Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

President Biden To Hold First Formal News Conference In Wake Of Mass Shooting In Boulder And Atlanta; President Biden Calls On Ban On Assault Weapons; How Civil Rights Fight Can Inspire Change On Gun Violence; Michelle Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Dozens Of Celebrities Urge Americans To Support Sweeping Voting Rights Bill; Senate Democrats Prepare For Showdown On Filibuster; Federal Prosecutors Allege Oath Keepers Leader And Proud Boys Coordinated Before Capitol Attack. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired March 24, 2021 - 23:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[23:00:00]

DON LEMON, CNN HOST (on camera): President Joe Biden preparing to hold his first formal news conference tomorrow afternoon in the wake of the mass shootings in Boulder and Atlanta. He's calling on Congress to pass gun legislation to prevent more senseless shooting deaths. But the president is also said to be considering executive action on guns to prevent more deadly violence.

Let's discuss now. CNN's White House correspondent, John Harwood is here as well as our senior political commentator David Axelrod, he is a former Obama senior adviser. Gentlemen, good evening. Thank you so much for joining.

John, I', going to start with you. The White House is dealing with a slate of urgent crisis, guns, voting rights, immigration, coronavirus. President Biden's first big news conference is tomorrow. Is he ready to get grilled on all of this?

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (on camera): Well, I think he's ready for it, Don, but I think he's going to illustrate through this experience why he has waited to hold a news conference. As David knows better than anyone because he's lived this professionally, presidents like to control what the political conversation is about.

And Joe Biden has been very purposely focused on his COVID relief plan. And now he's preparing an infrastructure climate, human capital plan called Build Back Better that he wants to pass. But what he's facing is, as is typical for White Houses, events that they cannot control. And so he's got a border challenge, crisis, problem, that he is not eager to have the focus of attention on because that's a more divisive issue than what he's spending his time on or prefers to spend his time on.

And now the gun issue as well. Crises of two mass shootings and calls for gun control. That is also a difficult issue. More difficult issue than the ones he would rather be paying attention on. He'll do his best I think to steer the conversation back to what he wants to talk about. But you can only do that so much. LEMON: David, I know you want to respond to what John said. But your

entree to the conversation and then you can go on. It's going to be the filibuster. He's likely going to be asked about that. If you were advising him, would you say to Chuck the filibuster together as much done as possible while you still have the political power? Go on, David.

DAVID AXELROD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR (on camera): Look, it really doesn't matter what I say or he says. If he doesn't have 50 votes plus one, Kamala Harris, to change the rules, he's not going to get rid of the filibuster. And right now he doesn't have 50 votes to get rid of the filibuster and he needs the support of Senator Manchin and Senator Sinema on other things.

So, you know, this is complicated stuff. And that is why these press conferences become complicated. I was smiling because I've lived this nightmare before. You know, eight days ago, Don, when they called the press conference, it was before the two gun massacres brought guns back to the forefront of our debate. It was before the blow-up with Russia and China. It was before North Korea tested ballistic missiles today in a clear challenge to the Biden administration.

That's the nature of the presidency. You go to work everyday and you have the best laid plans and then things happen and you have to respond to them. And he's going to have to respond to a number of these things tomorrow including the question about the filibuster.

LEMON: John, you know, President Biden is going to continue his push for gun legislation tomorrow. But we're told that he's also considering executive actions. What could that entail?

HARWOOD: Well, you know, David alluded a moment ago to, you have to have the votes to do whatever you want. On gun issues, the background check is very popular. Polls, 70, 80 percent. Does not have the votes to clear a Senate filibuster. Even if you didn't have a Senate filibuster, he doesn't have 50 votes to pass the assault weapons ban which he's also embraced.

[23:05:03]

So, of necessity, he will be turning to executive action. He was going to do some of these things anyway. There are steps he can take. They are not going to be dramatic steps. But they are steps that gun control advocates say might make some difference. You could regulate ghost guns. These guns that are put together without serial numbers. Subject the people who exchange those firearms to background checks.

There's money you can put into community violence prevention because mass shootings are not the only kinds of gun violence that you want to prevent. You want to try to stop the everyday drip, drip, drip of gun death that's occur in major cities around the country and there's also some things you can do administratively to strengthen the background check system that exists already. Even though you want legislation to try to make it much more robust than it is right now.

LEMON: David, I want to talk to you about immigration, because that is, you know, John mentioned that just a moment ago as something that is critical right now. When they announce this press conference, a lot of this stuff wasn't happening including the migrants who are showing up at the border, children.

So that's going to be a topic, of course at this conference, in this news conference. President Biden is making Vice President Harris the point person to deal with the flow of migrants at the Southern Border. And this is the first key issue of their agenda that she's getting tasked with. This is a big moment for her.

AXELROD: It is, Don, and I think one of the reasons why they wanted to announce this before the press conference was they might have gotten a question about exactly what her portfolio was. People have begun to raise that question so they announced that today. It is a discreet, it's an important assignment she's gotten.

It's a diplomatic mission which is to deal with those Central American nations from which these immigrants and refugees are leaving to try and get their cooperation and change in conditions that are causing these people to flee.

It is a difficult assignment. Biden himself had an assignment like this in the Obama administration and had hard time making progress with it. So she's taking on a very difficult assignment. But it is an important one and it is also is the first foreign policy assignment, diplomatic assignment that she's received as vice president. So yes, it is a big moment for her.

LEMON: David, John, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.

The White House says that there is an ongoing process on executive actions on guns. Does President Joe Biden need to use his executive power now? Let's discuss now. Legendary news man Dan Rather is here. Dan, always a pleasure. Good to see you. Thanks for appearing in the program. Here we go again. This is a uniquely American situation. Another mass shooting. Are we doomed to repeat this over and over and over?

DAN RATHER, HOST AXS TV'S THE BIG INTERVIEW (on camera): Well, first of all, Don, thanks for having me on. By the way congratulations on your new book. In answer to your question, look, sooner or later, and I'm convinced it will come someday. But sooner or later, common sense has got to start prevailing. But there is no sign it will at the moment.

We have to understand that what is happening right now with the gun violence crisis is similar to what's happening in some of the other crises we are having, including the pandemic. And that is that any number of the politicians are playing a divisive game. They want to keep the country divided on certain issues.

And for example, the Federal, National Republican leadership with its NRA allies has continually and continues to stoke animosities and grievances as a way of holding on to and wield power. And what is note that a lot of Democrats fall in line right behind them. Now everybody knows it's no secret that a lot of this has to do with sheer money. There's a lot of money being made in the sale of guns and ammunitions.

A lot of money is paid to lobbyist to have politicians vote the way they vote. This is in contrast to the country as a whole. That poll after poll shows a majority of people, a rather sizable majority of Americans are in favor of having, say, a delay in when you can buy a gun. A three-day delay or a two-day delay. Buy the gun today, you pick it up two or three days later, and together with background checks. This is very popular.

But year after year, decade after decade, it doesn't get put into law. What is needed of course is a -- what I call a common sense approach. If you can get the politicians out of this, I'm convinced that Americans of good will on various sides of this issue would get together for some common sense fingers. Look, you have to have a driver's license to drive a car. You have to be trained in driving an automobile.

LEMON: You have to have insurance.

[23:10:00]

RATHER: A seatbelt. And you have to have insurance.

LEMON: Right.

RATHER: I mean, in sayings we have. And you know, we're getting the reputation, Don, in this country overseas, even among our friends in places like Australia and New Zealand, never mind in China and Russia. We're getting the reputation for a country of people that can't do anything.

We have a terrible gun violence situation. We can't do, we don't do anything about it. We have a terrible pandemic and we have trouble getting our people even to wear a masks. This is dangerous for the country far beyond just any one issue such as gun (inaudible).

LEMON: I agree. I agree. Listen.

RATHER: Can we do anything?

LEMON: Yeah. You're right about that. Listen, I just -- just a couple of years ago, I had to get my driver's license re-upped, right. And you periodically, you have to get your driver's license, you got to go back in, you got to do the test, you got to do whatever it takes to get that driver's license renewed. And you know, so we do need to look at some sensible gun legislation.

But again, but we have to stop looking at it through the extremes that if someone that it can't even be looked at just by saying you want to look at how it could possibly be improved. That that means you're taking, you want to take someone's -- all of the guns away. That is the extremes that people go to.

And we have to stop doing that. Because it is not productive or helpful to anyone. Dan, I want to move on because I need to talk about something that's very important. That you draw lots of comparisons between the historic fight for civil rights, and the path forward to curb gun deaths. What doe that path look like? What do you mean by that?

RATHER: Well, what I mean by that, you know I'm old enough, Don, to remember the early stirrings of the civil rights movement with Dr. Martin Luther King. As you know, I was honored to cover Dr. King in the early 1960s.

And for a long time, for the longest time, everybody said, listen, things aren't going to change. There are not going to be any real changes. Particularly in the deep south when it comes to a thing like voting rights for African-Americans.

But you know, slowly, painfully, slowly, with determination of a lot of people, You know, Martin Luther King himself would say that the heroes of the (inaudible) with the rank and file people who turned out for protests in the streets, nonviolent protests. And you know, if the cause is just, nobody wants to preach about this. But if the cause is just and enough people are determined to have the cause prevail, then progress can be made.

That it can be done with the gun control. And you've touch on something very important. That is, that you don't start with the extremes. People who own guns, many of them have to be assured, nobody is coming after their guns. If they have a squirrel gun, a hunting gun, or a practice gun, nobody is coming after their gun. We're talking about have a few days' delay and letting people pick up guns they bought, so you can have a background check.

Just start with one sweep step at a time. This is what happened with the civil rights movement. And while we're still in progress with the civil rights movement here in the 21st century, progress was made during the '60s, mid to late '60s into the '70s. It can be done. So, you know, people shouldn't lose heart about the gun violence. But it is hard not to lose heart when we have these heartbreaking situations such as we've had in Atlanta and Boulder these last few days.

LEMON: Amen. Thank you, Dan Rather. Always a pleasure. You be well. Thank you, sir.

RATHER: Thanks.

LEMON: The former first lady Michelle Obama urging Americans to support the sweeping Senate voting rights bill to expand voting access nationwide. We are going to talk to Valerie Jarrett about the battle Stacey Abrams calls a moral imperative.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: It is not only I think an existential crisis that we face. It is morally imperative that we not allow a procedural rule to destroy the most durable democracy the world has known.

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) LEMON: Today the Senate holding a hearing on the sweeping voting

rights package known as The For The People Act. It would expand voting access and campaign finance regulations and end part some of gerrymandering. While it passed in the House, it's a tougher sell in the Senate. Democrats are worried that they won't be able to get all 50 of their Senators on board without making some changes.

But the former first lady Michelle Obama is throwing her support behind it, writing an open letter along with Valerie Jarrett and a dozen a-list celebrities. And here's what they write in part. They say, after more Americans than ever voted in the last presidential election, some state leaders believe that silencing them is the only way to maintain their grip on power.

They're hoping to choose their voters, rather than the other way around. And if we as Americans stand idly by, if we wait for others to act or we refuse to do so with anything other than clear purpose and full hearted patriotism, they will succeed.

So, let's talk about this now with Valerie Jarrett, the former senior adviser to President Barack Obama, and the chairwoman of the board for When We All Vote. Valerie, thank you so much. I really appreciate you joining us.

VALERIE JARRETT, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (on camera): I'm delighted to be here, Don, and of course I have to start by saying congratulations to you. New York Times best seller number one spot.

LEMON: Thank you very much, Valerie. You helped out. I appreciate all the help by holding the book interview with me. I really appreciate it.

JARRETT: Thank you.

LEMON: So, I want you to listen, before we get started here and you comment on this. Let's listen to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, what he had to say about the bill today and then we'll talk.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): The turnout in the 2020 election was the highest since 1900. States are not engaging in trying to suppress voters whatsoever.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[23:20:03]

LEMON: So isn't that, isn't that turnout -- that high turnout exactly why they want to roll back voting access now?

JARRETT: Well, of course it is. 43 states are trying to pass hundreds of bills to suppress the vote, to reduce early the number of days that people could early vote. To get rid of no excuse absentee voting. To prevent voting on weekends when we know that many times, that's when black people particularly will vote. The souls to the polls initiative where people to go vote right after they go to church.

Trying to take all of these different measures to target how they are suppressing the vote is un-Democratic. And the notion that you have to suppress the vote in order to win an election, or as we said in our letter, picking your voters rather than the voters picking you.

It's going the wrong way. And that is what made us decide to work with a group of voting rights, civil rights organizations, to bring this issue to the Senate to put pressure on them to do the right thing. And to do it at the federal level, where we are making it easier to vote early. Extending the days that you can vote early. Allowing 16 and 17- year-olds to pre register because evidence shows that you vote in your fist election, you're likely to become a lifelong voter. Same day registration.

There are lot of ways were across our country we should be making it easier to vote. And since these states, 43 of them are taking the opposite action. This is why we need a federal bill to set some minimum parameters to guarantee every American the opportunity to vote in an open and fair election.

LEMON: Well, listen we just --

(CROSSTALK)

JARRETT: (Inaudible). I was just reading about this in Georgia. They want to criminalize your ability to take food and drink to people who are at the polls.

LEMON: Including water, yes.

JARRETT: So my 92-year-old mother has been standing in line for hours, I can't bring her something to drink or eat? What it does is discourages people from standing in the line for a very long time. That's outrageous.

LEMON: Well, you know, we just -- we had a similar conversation, because I write about this with what my grandmother had to deal with, you know, how many bubbles in a bar of soap. How many beans in a jar, or jelly beans in a jar. Your 92-year-old mother, I'm sure, either witnessed that or it was happening in her time.

But it seems like they're trying, it seems like this is the second sort of Jim Crow, the new Jim Crow.

JARRETT: Yes.

LEMON: I want people to know how important it is for them to get in touch, to be in touch with what their local politicians are doing. And not just maybe every two years for a primary or every four years for a national presidential debate.

JARRETT: Well, that's exactly why. You need to put pressure on your state and local elected officials right now. The legislatures that are passing these laws at the state level. But you also have to put pressure on your Senators to say we need a national standard.

We shouldn't be at the whim of this individuals states that are designing strategically, let's call it what it is, Don, to suppress the black vote, the brown vote and young people. Very strategically, very deliberately.

LEMON: Yes. And poor people, too.

JARRETT: And the only counter balance to that is us, the American people. And we are a mighty force to be reckoned with.

LEMON: Look, it's not going to affect rich people. Right, people who have access. It's going to -- Black and Brown, marginalize people and poor people. You know, and it restricts them from getting to the polls. Not everyone has as much access as the next person. I want to talk about this act and whether you thinks it's -- you know, I know you want it to pass.

But it isn't likely going anywhere in the Senate as long as Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans have the ability to filibuster it. The former President Barack Obama brought this up at John Lewis' funeral, he was talking about restoring the voting rights act then. Let's listen to it and then we'll talk.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And if all this takes eliminating the filibuster, another Jim Crow relic, in order to secure the God-given rights of every American, then that's what we should do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Jim Crow relic. He said it. Do you think Democrats stand a chance of passing this bill?

JARRETT: I think they do. But if it means they have to get rid of the filibuster to do the right thing, and that's exactly what we should do. Look, I watched for eight years how Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans tried to block every single measure we put forward that would have been helpful to the American people.

And so when you have that kind of (inaudible), obstinate Senate, Republicans, you put us in a position where there's no other choice. So I think clear-eyed members of the Senate ought to think about what is best for our country, what strengthens our democracy, and then push that forward.

If that means we have to get rid of the filibusters to do so, that's a small price to pay to enfranchise millions and millions of Americans who will be disenfranchised if these bills around the country pass and become law.

[23:25:09]

LEMON: I want to you listen again to the former president. He said this on a recent podcast. The new podcast that he co-hosts with Bruce Springsteen. It was release just a few weeks ago before the shootings in Boulder and Atlanta. He's talking about how no meaningful gun reforms passed after Sandy Hook and then a few years later in Charleston. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: In addition to making a statement from the White House. I say, you know, I'll want to go to the funeral but I don't want to speak. I don't have anything left to say. I feel like I've used up all my words. Nothing I've been able to say, whether making practical, rational arguments, emotional arguments, I've shown anger in speaking about this.

I've shown sorrow, and nothing seems to have any impact. I'm out of words. And of course, they ask that I speak. And I -- concluded, it was part of the job. I don't have the luxury. But I was stuck. I had nothing to say.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So Valerie, we all of course remember how powerful it was when he led that congregation singing Amazing Grace after the shooting at Emanuel AME Church. How do you think he's feeling this week?

JARRETT: Well, I know, look, he's feeling the same anguish that many Americans are feeling at this senseless gun violence that continues to happen over and over again and we can't get Republicans in Congress to take even the most basic steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who are a danger to themselves or to others.

The vast majority of the American people support background checks. Why would you give a lethal weapon to somebody who can't pass a background check? And yet, because of the NRA, and the fact that the Republicans are more accountable to them than they are to us, they have a strangle hold over the Senate. And the only counter force to that Don, is the American people.

LEMON: Valerie Jarrett, thank you so much. I really appreciate you joining us. Thank you.

JARRETT: Thank you, Don. Thank you for putting the spotlight on this issue.

LEMON: We'll be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: (SINGING) Amazing grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00] LEMON: The Senate filibuster is now at the center of an epic power battle. Democrats want to pass big legislation on guns and voting rights with their slim majority of one tie-breaking vote instead of the 60-vote threshold.

Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says changing the filibuster will destroy bipartisanship. But my next guest actually got a rare bipartisan bill passed and argues that McConnell is wrong.

So let's talk about that. The former Democratic senator from Wisconsin, Russ Feingold, he is now the president of the American Constitution Society. It is good to see you, sir. Thank you so much for joining us. Really appreciate it.

You have a new piece. It is out in Politico. It is titled, "The Filibuster Isn't the Key to Bipartisanship." I know this first hand. So, explain that, will you?

RUSS FEINGOLD, FORMER WISCONSIN SENATOR, PRESIDENT OF AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY: Well, the filibuster has a long history, Don. But in the last few decades, it hasn't been used for bipartisanship. It has been used for partisanship. And when John McCain and I worked for eight years on McCain-Feingold, you know, the filibuster didn't help us pass the bill. It made it take a lot longer.

We started that bill on a bipartisan basis. We had a rule that whenever we brought in a person from one party under the bill, we had to bring someone from another party. I like to call it the animals came two by two.

So, this thing was always bipartisan and we still needed 60 votes to pass it. So, the idea that somehow the only way to get bipartisanship is through the filibuster is absurd and it is completely contrary to the history of bipartisanship in the Senate.

And of course, the filibuster isn't even in the Constitution. It is not some kind of a guaranteed aspect of the Senate. And so it is fair to ask whether it should be reformed or changed in order to get to some of the things that people are talking about such as the vital need for the voter protection laws to be passed.

LEMON: Yeah. And just to be clear, just what the former senator is saying, that Mitch McConnell actually used the filibuster to try to block the McCain-Feingold bill even though it was bipartisan.

Senator Feingold, in your piece, here's what you write and you write in part, you say, to have bipartisanship, some members from both parties need to agree on what the problem is and on how to solve it. If this doesn't happen, there will be no bipartisanship whether the filibuster is on the table or not.

So things are more polarized than nearly any time in our history. There are a few moderates on either side of the aisle, just a few. Is bipartisanship a pipe dream at this point?

FEINGOLD: Well, I think the American public has to demand bipartisanship. Unfortunately, a lot of the pressure from the public has been to go the other way. To stay in your corner or you're going to be -- have a primary run against you.

[23:34:59]

FEINGOLD: Mitch McConnell has not shown any concern for the traditions of the Senate when it came to the bipartisan traditions about Supreme Court judges. He used every tactic he could to steal Supreme Court seats. And so he is sort of picking and choosing which issue he wants to call for in terms of bipartisanship and Senate traditions and which ones he doesn't. And this can't be tolerated.

When it comes down to it, as you were all talking about here, from Stacey Abrams to others, the fact is this voting rights issue is preeminent. It is more important to protect the voting rights of Americans than to preserve the filibuster in its current form.

As Senator Warnock recently said, the new senator from Georgia, the idea that you have to protect minority rights in the Senate at the expense of the minority rights of the American people throughout the United States is an absurdity.

If this is a democracy, you have to protect voting rights first. If the filibuster can be preserved in other ways, so be it. But there may need to be an exception made at least with regard to voting rights which are the foundation of the entire democracy. The filibuster is not the foundation of this democracy.

LEMON: OK. So, listen. Explain -- I don't think this is contradictory but explain to me, because you're saying to have bipartisanship, some members from both parties need to agree on what the problem is. There will be no bipartisanship whether the filibuster is on the table or not. But you admit that McCain-Feingold wouldn't be possible today. So is killing the filibuster the only way to get -- to get anything done?

FEINGOLD: Well, you may have to modify the filibuster in order to get some things done, some critical things. Maybe you make temporary exceptions. Maybe you carve out something like voting right which I think would make sense. But nobody ever intended that the filibuster be used for political partisanship. In fact, the founders of the country didn't even believe in political parties. The whole filibuster thing came because --

LEMON: Wait, wait, wait, hang on. That's a very good point. Can you start over because I want -- people at home, are you listening? Can you start over, senator? I think what you're saying is very important.

FEINGOLD: What aspect --

LEMON: When you were talking -- the founders of the country not even believing in political parties and that --

FEINGOLD: Right. James Madison, many of the founders, particularly James Madison, set up the Senate the way they did because they feared political parties. They called it faction. It was written in the federalist papers and other key writings that they feared this. So it wasn't even intended that there be political parties dominating our government when these rules were made. It was a procedural ruling in about 1806 that said, well, actually, you can have unlimited debate, which is very unusual in a parliament.

Usually in a parliamentary body, somebody can do something called moving the previous question, which means that if a majority wants to cut out the debate, they can. So this is a very unusual -- the economist wrote the other day that there's basically no other legislature in the world that has this rule.

I think, Don, that it has some good points to it. I saw some courageous filibusters over time, but it wasn't about supporting your party every time. It was often a sole person like Will Proxmire of Wisconsin fighting for the genocide treaty, or as in a movie, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Jimmy Stewart getting up there and saying, hey, there is corruption here.

It wasn't about sticking with your party no matter what even in the face of voter suppression, as President Obama said, the return of Jim Crow-type laws, and frankly, other issues such as gun control and other issues where something has to give.

Dan Rather said it well tonight on your show. At some point, common sense has to prevail. And around the world, people are looking at us and saying, what is wrong with a country that puts specific procedural rule, refusing to change it, ahead of everything else. That makes us look foolish and incapable of governing ourselves. So, something has to give here.

LEMON: So, former Senator Feingold, I don't know what your -- what's on your calendar and what your schedule looks like, but we are going to be talking about this. This is the outmost importance to the American people. I learned a lot. I know the viewers learned a lot. Can you pencil us in and please come back to continue this discussion because we learned so much from you? Thank you, thank you, thank you for appearing this evening. I really appreciate it.

FEINGOLD: Thank you. I was my pleasure. I'd love to come back and we at American Constitution Society wanted to do everything we can to lift up this discussion about this critical aspect of our democracy. Thank you so much, Don.

LEMON: Absolutely. Be well, sir.

Prosecutors alleging the far-right Oath Keepers coordinated with the Proud Boys before the Capitol riot. Does it bill a more damning case against them?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: The feds are alleging that the Oath Keepers coordinated with the Proud Boys before the January 6th insurrection. Filings show that Oath Keepers' leader Kelly Meggs, saying, at night, we have orchestrated a plan with the Proud Boys.

And I've been communicating with (INAUDIBLE) the leader. We will have the Proud Boys get in front of them and the cops will get between Antifa and the Proud Boys. We will come in behind Antifa and beat the hell out of them.

So I want to bring in CNN political commentator Doug Jones, a former Democratic senator from Alabama. There is a lot more there. That was just a short excerpt of it. Senator, thank you for joining us. I appreciate it.

[23:44:58]

LEMON: So, here's what Meggs is talking about: Joining forces, planning tactics, discussing gear between the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers. What does this new evidence give prosecutors?

DOUG JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER ALABAMA SENATOR: Well, it gives them an incredible tool of conspiracy. By its very nature, it is showing an agreement which is the essence of a conspiracy charge, and that allows a prosecutor to get into so much evidence and to bring in so many more potential defendants, but mainly just to strengthen the evidence about plan, motive, intent.

Conspiracy is a tool that prosecutors love, and by that one e-mail or tweet, whatever that was, that is something that by its very nature shows that agreement. So it's a strong, strong tool for prosecutors.

LEMON: What about a point person? A leader, if prosecutors can identify someone, who put together the plan? Does that mean an even more serious crime here?

JONES: Well, remember, all of these crimes are going to carry a maximum penalty and they're going to be governed a lot by federal sentencing guidelines. Governed means that that is going to be a guideline for the court to follow. But certainly, any time you have a planner of anything like this, those guidelines go up. You enhance those guidelines for planning when there are more than a certain number of people. When it is a crime of violence, that is an enhancement as well.

So each of those enhancements go up the amount of the sentence that's possible up to the maximum, which in the case of conspiracy to commit sedition, is like 20 years. Sedition itself is like 10 years. So, these folks are looking, Don, at a significant amount of time.

And remember, in federal court, this is without parole. These folks do this time with only a minor part of their sentence lopped off for some minor time for good time. Most of this is day for day, especially with a crime of violence.

LEMON: Yeah. So, there's one more piece of evidence from the court filings today, another Facebook posting from Meggs, the Oath Keepers team leader referencing the former president, Donald Trump. Trump said it's going to be wild, right? That's what it says in this thing here.

It's going to be wild. He wants us to make it wild. That's what he's saying. He called us all to the Capitol and wants us to make it wild. Sir yes sir. Gentlemen, we are heading to D.C. Pack your -- ish is what he says.

It's more evidence that rioters felt that they were taking orders from the former president. Does that put him -- the former president in any legal jeopardy?

JONES: Well, it certainly is another piece of the puzzle, Don. Like every trial, cases like this are built like a puzzle. There are pieces of the puzzle. What the prosecutors are doing now, which, by the way, we're getting an amazing glimpse at what these cases are being built because they're putting forth this evidence to keep these guys in custody.

The defense is trying to get people out on bond. The prosecution is trying to keep them there. So, what you're seeing is a remarkable speed and efficiency with what the Justice Department and the FBI are proceeding with.

But every case is like a puzzle. These pieces of the puzzle are getting put on the table. The prosecutor's role is to connect those pieces, to see if it approves something at the end of the day beyond a reasonable doubt. That is an important piece of the puzzle, but it is not -- it can't be the only piece. That piece alone is not going to be sufficient.

They're going to continue to try to put the pieces of the puzzle together, I think, for President Trump, former President Trump, as well as anybody else that either spoke at that rally or had any planning whatsoever to do with the events that occurred on January 6th.

LEMON: Yeah. Very familiar with that skyline behind you, senator. I lived there for a bit. And I don't think people realize how beautiful Birmingham, Alabama is. It's a beautiful city. Thank you for joining us. We appreciate it.

JONES: It's a wonderful place.

LEMON: Yeah. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.

JONES: My pleasure, Don. Thanks.

LEMON: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Chicago was withholding vaccines from one hospital accused of allowing Trump Tower workers to jump the line. And late tonight, the controversy has led to a resignation. CNN's Adrienne Broaddus has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

(LAUGHTER)

UNKNOWN: I want to take you here (INAUDIBLE) you can be here.

ADRIENNE BROADDUS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): After more than a year of suffering through COVID-19 --

ALDERMAN EMMA MITTS, CHICAGO: They'll call and say my mom passed away. There was so much we couldn't keep up with them. And it was just heartbreaking.

BROADDUS (voice-over): Chicago's Alderman Emma Mitts is now dealing with a different type of pain. The city is withholding additional first doses of COVID-19 vaccines from Loretto Hospital near the ward she represents. It's located in the Austin neighborhood, a predominantly black community hardest hit by the virus. The penalty, after it was revealed, Loretto improperly distributed the vaccine at Trump Tower in Chicago.

EMMA MITTS: For this to happen is a tragedy.

BROADDUS (voice-over): The hospital CEO, George Miller, said he authorized the vaccine clinic at Trump International Hotel and Tower in downtown Chicago earlier this month for hospitality workers.

In a memo obtained by CNN, Miller told staff in part -- quote -- "We were, at the time, under the impression restaurant and other frontline hospitality industry workers were considered essential under the city of Chicago's 1B eligibility requirements."

[23:54:58]

BROADDUS (On camera): A spokesperson with Loretta Hospital told me 68 of the 72 people who received the vaccine at Trump Tower were Black, Latino or Asian. Four people identified themselves as other or non- Hispanic.

(Voice-over): Still, the city said some people who didn't meet the eligibility requirements received a shot.

GOV. J.B. PRITZKER (D-IL): It's unacceptable to let people jump the line, especially if people have clouted their way through.

BROADDUS (voice-over): Also facing scrutiny, Loretto COO, Dr. Anosh Ahmed. Ahmed owns a condo at Trump Tower worth $2 million, according to tax records. And late Wednesday night, the board of trustees accepted Ahmed's resignation.

KIMBERLY LIGHTFORD, VICE CHAIRMAN, LORETTO BOARD OF TRUSTEES: We have reprimanded the president and CEO. Sanctions were placed. Financial charges as well. And that doesn't change the fact that what they did wrong is wrong. So, each story line that continues to come out is wrong. WENDY GOODALL MCDONALD, OBSTETRICIAN/GYNECOLOGIST, NORTHWESTERN: They have pulled it from an area on the west side of Chicago where there is already a lack or a decreased amount of places that people can get vaccinated.

BROADDUS (voice-over): Dr. Wendy Goodall McDonald, who treats patients all over the city, said the people who need the vaccine the most could suffer.

GOODALL MCDONALD: I think that the pulling of the vaccines for the area will hurt and harm the black and brown communities.

EMMA MITTS: The vaccine was for us, zip code areas. Anything else shouldn't have been.

BROADDUS (voice-over): Mitts says she doesn't want the people she served for nearly two decades --

EMMA MITTS: The virus, I don't want it to get to you, no kind of way.

BROADDUS (voice-over): To Mitts, a lifesaving vaccine.

MITTS: Everyone shouldn't have to pay for someone else's mistake, particularly when you know that it had nothing to do with it.

BROADDUS (voice-over): Adrienne Broaddus, CNN, Chicago.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

LEMON (on camera): Adrienne, thank you so much. Very important story. And thank you for watching, everyone. Our coverage continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)