than nine minutes. use of force expect, jody steiger, a sergeant with the lapd returned to the stand and made it clear that force should not have been used once george floyd was handcuffed and on the ground and that the risks were very well known. >> because at the time of the restraint period, mr. floyd was not resisting. he was in the prone position. he was handcuffed. he was not attempting to evade, not attempting to resist and the pressure that was being caused by the body weight could cause positional asphyxia which could cause death. >> two days ago the emergency room doctor who received floyd at the hospital said it was his belief that the causes of floyd's death was, in fact, a lack of oxygen. the defense is trying its best to dispews that. attorney eric nelson put the spotlight on george floyd. nelson played part of a police body cam video and can be heard floyd saying, quote, i ate too many drugs. after the next witness, james ryerson, the minnesota law enforcement agent in charge of the death to initially agree with him, ryerson then undercut the defense in his recross by the prosecution. >> could you hear that the. >> yes. >> does it appear that mr. floyd said i ate too many drugs. >> yes, it does. >> having heard it in context, are you able to tell what mr. floyd is saying there? >> i believe he said i ain't do no drugs. >> george floyd's history of drug use should be fair game according to the prosecution, but derek chauvin's complaints against him as a law enforcement officer should be off limits. the defense wants to focus on the menacing crowd that must have had the police officers scared for their lives that included smart phone wielding teenagers and a 9-year-old girl. it's worth asking whether anyone could reasonably consider that small but increasingly agitated crowd which was crying out for mercy for george floyd but getting no response from chauvin or any of the officers, could anyone consider them to be a threat. >> when you reviewed the body-worn cameras, did you see anybody throw any rocks or bottles? >> no, i did not. >> did you see anyone physically attack the officers? >> no, did not. >> did you hear foul language or name calling? >> there was some name calling, yes, and some foul language, but that was about the most of it. >> did that factor into your analysis? >> no. >> why not? >> because i did not perceive them as being a threat. >> why is that? >> because they were merely filming and -- most of it was their concern for mr. floyd. >> stiger also added that given chauvin completed more than 800 hours of training over his nearly two decades in the force, he should have been well prepared to handle such a threating hoard of bystanders. paul butler, professor at georgetown law center and kirk buckalter, a former nypd detective. mr. stiger testified that he, himself, as a police officer faced real hostile crowd, people throwing rocks and bottles. can you sort of delineate for us, just as a law enforcement officer, you faced crowds, right? can a crowd impact whether or not you're allowed to use deadly force on somebody that you're holding? >> well, it's a good question, joy. thank you for having me. a crowd could only impact that use of deadly force if for some reason that crowd is perceived to be a threat. i will say if you have an issue with people cursing at you and yelling at you, then the police department is no place for you to be employed, because this is something that people do. we have something called the first amendment in this country. this is a country where folks can express themselves and express their thoughts and so forth with government. that's a big difference between perceiving a crowd as a threat, a group of people as a threat. i'll go a step further. that crowd -- that was not a crowd of predominantly african-american people. this argument would not pass the laugh test. we see crowds of people all the team engaged in all types of activities. it's a narrative here that for some reason this crowd was a threat. let's go a step further, if you perceive them a threat, perhaps it's because you were engaged of snuffing the life out of someone in front of them. so much irony here with regards to the defense's approach to this crowd. >> absolutely. i apologized, i mispronounced your last name. >> that's fine. >> paul, we have seen crowds of white armed citizens barraging into statehouses wielding ar-15s because they're mad about having to wear a mask. we've seen people who are pro open carry wielding ar-15s walking down the street yelling at police saying you don't have the right to disarm me. those people don't get shot. those people don't get held to the ground and choked out. that argument seems to me to be pretty ludicrous. you can comment on that, but there was i thought an even more absurd argument made by mr. nelson today. that is, he's trying to claim that george floyd, while being held down in the car, said i ate too many drugs, which strikes me as something that no one has ever said ever in life, rather than i ain't done no drugs which is what you can hear him say. your thoughts on that? >> first, the problem with the defense argument about the crowd is that last week the jury met the people in the crowd, the brave teenage girl who made the video, the emt first responder who begged chauvin to let her take mr. floyd's pulse. charles mcmillen, the older gentleman who broke down and sobbed. the crowd doesn't look like a vicious angry mob. the jury might think the people in the crowd dealt with mr. floyd more responsibly than chauvin did. unfortunately, the prosecutor has to respond to the argument that mr. floyd died of a drug overdose, and this is just the beginning of a long, dirty pathway. next week, the defense has its own video tape arrest of mr. floyd in 2019. it starts out like his encounter with chauvin. cops approach the car, take out their gun. mr. floyd appears to swallow some pills. that time the cops took them to the hospital. the defense wants the jury to think that mr. floyd did the same thing when chauvin arrested him, but this time when he swallowed the pills, they killed him. >> here is the problem with that in my mind, and you are the expert, sir, so i'll ask you, mr. burkhalter. if george floyd swallowed pills in the back of a squad car and was in the process of having a drug overdose that the officers deemed could be fatal, would the appropriate law enforcement response be to sit on him for nine minutes while he died rather than use the narcan and try to stop the dug overdose or otherwise trying to save his life? staying on top of him and putting three people's full body weight on them, doesn't seem like the appropriate law enforcement response to a drug overdose, even if you think that's what's happening. >> that is absolutely correct. the police have a duty to not only care for the lives and the welfare of victims, but the lives and welfare of whom they arrest. there's no sliding scale with the united states constitution. if the police believe he was in some type of medical distress, they had a duty to take some form of action, narcan, call ems immediately, certainly not just keep your knee on his neck for 9 1/2 minutes. that's very mornt. 9 1/2 minutes. if one did believe he was engaged in some sort of medical emergency overdose or something, that's ten minutes. we haven't even been talking for 9 1/2 minutes. this is how long the police witnessed this man in medical distress and did not take action. so once again, that argument really shouldn't fly. >> absolutely. i want to really quickly play george floyd's brother. this is rodney floyd who had comments about the treatment of the experts, by the way, many of whom are law enforcement. here is what george floyd's brother had to say. >> these are expert witnesses, they're well qualified in their field, the strategy to use, try to find a crack in the men and women that's testifying about their expertise, all the training they had. that just blows my mind, just the tactics they use to try to bring down the credible witness. >> what do you make of that paul? it seems like, as you said about the witnesses, the jury has now met these witnesses, and they're quite esteemed. the prosecution has gone a long way to say tell me about your background, how you got into law enforcement. is it a good tactic to try to undercut their credibility? >> the defense -- it's a bunch of jabs. hard to throw a knockout punch against experienced witnesses like expert witnesses. they're trying to say that chauvin still needed to pin floyd down because at some point floyd could have suddenly started fighting. the experts said that police don't make life-or-death decisions about the use of force based on what somebody possibly might do. they're supposed to assess what's actually happening. >> mr. burkhalter, the awful but lawful argument, that it may look bad on camera, but it's legal and, therefore, one should exonerate mr. chauvin. it feels a lot like the rodney king argument, that essentially once you, a black man has any drug in his system, he's like superman, he's going to rise from the dead even though he's in complete arrhythmia, has no pulse, but he's going to rise from the dead and become a threat to four officers. that feels very rodney king. do you think that argument still works 30 years later, however many years, decades later? >> no. i don't believe it works. one primary reason is police officers make arrests with regards to people who resist every single day. if this was standing operator procedure someone would die in police custody once every five minutes. it simply doesn't happen, and it doesn't happen because, as you saw the litany of law enforcement officials testify, that there are standards. when someone ignores those standards, crosses over the line, this is what happens. this doesn't occur. this drug superman, this plays into another wildly unfortunate narrative in this country, and let's just face the facts, that george floyd is a very tall, large black man. in some ways, the argument being promulgated here is he was to be feared based on who he was before you even had a chance to speak to him or know him, right? just based on his appearance, he's someone to be feared. >> they're quite disturbing, that he's the little ral bogeyman, that even after he's dead, he still poses a threat to officers, as you said, because it's this myth about black men that are literally the bogeyman. it's shocking to see that done in the 21st century. thank you both for being here this evening. still ahead, new reporting suggests that matt gaetz assault a preemptive pardon from trump while in office which raises new questions about when gaetz knew he was under investigation for alleged sex crimes. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell says corporations should stay the heck out of politics, but keep the money coming to gop. later we'll talk to st. louis mayor elect that schara jones about her historic victory. you won't want to miss tonight's absolute worse, as a republican attempts to spread false statements about voting. "the reidout" continues. some companies still have hr stuck between employees and their data. entering data. changing data. more and more sensitive, personal data. and it doesn't just drag hr down. it drags the entire business down -- with inefficiency, errors and waste. it's ridiculous. so ridiculous. with paycom, employees enter and manage their own data in a single, easy to use software. visit paycom.com, and schedule your demo today. as carla wonders if she can retire sooner, she'll revisit her plan with fidelity. and with a scenario that makes it a possibility, she'll enjoy her dream right now. that's the planning effect, from fidelity. president trump should pardon michael flynn. he should pardon the thanksgiving turkey, pardon everyone from himself to his administration officials to joe exotic if he has to, because you see from the radical left a blood lust who will only be quenched if they come after the people who worked so hard to animate the trump administration. i think the president ought to wield that pardon power effectively and robustly. >> he should pardon himself, his family, administration officials and any supporters who have been targeted. >> any of his supporters who have been targeted. congressman matt gaetz had presidential pardons on his mind in the weeks after donald trump lost re-election. now, "the new york times" has revealed in the final weeks of trump's term, gaetz privately asked the white house for blanket preemptive pardons for himself and unidentified congressional allies for any crimes they may have committed. that's according to two people told of the discussions. now, they note the white house viewed the request as a non-starter. now that we know gaetz is the subject of a federal sex crimes investigation, he would have had ample reason to want a pardon from the president he defended so vigorously. the times notes it is still unclear whether congressman gaetz or the white house knew at the time about the inquiry. however, some trump associates have speculated that gaetz's request for a group pardon was an attempt to camouflage his own potential criminal exposure. there were other hints gaetz may have known he was under investigation including his tweet naming any potential scandal gaetzgate five days before the news of the probe first broke. even if gaetz wasn't specifically aware he was under investigation when, according to "the times" he asked for a pardon, he had known since august his friend joel greenberg was under indictment for child sex trafficking. it's not every day your buddy is accused in engaging in sugar daddy relationships. it might have at least crossed his mind that he, too, could be under screwed any. after all, gaetz was close enough with greenberg to describe him as his wingman according to politico which reports they had shared more than one girlfriend. greenberg has denied the charges against him and, likewise, gaetz denies engaging in the conduct under investigation. he won't say when he first learned he was under investigation, even when asked point-blank by his favorite news network last week. >> how long has this investigation been going on, do you know? >> i don't know. >> when were you first informed of it? >> again, i really saw this as a deeply troubling challenge for my family on march 16th. really on march 16th is when this got going from the extortion standpoint. >> with me is "new york times" washington times correspondent michael schmidt and glenn kirschner, former federal prosecutor. michael, i should note that trump denied gaetz asked him for a pardon. here's the quote. -- your reporting leaves a lot of questions open for me. gaetz allegedly, per your reporting asked for blanket pardons and unidentified congressional allies. do you have any idea or any reporting on who those allies might be and whether it means members of congress or congressional staff? >> we wrote as much as we knew about this request that was made. it's sort of interesting, if you look at trump's response, trump says that gaetz never asked him himself. our story specifically says that the request went to white house officials, and it was unclear whether he had engaged with the president himself. now, trump has been very quiet on the gaetz issue since this came out a little bit over a week ago. he's said very little. basically just that one statement. there looks like there's a concerted effort to put some distance between the president and gaetz. it's important to understand what gaetz was looking for. gaetz was looking for sort of the ultimate pardon on steroids. donald trump really pushed the limits of pardons in ways, and he did them -- he wielded his pardon power in ways that legal experts and lawyers were very surprised by, whether it was giving pardons to people that had not cooperated in investigations into him or donors or allies and such. what gaetz wanted was basically a get-out-of-jail-free card for everything he had done in his life. no matter what trump did, there was nothing that rose to that level in the pardons and commutations trump gave. >> let me ask you this followup. the other sort of character in this is william barr who was very eager to protect trump's friends whenever he got the opportunity. we know this investigation began under william barr. is there any reporting that william barr might have communicated to the white house, to the president, the then president donald trump, about the investigation of this ally of his in congress? >> no. i have no evidence of that. in regards to barr, the investigation was opened under barr, and barr allowed it to move forward and gave essentially the approval for it to move forward. in most justice departments, that would not be a significant thing. in the way donald trump politicized investigations, it does make it notable in this case. but there's no evidence -- there is evidence that bar allowed this investigation to move forward and would essentially have had to sign off on it because it was a special sort of person, a designee being a national politician in the justice department's eyes. >> we do, also, have reporting, it might have been politico, that barr took steps to make sure he was physically distanced from gaetz and not appearing with him publicly. glenn, i want to ask you about this other breaking story. this was "cbs evening news" that broke within the last hour or so. cbs news reporting that gaetz's trip to the bahamas as part of a federal probe into this sex trafficking allegation. federal investigators are looking into a bahamas trip matt gaetz allegedly took in late 2018 or early 019 as part of an inquiry as to whether the florida representative violated sex trafficking laws. he was on that trip with a marijuana entrepreneur and hand surgeon who paid for accommodations and female escorts, sources said. investigators are trying to determine if the escorts were illegally trafficked across state or international lines for the purpose of sex with the congressman. what began with blaming headlines about sex trafficking has turned into a general fishing exercise and about consensual relationships with adults. can you lay out the significance of that aspect of it? this is allegedly travel outside of the united states. >> matt gaetz can protest all he wants. he can use his old boss' line of this is a witch hunt, and they're going after him because he's an outspoken conservative which i don't quite understand. but what is most telling, joy, is that we can speculate whether he knew he was under investigation when he asked for a pardon, but that's almost beside the point because he clearly knew he had committed crimes which is what prompts one to ask for a pardon, and the supreme court has actually given us some guidance that i think helps put what it means to ask for a pardon in context. in 1915 the supreme court said that a pardon carries with it an imputation of guilt, and accepting a pardon carries with it a confession of guilt. that's why a person cannot be forced to accept a pardon against his will. you know, asking for a pardon, there are a couple of related concepts in the criminal law. there's consciousness of guilt, and there's an admission of guilt. consciousness of guilt is like, when you hide incriminating evidence. that's not you admitting to the crime, but it does show you consciousness of guilt. an admission of guilt is just that, either when you come right out and say i committed the crime or you ask the president for a prospective pardon to wipe your entire life clean of all criminal activity. if i were ever prosecuting matt gaetz, joy, you can bet i would seek to introduce the fact that he asked donald trump for a pardon into evidence as a direct admission of guilt, and then we would have some robust litigation. i bet a judge would say, you know what? there's supreme court precedent that supports this argument, so i'm going to admit it into evidence. >> let me ask both of you this question. i'll ask you first, glenn, and then michael. would the on-air on fox -- people did communicate with donald trump through the tv, does that count if you were prosecuting this case, that he was on telling asking for blanket pardons which you could impute to mean for himself as well? >> everything you say, whether in writing, whether orally, whether broadcast, whether in a tweet is a potential admission. any statement by a party opponent, any statement by a defendant that is relevant to the crime being tried is admissible as evidence. listen, nobody was falling for him trying to mask read the fact that he wanted a pardon by throwing into the mix the thanksgiving turkey and joe exotic. i don't think gaetz cared about those two particular animals or people. i think he wanted a pardon and he was trying to put a little bit of window dressing on it saying let's give it to some other folks, too, and maybe i'll get lost in the mix. >> michael, now that we have this new information that there's added potential criminality, and he's denying it, but there's this new story out there. can you give us specifics on whether this request for a pardon, was it formal or informal? was it a formal request to white house officials or was it an informal, this is something that i need? >> there is a formal process department when you go to the justice department. paperwork is filled out. an application is filled out and it's examined. the trump administration ignored that process throughout the administration, sort of relied on their own way of doing it. there's no evidence he went through the formal process, but that is doesn't mean anything in this case because there was no formal process that was relied on. the only thing i would say in terms of gaetz, look, he's not been charged yet. it's a federal investigation. we only know so much. we're trying to peel back the facts as much as we can. it could be early in this investigation. his associate joel greenberg has been indicted on a range of charges, facing a mandatory minimum of 12 years in prison. federal authorities have significant leverage on him, greenberg has hired a prominent lawyer to represent him in this case. he has a status hearing tomorrow. there's still a lot more investigation to go. >> 100%, and a lot more reporting. appreciate you, michael schmitt, glenn kirschner. thank you very much. up next, these republicans think they're so sneaky trying to pass laws that seriously restrict voting rights claiming the new voting rights law is a threat to constitutional sovereignty. tonight's absolute worst is straight ahead. when heartburn takes you by surprise. fight back fast, with new tums naturals. free from artificial flavors and dyes. where can a healthier heart lead you? for people with heart failure taking entresto, it may lead to a world of possibilities. entresto is now approved for more patients with chronic heart failure. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about prescription entresto. ♪♪ tex-mex. tex-mex. ♪♪ termites. go back up! hang on! i am hanging on. don't mess up your deck with tex-mex. terminix. hi. the only way to nix it is to terminix it. antibacterial or moisturizing body wash? definitely moisturizer! antibacterial can i have both? new dove care & protect body wash eliminates 99% of bacteria and moisturizes for hours two for one! can i keep it? new dove care & protect, zero compromise! while republicans whine about dr. suess, baseball, mr. potato head and coca-cola, they're ignoring the existential threat the party is facing. elections were characterized by a particular thing, low turnouts. democrats and voters of colors have tended to turn out in lower numbers during non-presidential elections. then donald trump broke the gop's obama-era presidential losing streak. his gross mismanagement, negligence and racism turbo charged an electorate that powered a democratic whooping in the 2018 midterms and in 2020. in the wake of this seismic shift you would think republicans would have a come-to-jesus moment and think twice about following a guy that lost them the house, the senate and the presidency. nope, that would make too much sense. instead, option b, trying to make voting harder. they used the election lie as cover. take a look at the conservative national review, it recently argued the republic would be better served by having fewer but better voters. georgia's new law allows unlimited challenges to a voter's registration, requires id for an absentee ballot. texas is considering a law that would, among other things, reducerly voting and prohibit drive-through voting. unsurprisingly the bills and laws target predominantly diverse communities. democrats in washington are looking to put a stop to that with the for the people act which would expand voting rights, reduce the influence of money in politics and reduce gerrymandering. "the new yorker" obtained a private phone call between policy advisers to mitch mcconnell and several conservative groups in which they conceded the bill was so popular it wasn't worth trying to mount a public add cassie campaign to shift opinion. instead, opponents would be better off ignoring the will of the american public and just kill the bill in congress which explains the at tks we've seen from republican politicians against the bill. >> this is the bigger power grab since i've been in congress. it will take away every state's ability to run free and fair elections. >> it sounds to me like the little red states like mississippi are, if this thing goes through, are going to be powerless. >> i don't know a republican could ever win another national election. >> as long as i'm serving as governor, i will stand up against those who seek to infringe or denydeny. >> kevin cruz, quote, maybe you shouldn't use the state sovereignty argument as the southern manifesto, a manifesto that attacked the supreme court's 1954 brown versus the board of education decision outlying school sell gags. southern politicians saw it as an abuse of judicial power that trespassed on state's rights. this is from our friend ari berman, reporter with mother jones, maybe the national view shouldn't be quoting arguments of a fervent defender of segregation who wrote in 1965, quote, over most of this century, the great bulk of southern near grows have been genuinely unqualified for the franchise. for all those reasons, anti democracy, anti voting and, yes, jim crow republicans are the absolute worst. when we come back, the shockingly honest reason why the former president and current florida retiree says he takes issue with the new georgia law. - -so i can finish analyzing the risk on this position. you two are all set. choose the app that fits your investing style. ♪♪ vo: calling all builders, all welders, and roofers. engineers and electricians. calling all brick masons and boiler makers. steel workers and steam fitters your country is calling you to rebuild america. to create a cleaner, safer, more prosperous future for all. tackling climate change, this is the job of our lifetime. it's time to build back better. let's get to work. (burke) phone it in to 1-800-farmers to get policy perks, like a home and auto-bundle discount. (man) i'm phoning it in and just saved twenty percent. (burke) get your policy perks by calling 1-800-farmers. go ahead, phone it in. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ age before beauty? why not both? visibly diminish wrinkled skin in... crepe corrector lotion... only from gold bond. ♪♪ ♪♪ ocean spray works with nature every day to keep you healthy it should come as no surprise that most of the brilliant republican strategics come from a guy who cheated on his s.a.t. the orange-intoed retiree is spending most of his time from firing off hits and misses from his arts and crafts room. yesterday, election day is supposed to be election day, not election week or election month. far too many days are given to vote. he doesn't seem to want you to vote. perfect. joining me now, justice department correspondent for the nation and michelle goldberg columnist for "the new york times." my favorite argument about the georgia law is the whining by all these southern republican governors and also senators that it's not racist. here it is. queue the tape. >> how is the bill even racist? if you look at it with any form of neutrality, you can't spin that at the white house or the courthouse or anywhere else around this country. it just does not add up. >> the president has made a very serious accusation. he has said everybody who believes in having an id, showing an id before you vote, is a racist. >> they played the race card morning, noon and night. i am tired of it. i think it's cheap. i think it's sick for the president of the united states, joe biden, who has been a friend for years, to say that what they're doing in georgia is jim crow 2.0. >> he's been a friend for years except for when you were attacking his son, dude. let's take them seriously for just one moment. we're asking how many bubbles are in a bar of soap. what does that have to do with race. explain for the folks what's so racist about the georgia law. >> there's math on this. i know lindsey graham, that sick man doesn't believe in math. there's math on this. we know that when we do things like voter ids, when we close down early voting, stop mail-in voting, it disproportionately affects black and brown people. that's just science, lindsey. when you look at something like the national review article, last seen to be advocating for women to be hanged if they seek an abortion, they didn't do anything new. they didn't do anything new. they're columbusing that any white man with two ducketts to scratch together, a hemisphere of their own. all they want is a hemisphere where white people are the only ones that matter. we have tried in the constitution four times to stop them. the 15th amendment, the 19th amendment, the 24th amendment and the 26th amendment. four times in the constitution we have tried to expand the franchise, conservatives, where they call themselves democrats in 1865 or maga in 2021, have tried to stop us. they've always failed and they're going to fail this time, too. >> the thing about it is, michelle goldberg, i'm old enough to remember when ann coulter said women should lose the franchise because they vote too liberal, they just want all liberal stuff. there is demographic reality. they tended to do better in midterms because you had fewer people voting overall and definitely fewer people of color. then 2018 happened, we have to change all this because these people are voting in midterms. you have a special election, and you get two democratic senators in georgia. they keep reshuffling the deck because democrats figure out their system. i wonder if there's any further -- it seems like there's no further they can shuffle the deck. >> i think they can always find ways to go further. we're about to see what they're going to do in terms of this next round of redistricting. i'm sure this georgia law is not going to be the last. obviously it's no coincidence that they suddenly felt the need for this law after an election in which a representation that they seem to view as their divine right -- >> uh-oh. i think we're losing michelle. let's try to get michelle's sound back. you just froze for a second. let me play mitch mcconnell. this was yesterday on whether corporations should get involved in politics. this is rich. >> my warning, if you will, to corporate america is to stay out of politics. it's not what you're designed for. republicans drink coca-cola, too, and we fly and we like baseball. if i were running a major corporation, i'd stay out of politics. >> i'm not talking about political contributions. >> i didn't say that very artfully yesterday. they're certainly entitled to be involved in politics, they are. my principle complaint is they didn't read the darn bill. >> michelle, i'm giving this to you. oh, my god, well, i didn't really mean that when it came to giving money to me. your thoughts. >> hopefully this works. what's so amazing is you were talking earlier about the for the people act. one of the things that the for the people act wants to do is kur dale the influence of corporate money in politics. the reason that republicans have been so consistently against this is because they insist that corporations are people with first amendment rights. this has just been absolutely foundational -- conservatism until corporations started speaking out against their effort to restrict voting. >> and, also, when they decided we may not want sick people on our cruise ships. it's like they change their mind every time everything changes. very quickly before we go, elie, you and i, we've been talking off-line about this. midwin charles. we lost her shockingly. i think everyone is pretty shocked out there about her very untimely death. this was a young, vibrant, gorgeous, brilliant woman. it wanted to give you an opportunity to talk about her as wealth. i know she meant a lot to you as a fellow lawyer, as a fellow tv lawyer and somebody who advocates for all the good things, all the justice. i want to let you have an opportunity to talk a bit about her as well. >> i just wanted to say really quickly how much of a warrior that we lost this week. midwin, many people know her from her analysis on tv. the first time i met her on her show, the only three was as bad seemed to be. but she was that person because she came from such an in the trenches kind of legal background. this was an amazingly credentialed woman. she was a clerk for the 6th circuit. she worked for the top 50 law firms and stopped that work and left a lot of money on the table to go and help people. so it's such a hard thing to lose. she was one of those people that, you know, she's one of those lawyers you call when you only have one phone call. >> yeah, absolutely and the haitian community and haitian law is also really grieving right now. all my haitian-american friends have been calling. it's tragic. we love you. she is now our ancestor and we love her and we will, hopefully, her spirit will continue to stay with us. thank you so much. thank you, both. okay. up next, we will turn this now to a positive. st. louis mayor-elect tashara jones will be here. this is exciting to talk about her history-making victory last night arresting racial and associate injustice. don't go anywhere. she's coming up next. stice. don't go anywhere. she's coming up next to gelato made from scratch. raise the jar to all five layers. raise the jar to the best gelato... you've ever tasted. talenti. raise the jar. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ comfort in the extreme. ♪♪ the lincoln family of luxury suvs. ♪♪ [sfx: psst psst] allergies don't have to be scary.f luxury suvs. spraying flonase daily stops your body from overreacting to allergens all season long. psst! psst! all good when it comes to autism, finding the right words can be tough. finding understanding doesn't have to be. together, we can create a kinder, more inclusive world for the millions of people on the autism spectrum. go to autismspeaks.org use a single hr software? nope. we use 11. eleven. why do an expense report from your phone when you can do it from a machine that jams? i just emailed my wife's social security number to the entire company instead of hr, so... please come back. how hard is your business software working for you? with paycom, employees enter and manage their own hr data in one easy-to-use software. visit paycom.com for a free demo. hon? first off, we love each other... it's moving day. and while her friends are doing the heavy lifting, jess is busy moving her xfinity internet and tv services. it only takes about a minute. wait, a minute? but what have you been doing for the last two hours? ...delegating? oh, good one. move your xfinity services without breaking a sweat. xfinity makes moving easy. go online to transfer your services in about a minute. get started today. we have been surviving. we've suffered disinvestment, decades of violence, broken promises from our senior leaders. it's time for st. louis to thrive. it's time for st. louis to thrive. it's time to ring a breath of fresh air in our neighborhood. >> lyft night, the city of st. louis elected its first black woman mayor. city treasurer tashara jones. jones ran a progressive platform directing the city's coronavirus aid towards rental and mortgage assistance, as well as resources for those that are homeless. she pledged to restructure the police department, reallocating its budget towards investment in substance abuse and mental health services. st. louis leads the entire country and the city had its highest homicide rate in 50 years in 2020. it's quite a big job she has ahead of her. i am excited to be joined by tashara jones. i am grateful. so let's just get started. congratulations, first of all on your victory and let's dig into what you have ahead of you. coronavirus cases in st. louis, more than 22,000, nearly 23,000. 458 deaths. very high poverty rate, 21.8%. how do you begin to even dig into all of that? >> well, joy, thank you for having me. i am honored to be here this evening. you know, we have to tackle our problems one by one. i think the other thing that we have to, that's within these numbers is st. louis is one of the most hypersegregated cities in the country. we are known for the delmar divide. people that live north of delmar, 90% are african-american and the first 12 coronavirus deaths were all black people. so, you know, we have totally neglected over half of our city and we cannot expect it to thrive if half of it is left to fend for itself. >> and you, we have now passed at least the big stimulus bill and now there is talk of a big transportation bill. what could an infusion of federal money that could end up in your city, what can it do? what can you do with that? >> that can totally turn st. louis around. we have been saving money from a local tax that we rased to expand our et ro link and this infrastructure bill xould be huge for us to make sure that we can finally finish this project. we've updated the study to make sure we are ready to be back in the pipeline for federal funding. and also, like i said, our city has a lot of poverty. that's why we got so much money. so this will be a huge shot in the arm to make sure our people cannot only survive but thrive. >> we have been reporting a lot on the derek chauvin case and other police brutality cases. there was an infamous one in the city of st. louis where some white officers beat a black under cover officer thinking he was a black lives matter protestor. getting your arms around criminal justice, what kind of reforms can you do as mayor? >> well, i think we have to address the elephant in the room, joy. and we still have two separate police unions in st. louis. one for black officers and one for white officers. and so if they can't trust each other, then how can they expect the public to trust the police? so we have to have these hard, uncomfortable conversations. i think we are overdue for truth and reconciliation in st. louis, because we see and know the policies that have kept our region back and we have to embrace that uncomfortable past and uncomfortable truth and also embrace it so we can move forward. >> yeah. i can't get away from the other elephant in the room. you as a black woman are a rarity in terms of being a mayor in a major city like the one you are in. talk about what that representation means. i know what it means to me to see you. what does that representation mean in your view? >> i think it also means a huge representation for single moms. i am a single mother, with the most adorable 13-year-old son. he is the reason for the things i want to do in politics. i want to build a st. louis where he is able to walk across the street to my father's house without fear of being shot at or pulled a gun on, which has happened to him. i want a st. louis where he is not afraid of police officers. once he found out what the mayor does and that, you know, the mayor is over the police, he immediately said to me, well, that means i'll be safe. his mother doesn't have to become mayor for him to feel safe around police officers or neither should any child. >> yeah, absolutely. those are inspiring words him i am inspired by you. st. louis mayor elect tashara jones. congratulations. i know you will do great things, very, very lucky, the city of st. louis. they would be very happy to have you so congratulations. be well. >> thank you, joy. thank you. >> well, that ends on an inspirational note. that is the leadout tonight. lea. tonight on "all in. >> these new jim crowe laws are just anti-theticcal to what we are. >> the backlash continues as republicans give up the game. >> so think about all the college university students now who automatically registered to vote. we had an unemployed citizen you may not be prepared and ready to vote. >> tonight how everything old is new again down south. >> this bill