar playbook, conjuring fears about crime and accusations that they would implement preferential treatment for racial minorities. >> they're almost fantastical and frankly i'd heard about the ads. and when i saw the ad, it was so ridiculous, so preposterous, so every word, so untrue with the exception of and and the. >> reporter: and 30 years ago, it worked. similar attacks derailed president clinton's nominee, also a black woman. >> should we have proceeded with a confirmation battle, that would give her a more ample opportunity to clarify her views but would guarantee a bloody and divisive conflict over civil rights. >> reporter: gupta's nomination in particular has drawn support from unlikely quarters. grover norquist, head of the conservative group americans for tax reform, the fraternal order of police, the national sheriff's association, and nearly a dozen other police organizations, have all put their support behind her. gupta and clark are just two nominees of color who have faced difficult paths to confirmation in a narrowly divided senate, leading to accusations that they are being targeted because of their race or gender. senator tom cotton, a republican, pushed back on that suggestion today. >> can you oppose the nomination of a woman or a racial minority on the merits without being racist or sexist? >> yes. >> reporter: whether it was president clinton, president obama, or now president biden, many of the nominees who are being blocked by republicans all have one thing in common. many of them worked for the naacp's legal defense fund, an organization that was founded by civil rights giant and former supreme court justice thurgood marshall. and observers who look at the situation say these nominees are also being punished for being willing to speak candidly about race and the criminal justice system in the united states. don. >> abby phillip, thank you so much. and thank you, everyone, for watching. our coverage continues. 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. call coventry direct to learn more. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized that we needed a way to supplement our income. our friends sold their policy to help pay for their medical bills and that got me thinking. maybe selling our policy could help with our retirement. i'm skeptical, so i did some research and called coventry direct. they explained life insurance is a valuable asset that can be sold. we learned that we can sell all of our policy or keep part of it with no future payments, who knew? we sold our policy. now we can relax and enjoy our retirement as we had planned. 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. rely on the experts at 1800petmeds for the same medications as the vet, but for less with fast free shipping. visit petmeds.com today. ♪ hello and welcome to our viewers joining us here in the united states and all around the world. you are watching "cnn newsroom" and i'm rosemary church. just ahead, joe biden's massive covid relief bill is expected to pass in the house today. meaning much needed economic aid could find its way into americans' bank accounts in a matter of days. also ahead, a growing crisis at the u.s. southern border as officials call for reinforcements to handle a migrant surge. an