she held onto the tub, but it was lifted away by the tornado. after a pass, she found two officers who helped search for her grand chyron. both survived. let's hand it to michael smerconish. incredible story, john. thank you so much. i am michael smerconish, and welcome to "cnn tonight." a trifecta of good news this wednesday evening. we're going to take apart this potentially game changing covid pill authorized by the fda today and take hold of this encouraging new data that appears to show omicron might not be as ominous as it sounds. and also take in this rare moment of harmony between presidents biden and trump in our pandemic fight, never say never. this country could use some doses of good news as we now see omicron all over the map of the united states. the variant that arrived 22 days ago has spread to all 50 states, along with d.c. and puerto rico. but that shouldn't necessarily be as frightening as it looks. dr. fauci highlighted data today from africa where omicron was first detected that shows this new covid strain poses a 70% lower risk of severe disease than the delta variant. fauci also pointed to data from scotland appears to back it up. that study found a two-thirds reduction in the risk of covid hospitalization compared with delta. so that's welcome news because maybe, as omicron spreads like wildfire with a less severe punch than delta, we'll be more likely as a society to develop some sort of herd immunity, although nothing is for certain with this virus. and on top of that, the first ever pill to treat covid-19 has just been authorized by the food and drug administration. it's an oral antiviral developed by pfizer. it's called paxlovid, proven to significantly reduce hospitalizations and death and will be available sometime next month. how does it work? people infected with the virus, vaccinated or not, who are symptomatic, can take it at home before they get sick enough to be hospitalized. it's been green-lighted for children aged 12 and older as well. a similar pill developed by merck still under review. so this is great and a credit once again to science and scientists developing these life-saving tools. it comes as we learn covid was the third leading cause of death in america last year. heart disease, number one, then cancer, then covid accounting for more than 10% of all the deaths in 2020. the pfizer pill won't prevent infection, of course. neither do vaccines 100%. but shots are still our most crucial protection, and president biden keeps hitting a concrete wall on that front with the unvaccinated. we showed you this alarming kaiser survey last night, 48% of unvaxxed adults say nothing, nada, zilch, will ever convince them to get the shot. one of the respondents saying, quote, jesus himself would have to come down from heaven and speak with her personally in order to get her vaccinated. we could use some divine intervention right about now. right? too many still won't get vaccinated. could that change now that trump and biden are playing nice with one another? i thought one of the most persuasive moments of president biden's plea to the unvaxxed yesterday was when he tipped his hat to his predecessor. >> thanks to the prior administration and our scientific community, america is one of the first countries to get the vaccine. just the other day, former president trump announced he had gotten his booster shot. maybe one of the few things he and i agree on. >> this wasn't the first time that biden has acknowledged the vaccines were developed on trump's watch but it definitely caught trump's attention. here's what he told fox news in response to biden giving him credit. he said, quote, i'm very appreciative of that. i saw surprised to hear it. i think it was a terrific thing and i think it makes a lot of people happy. i think he did something very good. you know, it has to be a process of healing in this country, and that will help a lot. would it have made a difference if trump and biden had played nice with one another all along? one can only wonder. vaccine politics have held this country back from beating covid back, but should we be a lot more hopeful tonight with this new data on omicron severity and this new covid pill coming to pharmacies nationwide? joining me now is dr. peter hotez, an infectious disease expert at baylor college of medicine. great to see you, doctor. here's the concern that i have. what now stops the unvaccinated from saying i'm not going to get vaccinated, after all, there's now a pill on the horizon? >> well, that would be a pretty treacherous strategy to embark upon. here's why, michael. first of all, the drug's not going to be ready possibly in time for this omicron wave. production is only really starting now. we're not going to really get up to speed for another few months, so it's not going to really help us that much during this omicron wave. the second point is you've got to get treated very early. you have to take this medicine the minute you have symptoms, number one, or within a short time afterwards, and you have to have easy access to diagnosis in order to be eligible to get it. and we don't have diagnostic testing up to speed. so eventually paxlovid is going to be a very important tool in combating the pandemic, not only in the united states, but globally. but it's going to take a while, so let's revisit this question in a few months, but right now it's not ready for prime time. >> okay. one follow-up because this is my survey question tonight. should vax status be taken into account when that pill is rolled out? hypothetical, two patients both in need, one vaccinated, one unvaccinated. should that be taken into consideration? i would say, why would we reward the bad actor, the bad actor in that hypothetical being the person who had foregone getting vaccinated? >> hopefully when the medicine's here in abundance, we won't have to make those terrible decisions. here's why i do not think we should consider vaccination status. two nights ago we had our first omicron death here in houston. this was an individual who had been infected and recovered, chose not to get vaccinated and got reinfected with omicron. and then lost his life. what it's telling us is that partial immunity, partial protection is by no means a guarantee that you're not going to lose your life from covid-19. so it's going to be very hard to factor that into decision-making, and then what do you mean by vaccination? one dose? two doses? all three doses? how would you ever operationalize it? so i think it's going to be too unwieldy, so i would say no. >> you heard me share some of the latest data about the punch packed by omicron, hopefully less severe than delta. i have to go to great lengths to say not yet peer reviewed. what do you make nevertheless of that information? >> so i'd be very careful about it, michael, and here's why. both in south africa and in the u.k. their omicron came -- dovetailed right into their big delta wave. it's not like it went down and now it's going up like here in the united states. so a lot of the people who got omicron were actually omicron reinfections upon delta. that may have mitigated the severity of some of the illness and gave the false impression that it's less severe. what i've not seen is data among those who have not been vaccinated nor infected and recovered. i think there's a good possibility omicron could be just as bad an actor as delta or any of the other variants, which again is a reminder to get people vaccinated. >> doctor, i wonder if someone who's reluctant to take a pfizer vaccine will be willing to take a pfizer pill when it's available. >> that's a good question. obviously i don't know the answer. it may not be so straightforward because, remember, the individuals who are refusing to get vaccinated, many of them are deeply dug in and also have the false understanding about ivermectin and think ivermectin is the superior drug and are still committed to ivermectin. so trying to convince them now to take paxlovid, it would seem obvious to most of us, but it's not a guarantee, and i think we're going to see a lot of people also not buy into paxlovid as well, tragically. >> final question. you yourself have some news tonight. you're at work on a vaccine that could help undeveloped countries. tell us briefly about it. >> we're very excited. so in our texas children's center for vaccine development at baylor college of medicine, we've been developing low cost protein vaccines, the ones that the big pharma companies are not interested in. and then about a decade ago we began working on coronavirus vaccines, and now we've been able to pivot that program around to covid-19 and developed a low-cost protein vaccine, same technology as used to make the hepatitis b vaccine which parents have been giving to their kids for the last 40 years, it's microbial fermentation and yeast. we licensed it without a patent, with no strings attached to biological e in india, and they're moving forward hopefully soon to release the vaccine for emergency use with an advanced purchase commitment of 300 million doses from the indian government. we've also licensed them to indonesia, bangladesh, botswana. so, you know, if all the stars align, we're hoping we can make a big contribution to fixing this horrible, horrible global vaccine equity gap. >> i lack your expertise and knowledge, but i made the point several times over we're only as strong as our weakest link. that is global issue and if we get ahead of the curve here in the united states but they're still behind in the undeveloped world, then we're still in a tough spot. dr. peter hotez, thanks for your time. >> remember, michael, all of our variants have arisen around unvaccinated populations. until we fix this problem, we're going to continue to have problems. i appreciate that remark. >> thank you for that. i could tonight's survey question at smerconish.com. i got dr. hotez to answer it already. should vaccination status be a factor when distributing limited supply of the new covid pill? yes or no? his is a "no" vote. i'm not with him on that. i'd like to see it considered. make up your own mind, go to my website, cast a ballot, and i'll give you the result in an hour. of course we'll go through social media as the program unfolds. what do we have that's come in so far? if the efficacy of the covid pill is high enough, wouldn't it bring the fatality rate down low enough that we could get back to some sense of normalcy? jim, i should have kept the doctor around to answer that. i would like to think -- and i actually went through this with dr. ashish jha last night from brown that a silver lining to omicron might be that it's spreading rapidly, but packs less of a punch. again, the data is not yet peer reviewed, so more people are going to get it and hopefully put us closer to a position of herd immunity. severe or not, omicron dealing another big blow to schools nationwide, sending some students home again for remote learning. my next guest thinks that should be off the table. he argues the costs of closing schools are high and risks are severe physical illness for kids is low. harvard disease expert joseph allen joins me next. noooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent, so you can use less. bounty, the quicker picker upper. ♪ limu emu... & doug ♪ ♪ superpowers from a spider bite? i could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance so they only pay for what they need. (gasps) ♪ did it work? only pay for what you need ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ spider-man no way home in theaters december 17th [ marcia ] my dental health was not good. i had periodontal disease, and i just didn't feel well. but then i found clearchoice. [ forde ] replacing marcia's teeth with dental implants at clearchoice was going to afford her that permanent solution. [ marcia ] clearchoice dental implants gave me the ability to take on the world. i feel so much better, and i think that that is the key. [school bus passing by] [kids laughing] [bikes passing] [fire truck siren] [first responder] onstar, we see them. [onstar advisor] okay. mother and child in vehicle. mother is unable to exit the vehicle. injuries are unknown. [first responder] thank you, onstar. [driver] my son, is he okay? [first responder] your son's fine. [driver] thank you. there was something in the road... [first responder] it's okay. you're safe now. should kids be kept out of school amid this omicron wave? it's a debate schools all over are grappling with right now. so far data from the department of education shows that 85 k-12 school districts across the country are hybrid as of december 12th. some turned virtual only recently amid the rise in omicron cases. the same goes for colleges and universities. at least 15 from stanford, ucla, to temple and columbia, all have chosen to go virtual for final exams or to start the next semester online. but is this really necessary? my next guest says we learned our lesson last year, do not close the schools. joseph allen is associate professor and director of the healthy buildings program at harvard's school of public health and he joins me now. professor, in very simplistic terms, you're saying worse outcomes await kids if they're out of school than if they are in school. explain. >> thanks for having me back on, michael. it is that simple. we shouldn't close schools because the risk to kids, talking about elementary, middle school, and high school students is low from this virus. through original strain, alpha, and delta strain and evidence shows this is about the same thing for omicron. the deaths, several major studies have shown hover at 1 to 2 per million. the american academy of pediatrics released a report two weeks ago that called hospitalizations in kids, quote, unquote, uncommon. on the flip side of this, the risk of being out of school are severe and they're accumulating fast. we have lost -- kids have lost five months, they're behind five months in reading and math. math scores just since the pandemic and remote learning has started. 1 million kids were totally unaccounted for, expect to be in school and disappeared from the system. schools are our first chance to detect neglect and abuse. new york city did a study that showed in just three months of school closures, 8,000 reports of abuse and neglect were expected that never came in. extrapolate this to the country, it's 300,000 reports of neglect and abuse that never came in. kids rely on schools for food. 14 million kids didn't get the food they needed when schools closed. this extends to women in particular working women who have borne the disproportionate burden of kids being home. the labor drop, labor participation dropped for women grew another 5%. so the costs are severe when kids are out of school across the economy and their learning and well-being. we know importantly that the risk from the virus has remained low, and that's been consistent throughout the entire pandemic. >> so here's something that i took away from the essay you published in the "times." it seeltz seems like in the first go-around, spring of 2020, all the concern was on the side of the ledger for physical health and we've learned so much since then now to factor in the mental health costs of all of this, the emotional tab that now has to be paid by young people, that's, frankly, incalculable. so many other things, racial inequality you pointed out. so now as we balance the priorities, things have shifted. that's where you're coming from. >> that's entirely right. let's not forget the best thing in this whole scenario is that we now have a safe and effective vaccine that's been available to all adults in schools for at least eight months at this point. i'm in favor of mandates for vaccines for all adults in schools. when new york city did this, they moved from 70% to 95%. we have a vaccine available for kids, 5 to 18-year-olds and college kids for that matter. not only is the risk low for kids, we now have a safe and effective vaccine widely available. >> do you also see covid as having been a wake-up call for parents that in certain circumstances their education model, their school, their school system wasn't working, and now they're going to keep kids at home for home schooling or look at a charter model that heretofore they never would have done? >> i think there's no doubt. i'm a parent of three myself. we've seen gross dysfunction in our school system over the past two years. stimulus money has been there for the past two years. we had another influx of stimulus money. stishlgs i wrote i wrote this in "the hill" recently. tens of millions of dollars still haven't been spent. this is emergency stimulus money for schools still on the sidelines. why is that not spent to improve the school infrastructure, improve ventilation, use it to bolster the workforce and it just hasn't been spent. the science has been very clear since the summer of 2020 that we could get schools open, keep adults and kids safe, and avoid the worse face of having these kids out of school. we made bad decisions last year and i'm concerned we see schools closing again, the dominos are in danger of falling. that is a terrible mistake. >> i hear you. i'm just making a related point that when the dust settles from this, which i hope is sooner than later, i don't think that the education models as we knew them will continue to exist in many circumstances. professor allen, thank you so much for coming back. i appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. more social media reaction coming in as the program progresses. vaughn, what else do we have? so basically he finally realized what president trump and conservatives have known and said all along, no lockdowns, keep the kids in school without masks. freedom, i don't know that he presented it in political terms. i can only say this, that for the last 18 months or so as a parent of four, three of whom are still my responsibility -- my wife and i loved having them at home. they're either in college or grad school level. but the cost on each of their development is something that we see both within them and within their friend groups and within their orbit. so i completely understand the idea that initially it was batten down the hatches, protect the physical well-being of all americans, but i see it the way he balances that scale. developing news on another front from president biden. will he run for re-election and how does donald trump factor into his thinking? his answers to both are coming up. plus, the over-under from political analyst ron brownstein. what does he say? that's next. oh no. for the gifts you won't forget. the mercedes-benz winter event. get a credit toward your first month's payment on select models. from the very first touch, pampers, the #1 pediatrician recommended brand, helps keep baby's skin drier and healthier. so every touch will protect like the first. pampers football, is a game of inches. but it's also a game, of information. because the nfl is connected. and at any moment, the fate of the season can come down to this. billions of secure connections, per second. when the game is on the line and the game is always on the line touchdown! the nfl relies on cisco. new tonight, president joe biden affirming his intention to be on the ballot in 2024. >> do you plan to run for re-election? >> yes. but, look, i'm a great respecter of fate. fate has intervened in my life many, many times. if i'm in the health i'm in now, if i'm in good health, then, in fact, i would run again. >> he even addressed the idea of a 2020 rematch. >> if that means a rematch against donald trump? >> you're trying to tempt me now. sure. why would i not run against donald trump? if he's the nominee, that would increase the prospect of running. >> just last week "new york times" opinion columnist brett stevens wrote that this is exactly what joe biden shouldn't do and shouldn't be saying. this weekend stevens, known for his conservative views, told me why he thinks this hurts biden's party. >> there's already a whisper campaign out there about who in the democratic party might succeed him, but that whisper campaign is not really allowed to take off in any way, that no one in the democratic party can openly say they're considering a run for the presidency. and we now live in a world, michael, where runs for presidency begin four years early. >> if you know the impact this plan to run will have better than my next guest, ron brownstein. ron, great to see you. that sound you hear is shamble -- champagne being popped at the naval observatory, home of kamala harris. i think this is great for her. it keeps the otherwise democratic field frozen. what do you think? >> yeah. look, i take president biden at his word. i mean, with that pre-condition, if he's healthy, i think he will run. i could argue to you, in fact, that the most likely economic and political dynamics of the next couple years make it more likely that he runs and that trump runs in this respect. you know, the history of midterm elections, first midterms especially, they're pretty tough for the party holding the white house. republicans only need five seats to pick up the house. there are only four midterm elections, michael, since the civil war in which the party out of the white house hasn't won at least five seats. so if republicans have a good day next november, which is more likely than not, you got to think that's going to encourage donald trump to run on the theory that biden is wounded and it's a pretty straight path to the white house. it'll make it tougher for any other republican to challenge him for the nomination. but the history of the midterm predicting the next general election is actually quite mixed. there are occasions like 1946 or '66 or '74 where a bad midterm foreshadowed a loss for the president's party in holding and white house in the next election. but there are just as many cases where the president's party did bad in the midterm and the economy picks up in the second half of his term, his approval rating rises and his position is much stronger than it looks the morning after the midterms. that was the case with reagan and clinton and obama. so i could imagine a world in which next november it encourages trump to run and then the next 18 months or so if inflation recedes and biden's position improves, that encourages him to run and we get the exact rematch they were talking about tonight. how's that? >> i'll meet you halfway. i could see the scenario where -- i mean, trump has -- the republicans have history -- you know this better than i do, on their side. 26 would be the number of seat gain, so i can totally see a scenario where republicans take the house and then trump takes credit for it. and yes, he runs and becomes the nominee. but won't that raise a drum beat among democrats that they've got to make a change at the top of the ticket? >> only if biden is still weak, right? i mean, what happened -- if you look at -- and that is possible. but it's also possible that if you look at the underlying strength of the economy and the growth that is occurring, and the growth that will be seeded if he can get manchin over the line and pass this build back better act, what that says is that if that growth is there and they are right that inflation recedes at some point in his term, biden's position could look a lot better in six months after the midterm than it does on the midterm day. that's really what happened to reagan and clinton and obama. they came in at a moment of economic turbulence, things didn't turn around fast enough in the eyes of the voters, and then the second half of their term the economy started to improve. some of the policies they passed initially, the effect was felt more widely and they solidified their position and all of them won re-election pretty comfortably, especially reagan. i'm not saying it's guaranteed, i'm saying it is a real precedent we've seen in three presidents in the last 40 years have that bad midterm and then have the economy kind of lift them along with some political developments to a pretty comfortable re-election. so i don't think there's going to be -- yes, there will be a clamor to get rid of biden after the midterm, but that doesn't mean they will feel that way six months after the midterm. >> i totally get it. i just have to say, and i hope i'm not being indelicate that that analysis doesn't factor in the age issue. and it's an issue. ron, quick final question, because you were invited here under false pretenses. we were supposed to discuss whether joe manchin ever becomes a republican and then came this breaking news. so here's what i will ask you, a quick final question. what has a stronger likelihood, that manchin becomes an "r," or that biden runs for re-election? >> biden runs for re-election. manchin becoming an "r," less influence, more risk. he voted to convict trump twice and voted against amy coney barrett and voted against trump tax cuts. he voted for maintaining the affordable care act. does he want to put that up in a republic primary in west virginia? also he's now the 50th vote on everything. if he becomes a republican, he's the 51st republican, less leverage, more risk. i think he either stays a democrat or becomes an independent. i could see that before 2024. and then the question is, does he see value in tipping the majority to the republicans? i can't see the advantage. because right now he is -- auf it all leads to joe manchin. >> all of that makes total sense. ron brownstein, thank you so much. appreciate it. >> i try. thank you. >> thanks, ron. social media, what do we have? this just came in. media starts talking about this way too early. joe has not even been in office for a full year, talking about trump running should not even be happening. especially when we find out more information about what really happened. sharon, you might not want to hear it, but you can't ignore it either. i mean, yesterday -- we referenced this last night, trump issues a statement and says he'll see you on january 6th because, as nancy pelosi wants it to be marked with a solemn occasion, donald trump has other plans. so that presents a very interesting question, doesn't it? what level of coverage do you give him for whatever he says on january 6th? luckily, i don't have to make that decision here. don't forget tonight's survey question at smerconish.com. i discussed this with dr. hotez earlier. really interesting question. should vaccination status be a factor when distributing limited supply of the new covid pill? so we have great news. pfizer has this new pill, but they're going to be going to be rolled out without enough supply for all who need them. so should we look at a scenario where we determine the need and whether someone's vaxxed or unvaxxed? that's what i'm asking. go to my website and cast a ballot on the question. coming up, when does tough on crime go too far? a truck driver set to serve a 110-year prison sentence after a deadly crash in colorado. wasn't drunk, wasn't high, and even the judge who sentenced him is questioning the punishment. but a former colorado prosecutor, george brauchler, is here to tell me why he's not sympathetic about the drive's -- driver's fate, and that's next. ♪ the one desire ♪ ♪ you are, you are, ♪ ♪ don't wanna hear you say... ♪ ♪ ♪ i want it that way ♪ at fidelity, your dedicated advisor will help you create a comprehensive wealth plan for your full financial picture. with the right balance of risk and reward. so you can enjoy more of...this. this is the planning effect. hey, angie! you forgot your phone! hey lou! angie forget her phone again? yep. lou! mom said she could save up to $400 on her wireless bill by switching to xfinity internet and mobile. with nationwide 5g at no extra cost. and lou! on the most reliable network, lou! smart kid, bill. oh oh so true. and now, the moon christmas special. gotta go! take the savings challenge at xfinitymobile.com/mysavings or visit an xfinity store to learn how our switch squad makes switching fast and easy this holiday season. a man essentially got a life sentence after he killed four people. so why did nearly 5 million people sign a petition to lessen it? the driver's tearful apology couldn't stop the 110-year sentence dictated by state law. the cuban immigrant was behind the wheel of a semi that caused this wreck outside of denver in 2019. four died, six were hurt. mr. aguilera-mederos was 28 when his brakes went out. on i-70. he knew his brakes were a problem before the crash. he even called another driver for help with that problem. yet he still drove past a runaway truck ramp after losing control. his case sparked public outcry over the sentence that teen judge said was too much. the way the law in colorado was written and how the counts were stacked up, 110 years is actually the minimum sentence. now even the d.a. whose office brought the case wants the case reconsidered. my next guest knows the law, and the issues that led us here. george brauchler, former district attorney for colorado's 18th judicial district. counselor, thank you for being here. what went on? was he overcharged? >> i don't think so initially. there was a prior district attorney -- colorado is one of the only states in the country, in fact, the only state that has term limits for district attorneys. that may have played small role here as well as more of these d.a.s races become politicized. the new d.a. who took office in january of this year had every bit of authority in her disposal to change the charges, dismiss the case, reduce the charges, pursue some alternative outcome but chose to stay the course. these are charges that carry mandatory minimums and mandatory consecutives based on the nature of the crimes themselves. i think one of the things i noticed about the coverage of this case and the great deal of sympathy that pours out for this driver is people don't appreciate that he was so remorseful at the time that he was charged with these big, big crimes that he came to the table and offered to plead guilty only to a traffic ticket for what he had done that day. that makes him seem a lot less sympathetic to me. >> well, i hear the point, but he's got a right to a trial, right? we can't -- we can't hold him accountable because through his lawyer he exercised his sixth amendment right. >> i don't think that's what we're doing. let's be clear about this too. it feels like the sixth amendment is the only one where we say we can't judge you for exercising your right rather than give you the benefit of having come in and taking responsibility for your conduct like 99% of everyone else. we have people exercise their first amendment rights, second amendment rights. in this case, if this guy was truly remorseful for how he felt and accepted what he had done led to the death of these people, why not come in and have a negotiation that made sense? i'll do five years, ten years, 20 years. i'm not telling you 110 is the appropriate sentence, but when this guy kills four people, sets six others on fire with life-changing injuries and says i'll take points on my license, that ain't sympathetic. >> yeah, but, counselor, i think you're trying to hold i am accountable for what sounds like, according to you, was bad lawyering. look, i get that you're not one of the 5 million who's signing that petition. i don't know if i would either, but what do you think is the appropriate outcome? >> i think he needs to go to prison. i think that when you get to the point in the state of colorado where you are good for four souls wiped off the planet earth, you get into some serious prison time. now, in no way does that mean 110 years. frankly, the other thing people don't know is in colorado any number that comes out of a judge's mouth is fake. 110 years is probably less than 50 and even that's probably even too strong here. but remember this guy does not ever say i'm willing to take any time in prison for what i've done. that may be a function of his attorney, but let's be clear too. this guy testified. he got his story out front of a jury of 12 people that he helped pick, and those people didn't find that he had an accident, they didn't find that he was negligent or reckless. they found that he acted with extreme indifference to the value of human life by engaging in conduct that created a grave risk of death to others. that's far more than, oops, my brakes went out. >> isn't this the outcome you get when legislators take away discretion from judges? i can just see the scenario here. this is sort of case where somebody runs for office and they thump their chest and say we're going to go after these liberal judges, we're going to not allow them to give lax sentences, and then you get a judge in this case who wants to have discretion but just doesn't. >> no, i don't think so. and i say that because the birth of these mandatory minimum sentences was a product of poor judging to begin with. so, for instance, back in the day, you could have widely disparate sentences for heinous crimes based on where you lived, the color of your skin, and the legislature stepped in and said we're not going to do that. if this crime is going to have value, we're going to set a floor to it. we saw judges imposing sentences that treated five victims as if it was a crime with one victim. i don't think that's the issue here. i think the issue here and the one that people are just now starting to drill down on is the discretion exercised by the district attorney. there's a real question here as to how somebody could allow a case to move forward with these heavy, heavy-handed charges, tell their prosecutors to go into court and get a victory, they secure the victory, and then two months later the mandatory minimum sentence, which was known at the time the charges were filed, happens, and only because of a public out -- you know, they blow up and end up saying, you know what? maybe we should reconsider that. that's real questions that there need to be answered by the d.a. these are important, valuable tools to prosecutors -- >> i hear you. i hear what you're saying. look, like you, my primary sympathy rests with the four families. those are the folks that i'm thinking of at the top of the list. but by the same token, and i think you acknowledge this, this is not -- and the six injured, and the six injured. but this is not the right outcome. and something's got to get done about it. george brauchler, thank you. appreciate it. i've been interested in this case. i wanted local insight and you delivered. thank you. >> thank you so much, sir. thanks for having me on. another nba game canceled tonight over covid, but let's keep an eye on the big picture. bob costas is back tonight. we'll look at how sports can set an example right now that covid helped all of us win. we'll do that next. this is soft! holy charmin! oh! excuse me! roll it back, everybody! sorry! charmin ultra soft is so cushiony soft, you'll want more! but it's so absorbent, you can use less. so it's always worth it. now, what did we learn about using less? you've got to, roll it back everybody! we all go, why not enjoy the go with charmin. nyquil severe gives you powerful relief for your worst cold and flu symptoms, on sunday night and every night. nyquil severe. the nighttime, sniffling, sneezing, coughing, aching, stuffy head, best sleep with a cold, medicine. new vicks vapostick. strong soothing vapors... help comfort your loved ones. for chest, neck, and back. it goes on clear. no mess just soothing comfort. try new vicks vapostick. ♪ limu emu... & doug ♪ ♪ superpowers from a spider bite? i could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance so they only pay for what they need. (gasps) ♪ did it work? only pay for what you need ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ spider-man no way home in theaters december 17th ordinary tissues burn when theo blows. so puffs plus lotion rescued his nose. with up to 50% more lotion, puffs bring soothing relief. a nose in need deserves puffs indeed. america's #1 lotion tissue. (man) so when in doubt, just say, "let me talk to my manager." next, carvana's 100% online shopping experience. oh, man. carvana lets people buy a car-- get this-- from their couch. oh, how disruptive. no salesman there to help me pick out the car i need. how does anyone find a car on this site without someone like us checking in? she's a beauty, huh? oh, golly! (laughter) i can help you find the color you want. that sounds nice. let me talk to my manager. (vo) buy your next car 100% online. with carvana. one of my favorite supplements is qunol turmeric. turmeric helps with healthy joints and inflammation support. unlike regular turmeric supplements qunol's superior absorption helps me get the full benefits of turmeric. the brand i trust is qunol. professional sports remain the proverbial canary in the coal mine of covid. the pandemic became real on march 22 of 2020 because that's the night the president addressed the nation. maybe more because the nba shut down that night. leagues are once again trying to chart a path from pandemic to endemic. bob costas is back to continue our conversation about what the future looks like. bob, where were we? >> well, even since we left it off, texas a&m is unable to field a squad. they can't play in the gator bowl. the bowl championship series announces they are down to four teams, alabama, cincinnati, michigan and georgia. if any can't play on the semifinal date, they will for fit and the other team will move on. if they get to the championship game and one of these teams can't play, then they'll forfeit. without playing a game, they will be a national champion declared. the national hockey league as best we understand it has only four unvaccinated players among their hundreds of players and yet their season has been interrupted. the omicron variant will wreak havoc on the olympics. that's obvious. the nhl is not sending any players and athletes in other sports from all around the world may test positive despite being asymptomatic and may not get to enter china or, if they test positive again while being asymptomatic, may be quarantined in china for a considerable length of time before going home to their home nations. >> i was going to say, you were setting forth a prescription. i mean, you, like, have a plan as to what ought to take place. lay it out. >> well, i don't know that i have the specifics of it, but clearly vaccination is the key here. and we might as well call it what it is. this anti-vax stuff is a belligerent idiocy and flies in the face of everything we know. we can debate the efficacy of masks and whether kids should learn virtually, but the evidence of vaccines is overwhelming. hospital rate, serious illnesses and deaths lean heavily in the direction of those unvaccinated. now, what to do about those who are vaccinated. especially healthy young fit athletes. adam silver in the nba have always been forward looking when it comes to this. as you said, they were the first league to shut down. they got through the 2020 season successfully in a bubble. so they are not backward looking on this. but adam silver said this is going to be with us for a while. the question is, how do we deal with this? do we constantly stop and smart and to my mind the players associations have to get together and they have to convince not 95%, but 100% of the players in all of the major sports to be fully vaccinated and beyond that, and this would be easy for the teams and the leagues to administer, they have the resources and they have a small group of people to deal with. if boosters are available and the consensus is that you need another booster and one after that, whatever is the state of the art, whatever is the abundance of caution course to take, that's what they should do. the boosters, making sure that every team facility has the proper ventilation. and then if you have all of that in place, that 100% vaccination, and these young, healthy athletes almost none of whom have wound up in the hospital, let alone died among professional athletes, we have to recognize that fact as we roll our eyes about people that won't get vaccinate, young healthy professional athletes are not dying of covid at least to this point. those athletes should, if every proper precaution has been taken and now you get to the point where someone tests positive but they are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic there has to be a way to return to play quickly. think of what -- >> i have a concern. >> with the nfl, this is a what -- go ahead. >> i have a concern. >> go ahead. >> i think i misspoke. i think the nba shut down on march 11. anyway, at the outset of tonight's program i was talking to dr. hotez about the pfizer pill, this miracle pill which is finally on the horizon. i embrace everything you said. i love the way you said it. i am worried the unvaxed among us, including the will say, why am i get vaxed now? i will just take that pill when it's available. you get the final word. >> well, one of the things they should do, the leagues have some control over their players. some control over the conditions of employment. and assuming they get to 100% vaccination or something very, very close to it, what i would like to see all of the leagues and all of the teams do is flood the airwaves with and the digital world with psas that say, look, the reason we're able to carry on with relative normalcy is because we've done everything that can be done. every sensible thing that can be done. and we implore you, our fans, to follow our lead. this is the way to get closer to normal. please, in the name of god, get vaccinated. >> love it. great suggestion. i would wish you a merry christmas except i am hoping you will come back tomorrow night and make it a hat trick. thank you, bob costas. >> thank you, michael. we'll be right back with the results of tonight's survey question. did you go to smerconish.com and cast your ballot? if not go there right now. i want to know whether the vaxed and unvaxed should be treated the same when the pfizer pill is made available. go vote. i will give you the result and some social media. yeah, there it is. should vaccination status be a factor when distributing limited supply of the new covid pill? back in a moment. ♪ grandma, how wide are two reindeer? twenty-seven, twenty-eight, twenty-nine... ♪ ♪ we've been waiting all year to come together... it worked! have a happy and safe holiday season from lexus. ♪ thousands of women with metastatic breast cancer are living in the moment and taking ibrance. ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole. ibrance may cause low white blood cell counts that may lead to serious infections. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs. both of these can lead to death. tell your doctor if you have new or worsening chest pain, cough, or trouble breathing. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are or plan to become pregnant, or are breastfeeding. for more information about side effects talk to your doctor. ♪ be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance. (music) ♪ i think to myself ♪ ♪ what a wonderful world ♪ (music) ♪ i think to myself ♪ ♪ what a wonderful world ♪ here are the results of tonight's survey question. should vaccines status be a factor? survey says 73% say yes. i'm in that category. 27% say no. you know what? i don't have time for social media because lawyer coates is in the on-deck circle and her program on behalf of don lemon starts now. >> thanks. one interesting question. i wonder if you gave that survey a year ago how it would compare to now. people change their minds with the fatigue setting in. i wonder if it changed their views on this issue as well. >> i have asked the same thing about the monoclonal antibodies. two people show up hypothetically, one vaxed and one unvaxed. i feel like we are rewarding bad behavior if we go with the unvaxed. my two cents. >> there has been a carrot stick approach for three years now. which will win out. breaking news tonight. president biden's on the defensive about the lack of a sufficient number of covid tests in the country. as the highly contagious omicron variant spreads rapidly across the country, americans standing in line outside in the cold winter air or sitting in their cars. sometimes for hours.