investigation into the louisville police department. attorney general merrick garland announced the systemic problems his team found just days before the three-year anniversary of the case that prompted the review, the death of breonna taylor, a black woman who was shot and killed during a no-knock raid on her apartment. the report finds that lmpd uses excessive force including unjustified neck restraints and the unreasonable use of police dogs and tasers, conducts searches based on imbalanced warrants, unlawfully executes warrants without knocking and announcing, unlawfully stops, searches, detains and arrests people, unlawfully discriminates against black people in enforcement activities, violates the rights of people engaged in protected speech, critical policing. and along with louisville metro discriminates against people with behavioral health disabilities when responding to them in crisis. cnn s senior justice correspondent jessica schneider joins us now. so, jes
by president trump s budget director and includes a 40% cut in foreign aid. could you back a 40% cut in foreign aid spending, which of the overall budget is about 1%? yeah, so, i say there are certainly savings. i was actually the ranking member on international organizations committee where we did oversee all that foreign aid. and quite frankly there s a lot of money that s going overseas where we don t know where it s actually going. there are no metrics in place, and that is one of the things i ve constantly brought up in our hearings. if you look at afghanistan, for example, there are billions of dollars spent in afghanistan whether that be through the department of state or whether it be by the department of defense that went into areas where, you know, they went to pay for ghost armies, for example, people that actually didn t exist. they built buildings that were never used. sure but of the 45% cut, would you back a 45% cut?
i can t commit to a specific number right now. i don t think it s just about throwing a number out there. i think it s got to be specific. you know, where s the money going, why is it going there, and is it fulfilling its purpose? but the truth is there are countries that do not support us whether it be the united nations, there are countries gnat do not like us and yet they still receive foreign aid, and i think that has to be reexamined. my whole thing that money is fulfilling its specific goal. i think that s these inspector general reports is where we should be starting because they point out the fraud, point out the abuse and there is some cost saving to be had. particularly with strategic aid it needs to have a purpose and a goal. let s talk about the first hearing today of this covid subcommittee. you had the former cdc director there. there has been this claim by republicans that there is some
hearing and it s all about dr. fauci. you did not invite dr. fauci to answer these questions. will you do that, and why not today? i would love to. it s not my decision. it s the chairman s. i believe dr. fauci should be coming to the committee. i think the goal here is to question those around him first and follow those answers and facts to where they lead. if it leads to dr. fauci he should be coming forward to the committee as should peter with eco health alliance which is where the money was funneled from nih to eco health and to the wuhan lab. dr. fauci did deny where that nih funding went. but in an e-mail we were able to produce we were able to show the connection here he was informed, quite frankly, of that funding, that nih money through nih went to the wuhan lab. and i think he s later backtracked on that, and by the way we have the proof to show it. there s no doubt that money did make its way to the wuhan lab, and that is something where we
coming out with recommendations how we could save money, how we could put safe guards in place to protect taxpayers. i think we need to look at where we can save. you have a bunch of programs, by the way, that have not been re-authorized, that they have discretionary funding, and we never even discussed what is the merit of those programs, are they accomplishing their goals or is that money can be shifted else, and i think what republicans want to look at is cost saving measures. we want to make sure we do not default, by the way. i m very much committed to ensuring that does not happen, but i also want to make sure we are fulfilling our obligations in terms of medicare and social security, so that leaves the discretionary funding and other parts. i think if we review the inspector general s recommendations that could be huge cost savings for taxpayers. the new york times is reporting the house republicans are relying on a framework bell