Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Biden To Sign Infrastructure Bill As Inflation Worries Grow; House Set To Vote On $1.75 Trillion Economic And Climate Bill This Week; Defense Attorney Walks Back Objected To Black Pastors In Court. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired November 14, 2021 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:35]

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Hello again, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

We begin this hour with President Biden preparing to celebrate his biggest legislative win yet. Tomorrow, he will sign into law his $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Bill during a bipartisan ceremony. $110 billion for roads, bridges, and other projects, $65 billion to expand high speed internet access, $42 billion for airports, and ports, and the biggest funding boost for Amtrak since it was founded in 1971.

But as the President celebrates this accomplishment, rising inflation is threatening the rest of his economic agenda and helping push his poll numbers to new lows.

For more on this, let's bring in Joe Johns at the White House. So Joe, tell us more about the significance of this bill signing tomorrow and how the White House is hoping to get the rest of his agenda through.

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Right, Fred. Well, at least part of this week is going to be devoted to something that Democrats see themselves as not very good at or something they think they could at least do better at. It is something Republicans, especially somebody like Donald Trump see themselves as excelling at, and that is taking credit for big ideas, and selling themselves to the public, as the people who pushed it through.

So that is what we're going to see with this Infrastructure Bill. Tomorrow here at the White House, we are expecting a signing ceremony involving the President and a cast of other people, and it doesn't stop there. Then we expect to see the President going out into the country to sell this idea, this infrastructure bill in both New Hampshire, as well as Michigan.

And the point of all of this is there is some concern here that during all of the infighting up on Capitol Hill over this bill, lost in the process may have been what this bill is for, all those things that you read, at the very beginning, Fred -- roads, bridges, infrastructure to help Americans and to sort of improve they say even the economy given this time of inflation -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, Joe John at the White House. Thanks so much. All right. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is vowing to finally bring the

President's massive spending bill up for a vote this week. Up to this point, getting the second part of Biden's economic agenda through Congress has been quite the struggle for Democrats who remain divided on the size and cost of the bill and its possible impact on inflation.

For more now, let's go to Capitol Hill. Suzanne Malveaux is there. So Suzanne, what do we expect might happen this week?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, Joe is absolutely right, the Democrats are going to be taking a victory lap, if you will. They want their full credit for that infrastructure bill, but also, they want to make sure that there is still some momentum behind the Build Back Better Bill, and that is something that the leadership -- Democratic leadership, specifically House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is trying to do over the weekend.

You might recall, Fred, it was just last week, a small group of moderates said they were not going to move this forward. They decoupled it from the Infrastructure Bill, until they got the Independent Congressional Budget Office to score it. Let us know and the taxpayers how much this is going to cost and whether or not that aligns with what the White House predicted.

Pelosi sending a "Dear Colleague" letter over the weekend saying that six of the nine committees got those CBO scores that they were in line with those White House figures, and that she anticipates the three other Committees will get their scores by Monday.

So of course, we're keeping an eye on the website there to see if in fact that does happen, but in the meantime, Fred, it really depends on who you ask what they have at stake in terms of where they think the future of this bill is going.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. FRED UPTON (R-MI): Well, I'm not at all convinced that the Build Back Better plan is actually going to pass or even be considered this week. I don't think the votes are there yet. A good number of Democrats had demanded and are going to receive a CBO report as to whether is it really paid for.

REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): I do believe that we will have a vote this week on the Build Back Better Act. It will go to the Senate and then it will be up to the Senate Democrats and the President who gave us his commitment that he believed that he could get this across the finish line in the form that that the framework was presented. So yes, is the short answer, we will have a vote this week.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[15:05:00]

MALVEAUX: So, Fred we will see that. We will see whether or not that actually happens when it goes on the Senate side. As you know, Senator Joe Manchin the moderate from West Virginia, very much a key negotiator and where it goes from there, his main objection here, whether or not it compounds the country's problems, inflation problems, and also, you should know, just kind of a preemptive move in anticipation of all the things that the Congress has to get done, particularly the Senate before next year.

We heard from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer in a "Dear Colleague" letter saying that he anticipates -- of course, you're going to have to deal with the debt ceiling, funding the military, but anticipates there might be a continuing resolution for funding the government, because they very likely will not miss -- not make that deadline of December 3rd to fully fund the government. They might have to just kick the can down the road a little bit on that one -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, Suzanne Malveaux on Capitol Hill. Thanks so much for that.

All right, with me now is Reverend William Barber. He is the co-chair of the Poor People's Campaign. Reverend, so good to see you, joining us from New York today.

I understand, you know, you are leading a rally in the Nation's Capital tomorrow as Congress returns to debate and possibly vote on this Build Back Better Plan this week. Tell us why you believe this bill is so important to the American public.

REVEREND WILLIAM BARBER, CO-CHAIR, POOR PEOPLE'S CAMPAIGN: Fredricka, first of all, part of the problem is when we talk about is it Biden's plan or is it Manchin's plan? It's the people's plan.

And the people who were hurt the most during COVID, poor and low wealth people, white, black, brown, Asian -- people of every different race, creed and color. So tomorrow, we have people coming from 30 states, we've been trying to visit with Manchin and Sinema, they want, so we're going to go. We're going to go to the step because, listen, if we don't do this, people who need Earned Income Tax Credits are the ones that lose. That's 17 million working families.

Four million children will lose if we don't do the child tax credit. If we don't raise the money for home healthcare workers, 28 percent of them are black, 23 percent are Latinos, they will lose.

We need to start talking about not how much does it cost, but how much will it will it cost if we don't do this. And inflation is not an issue in this.

Jeffrey Sachs, an economist has said, this bill is paid for by taxing the billionaires, and that's the problem, people don't want to tax the billionaires, even though it was poor and low wage essential workers who saved this country during the midst of COVID.

So, we can't let this just go away. Yes, we need infrastructure, roads and bridges, but we also need healthcare and education and wages, and those things that are the infrastructure of people's daily lives. So people are not backing down.

WHITFIELD: So you've tried to reach out to Senators Manchin and Sinema, and what has happened by you reaching out? Have they said no? Or do you know that they received the invitation from you?

BARBERS: Oh, yes.

WHITFIELD: That you want to meet and talk about the specifics, like you just laid out?

BARBER: Sure. Sure, they've received it. We know that because we always send a certified mail. But when we went to Sinema's office, we got arrested. When we went to Manchin's office, he said he wasn't available right then, you know, of course we've been in his state.

But it is more than -- it's not me, it is his own people you know, he ought to be championing. He comes from a poor state. We will have people there from West Virginia tomorrow who are willing to engage in nonviolent civil disobedience if necessary, because they say, listen, why is our senator blocking healthcare for us? Why is our senator blocking child tax credit for us when we are a state that need it more than anyplace else?

That's what so confusing. Why would you choose the billionaires over your own people?

And by the way, we keep saying this as a spending this -- this is an investment bill there. The Economic Policy Institute and others say, when you invest in education, when you invest in healthcare, when you invest in living wages, it actually builds the economy.

You know, Joe Manchin, for instance, Sinema blocked raising the minimum wage for $15.00 in the American Rescue Plan. Think about this. If we had raised the minimum wage to $15.00 an hour, it would have pumped $330 billion into the economy, and it would have lifted 32 million people out of poverty in the lower end, and 40 percent of African-American.

So lastly, Fredricka, the other thing we've got to talk about is the racial and the class parts of this. If you block these bills, it is a form of systemic racism and classism, because when you disaggregate the numbers, that's who is going to benefit the most.

In the infrastructure, mostly white men will benefit; in the BBB, poor whites, poor blacks, poor Latinos, poor Asians, poor Natives. That's what we need to be talking about here in America.

WHITFIELD: Let me ask you about something else very much race related.

BARBER: Yes.

WHITFIELD: We're talking about the murder trial of Ahmaud Arbery underway right now in Georgia. You've attended that trial to sit with Arbery's family members. On Thursday, we heard some peculiar words coming from the defense attorney, Kevin Gough, right, objecting to any more black pastors attending the proceedings to support the family.

For those who haven't seen it or heard the words here it is.

[15:10:03] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEVIN GOUGH, ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT, WILLIAM BRYAN: If we're going to start a precedent, starting yesterday, we're going to bring high profile members of the African-American community into the courtroom to sit with the family during the trial in the presence of the jury, I believe that's intimidating and it is an attempt to pressure -- could be, consciously or unconsciously, an attempt to pressure or influence the jury.

I don't want any more black pastors coming in here, or other -- Jesse Jackson -- whoever was in was in here earlier this week, sitting with the victim's family trying to influence a jury in this case.

If a bunch of folks came in here dressed like Colonel Sanders with white masks sitting in the back --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: And by the way, Jesse Jackson wasn't there. You have been there. I guess that he confused the two of you, and then this is how Mr. Gough tried to clean it up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOUGH: My statements yesterday were overly broad. I will follow up with a more specific motion on Monday, putting that and those concerns in the proper context. And my apologies to anyone who might inadvertently get offended.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So, whether it was his initial statement, or even his, you know, quote-unquote, "apology," what does this either reveal to you or cement to you?

BARBER: Well, this is not peculiar if you come from the south. We've heard this before. This is a trope. And whether it is myself or Jesse Jackson, we shouldn't even take this personally. It's not about us. This is about something much deeper.

First of all, he doesn't have a case. So, he is trying to do whatever he can, because his own client filmed themselves killing someone else. And think about that, you have three people in there that have killed people, and you're saying black pastors are intimidating.

Lastly, he said black pastors are intimidating. He is connecting blackness to intimidation, and that is the crux of the American racial violence problem. Blackness is intimidating to the white supremacy man. Blackness means you can purge it, you can stop it because it's bad. It's because it's a nigger -- excuse me for saying it.

But blackness is intimidation. Just being black is intimidating, and that is the fundamental problem that has been in this country for far too long in a white supremacist mindset, and he should not have done that. Lastly, I just want to say, you know, I'm not a black pastor, I'm a

pastor who happens to be black. I didn't get ordained to be a black pastor or be a consecrated a Bishop. We are pastors, but think about how he is trying to narrow even the concept of a minister who happens to be black, that you only deal with black folk. And when you do, you're intimidating.

That's the danger of that language, because you can put it on anything. And what happened to Ahmaud, he had blackness, he was black, he was in the wrong place at the wrong time black, and they saw him as someone they could destroy, they could kill, and listen could even film it because he was black. So, they were right. And they thought they were heroes. They are going to be heroes, rather than showing up as murderers.

WHITFIELD: Yes, and all that you said is just so profound. I'd have to ask you though, even though the cases are very different, we're talking about two cases right now that America is watching, and they are very different cases, that with Kyle Rittenhouse.

But I see some commonalities here where you talk about the issue. The defense is talking about self-defense, and also talking about protecting property that was not theirs. You know, race may not be a component of the Kyle Rittenhouse, but what do you see in this correlation?

What is the message that America should be gathering here when we are talking about people were killed, where there is a vigilantism and there's a self-defense defense over the protection of property that isn't even there's and people die.

BARBER: Fredricka, I think we need to look at it in these cases, and in terms of things like the Build Back Better, because 700 people die a day from poverty in this country before COVID, a quarter million a year. Who makes up the majority of those if 60.9 percent of black people are poor and low wealth, and 30 percent of white people are poor and low wealth even though that does mean 66 million white people and 26 million black.

But the notion is, if someone attacked someone who was black, the black person had to be doing something. Think about this, the black person didn't have the gun. The black person was just jogging. The white person has had the gun, the cause, and had multiple guns, but they're trying to say they were protecting themselves from the black man. Why? Because blackness again, in that mindset is automatically guilty, is automatically wrong, is automatically intimidating, is automatically something to be stopped.

And we've seen it, people have said, imagine if on January 6, it had been African-Americans and Latinos that were going into it -- even people have asked the question, don't you know some people would have been shot more?

We are in a time where we are going to have to look much deeper when it comes to this issue of race and the kind of violence and an ugliness that is wrapped into some people's idea of blackness, where blackness itself renders you a target, where blackness itself makes you guilty, where blackness itself means I can kill you because you must have done something, you had to do something. You wouldn't be here -- over here. We'll kill you and worry about fixing it later.

[15:15:18]

BARBER: We'll shoot you down and worry later about it because, you had to do something. I know you've done something because you're black and black -- by being black, being brown, you are intimidated.

And that is the lesson America is going to have to deal with if we're ever going to get at the crux of these issues and wonder why people do it, cops do it, other folks do it and they seem to have no remorse. Because in their mindset, when I was killing, I was not killing something that didn't deserve it or somebody didn't deserve it. The blackness itself in some people's mind is guilt enough.

WHITFIELD: All right, Reverend William Barber, so glad to have you. Thank you so much.

BARBER: Thank you. Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, coming up. Investigators say they have tracked down and identified a bank teller that stole hundreds of thousands of dollars 52 years ago. We talk to one of the case's key investigators, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:20:27]

WHITFIELD: After 52 years and two generations of investigators, authorities are finally closing one of America's most infamous cold cases. A 1969 bank robbery in Cleveland, Ohio.

Pete Elliott helped find the man his father spent decades searching for following in his footsteps as a U.S. Marshal. Authorities say in 1969, Ted Conrad walked out of the bank he worked at with $215,000.00 in cash, the equivalent of about $1.7 million in today's figures.

He was ever found, and eventually settled down in a Massachusetts suburb using a fake identity until his death earlier this year.

Pete Elliott joins us now from Cleveland. So Pete, how did you crack this case?

PETE ELLIOTT, U.S. MARSHAL: Well, really, I have to give credit to my father. My father passed away in March of 2020. He worked on this investigation since 1969. He was a career deputy U.S. Marshal. You know, we grew up near where Conrad lived. Conrad and my father had the same doctor and Conrad used to work at a local ice cream shop where my dad used to take us as kids. So, this was personal for my father.

My father did a lot during those -- in the court. He pulled applications from New England College, and I had those original applications. When we saw the obituary of Thomas Randall, we immediately noticed a lot of things.

First, he said he was raised in Colorado, which Conrad was. He said went to New England College where Conrad went to college. He said his date of birth was 7/10 of 47. Conrad was 7/10 of 1949. A lot of similarities.

He said he was a son of Edward and Ruth of Beth Krueger Randall. Conrad's real parents were Edward and Ruth Beth Kruger Conrad.

So, it all added up. It all looked good. Again, my father had the original application from 1967 from New England College. He always wanted to find the truth behind what happened with Conrad. We were able to take that application and we found out Randall filed for bankruptcy in 2014 in Boston Federal Court.

We were able to get those documents, and then we were able to match up signatures from that '67 application my father found of Conrad and the 2014 Boston court papers.

WHITFIELD: Wow. So, I mean, this really had kind of consumed your family. I mean, consumed your dad, he was working on it. But then, I mean, I guess was this dinner conversation sometimes where you found yourself just as enamored and committed to solving this case, even after your dad's passing?

ELLIOTT: Well, I'm the boss now, so we have tons of cases, but my father even after retirement in 1990, would never let the case go up until his death. It was number one in his life, and the number one case he wanted solved.

WHITFIELD: So how gratifying is this for you?

ELLIOTT: Well, it is good. I'm happy. My dad was the one that really solved this case. I've got to give the credit to him. He is a career Deputy U.S. Marshal and very determined.

When we went to the house in Massachusetts, we learned that Randall gave a death bed confession that he is really Theodore Conrad.

WHITFIELD: Now, what about his family? Because he had a family, who I imagine, I guess was enlightened then by you cracking the case, or even his deathbed confession? Or did they know?

ELLIOTT: Well, I made calls to the Conrad family, his brothers and sister, advised them that we had found out where he was and what his name is now. The family that Conrad had and lived under -- it is all under a fictitious name and it's not their fault -- a family, a wife and the daughter, they're beside themselves and they're really good people.

At the end of the day, you know, they didn't know, you know, the true identity of their father and their husband. And think about that.

WHITFIELD: I can't imagine.

[15:25:02] ELLIOTT: I've been doing this for 38 years and then covered 34 of

those, and I've never been in one house that got what was in that house -- where I saw so many bills piled up, bill after bill after bill and it just goes to show, you know, everything doesn't end like the movies. He died of lung cancer, and died, I think at a pretty young age and left his family broke with a fictitious last name.

WHITFIELD: Wow, what they must be going through. Well, Pete Elliott, congratulations on having some resolution to the case that very much occupied your dad's efforts and yours as well.

ELLIOTT: Well, thank you, and thank you for having me on.

WHITFIELD: Coming up, closing arguments in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial are to begin tomorrow. What both sides are expected to highlight, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:30:19]

WHITFIELD: All right tomorrow, closing arguments began in the Kyle Rittenhouse homicide trial after more than 30 witnesses took the stand to testify.

Rittenhouse faces five felony charges and a misdemeanor weapons charge after killing two men and injuring another during tense protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin last year. If convicted on the most serious charge, the teen faces a mandatory sentence of life in prison.

I want to bring in CNN legal analyst, Areva Martin right now. Areva, so good to see you. So what do you expect both sides to focus on during their closing statements?

AREVA MARTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Fred, I think what we're going to see from the prosecution is an attempt to remind the jurors that Kyle Rittenhouse was a teenager that crossed state lines with a weapon that he wasn't legally should have been in possession of, that he went to a business that he said he was there to protect, the business had not invited him to be there, that he left the premises of that business and posed as an EMT when he had no training in medical care, and that he shot and killed two unarmed men, and that he wounded a third man, and that he inserted himself in this very volatile situation.

And for the prosecution, they were given a lifeline when this Judge, on Friday, allow the jurors to hear lesser included charges and to get a jury instruction on provocation. And what this means is the prosecution will be able to establish that these actions were set in motion by Kyle Rittenhouse and that undermines his self-defense.

On the other hand, the defense will try to drive home that Kyle Rittenhouse was only responding to attacks that were made on him because he was in fear of his life.

WHITFIELD: Interesting, and they have two hours in which to do so. So I mean, you'd laid it out, the prosecutors will talk about all the events leading up to the shooting deaths, whereas the defense is likely to zero in on that moment when he was confronted or he confronted the other demonstrators who were armed and thereby be able to say it was self-defense.

So Judge Bruce Schroeder, he is also kind of under the microscope, right? Because he has been quite colorful, shall we say, you know, in his demeanor, and I wonder how the jury will take that into consideration as they hear closing statement, some of which they didn't see, but then some that they did see in here.

MARTIN: Yes. What we know, Fred, is that jurors watch everything in a courtroom. They watch the lawyers, they watch the parties, and of course, they watch the Judge and they take their cues from this Judge, which is why this Judge's behavior has been so disappointing.

He has inserted himself into this trial in a way that you don't expect to see from Judges, particularly an experienced Judge like this Judge. He is prone to histrionics. He is prone to drama. He seems to love and crave media attention.

And I just hope that the jurors are able to separate his conduct, focus on the facts, focus on the law, and render a decision in this case that is consistent with the facts.

WHITFIELD: And Wisconsin authorized 500 National Guard troops now to be on standby to assist law enforcement in Kenosha next week. There was some movement already in the latter part of last week, do you feel this is an appropriate indication of how things might go in terms of the expectations of the verdict either way?

MARTIN: Well, we've seen this before, Fred, where Governors move in the National Guard in anticipation of what they think might be volatile and even violent protests. But this case is a little interesting because I'm not sure if the Governor is expecting those on the right, those conservative groups that were out on the night that these shootings took place, the Proud Boys and other conservative groups are going to protest in the event that Kyle was found guilty on any of these charges, or if they are expecting, you know, protesters that were there supporting Black Lives Matter to show up in the event that he is, you know, acquitted on all the charges.

So, it's not really clear, you know, who they are expecting to show up and why they think that those protesters, if any, might resort to violence.

WHITFIELD: Yes. All right, Areva Martin, good to see you. Thank you so much.

MARTIN: Thanks, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, still ahead, with the Holiday Season and colder temperatures right around the corner, how is the record U.S. inflation impacting food pantries and soup kitchens.

We're live at one of New York's oldest homeless shelters, next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:39:22]

WHITFIELD: Americans are paying more for everything right now as inflation hits a 30-year high. Groceries for a family of four are up considerably from this time last year, and many of those who can't afford those groceries right now are turning to charitable organizations for help.

CNN's Pablo Sandoval is with us now from the Bowery Mission in New York City. So Polo, what are the biggest challenges right now for food charities to be able to keep up with the demand?

POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, Fred, all of us are very familiar right now with that rising price of just keeping food on the table. And for some of those organizations that are helping those communities, they are stuck in a struggle of their own here.

Of course, we've often heard about inflation and also food supply shortages that many organizations are experiencing.

Here though at the Bower Mission in Manhattan, which has been serving the needy for well over a hundred years, they say that they can't say for sure whether or not those are direct factors, but they can say for sure that they're having to do more with less this year.

[15:40:19]

SANDOVAL: Donations are certainly down, their partners are having to spend more to be able to contribute to some organizations like that and it is happening in some of the hardest time during the year, obviously, getting ready for Thanksgiving less than two weeks away.

And the good folks here are certainly having to make sure that they can feed the hungry, feed those that certainly rely on them, not only just for their Thanksgiving meal, but just year round all together.

I want you to hear directly from the organization's CEO, James Winans as he describes -- as he took us inside earlier today to show us how they are already prepping and having to do more with fewer resources this year.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES WINANS, CEO, BOWERY MISSION: This year, for example, we have many received many, many fewer turkeys than we're used to for Thanksgiving. And so where we're used to distributing out an abundance of food to other partners in the community. This year, we're really focused on those probably 1,000 people we are expecting on Thanksgiving Day right here at the Bowery Mission.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANDOVAL: Mr. Winans there certainly touching on something that has many Americans worried that is, if they can find a turkey this year, then they're probably going to have to pay a little bit more for it, but looking short, this basically sums it up. It is usually, they're able to over produce some of those meals this time of the year. That way, they can only satisfy some of those folks that turn to them year after year. But they can also spread the generosity to neighboring churches.

This year, however, because of their limited stock, or at least somewhat of a limited stock, they now will simply have to focus on those who usually show up at their doorstep come Thanksgiving and hope that they will have a little bit extra to spread around -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: Yes, tough times for everyone across the board. Thank you so much, Polo Sandoval in New York.

All right, the Rockefeller Christmas tree, it's arrived in New York City. This year's tree is a 79-foot Norway Spruce weighing 12 tons. It will be illuminated by more than 50,000 colored lights and topped with a Swarovski star.

The official lighting ceremony is on December 1st. And this year, the tree comes from Maryland, which is the first time the Rockefeller tree is from that state.

All right, it's all said to be a fuller tree with more robust foliage as compared to the tree in 2020, which was a little on the skinny side. That's what the critics were saying, and some said it was a metaphor for how 2020 was.

All right, still ahead, an Amazon delivery driver gets hit by a train and lives to tell the tale. It's an amazing story, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right, tonight, Lisa Ling is back with an all-new episode of "This is Life."

This week, she takes a look at the so called Lavender Scare from the 1940s through the 1960s. Gay people were considered a National Security threat and were purged from working in every aspect of the U.S. Federal government and military. Here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LISA LING, CNN HOST, "THIS IS LIFE": Do you know how these investigations would be conducted?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A lot of it was just based on pure allegation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, Charlie, got a minute?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your coworker would go to your boss and say, "I heard my coworker went to a gay bar." And so that other employee would be called in and told, "We have information indicating that you're a sexual deviant. So, you have two options, you can either resign quietly, and no one will ever know or go have to be terminated and this will be on your record forever." (END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right, joining us now, the host of "This is Life," Lisa Ling. Good to see you.

So wow, I mean, how pervasive was this purging of gay people from U.S. government?

LING: Well, in a word, extremely pervasive. You know, most Americans know something about the Red Scare from history classes back in the day and time during the late 1940s and 50s when the belief that communist agents were infiltrating our government was also pervasive. It was a movement that was touched off by none other than Senator Joseph McCarthy.

But many people don't know that McCarthy also charged that the government had been infiltrated by homosexuals and that they posed a threat that was equally as scary and as grave, to our National Security.

And this fear that gay men and lesbians could be blackmailed into revealing State Secrets resulted in a systematic campaign to identify and remove all government employees, and those who were in the military suspected of being homosexuals.

And this continued on for decades, Fred, as you mentioned, and although they could never uncover a single example of a gay person, an American citizen who had betrayed the secrets of the United States government, as a result of what was called the Lavender Scare, tens of thousands of Americans were purged from their government jobs and the United States military because they were suspected of being gay and therefore, a threat to U.S. National Security.

WHITFIELD: I mean, tens of thousands. So the number is sizable, and then you talked to a number of people. Did they ever get a chance, I guess to challenge government. Did they have any success in being able to reclaim their jobs that they were purged from?

[15:50:02]

LING: Almost none of them were able to get their jobs back especially in those early decades. And really the response from the victim's perspective was just devastating. The shame that so many of them carried after being fired continued on for years.

I mean, in the 1950s, the term security risk applied, it was like virtual code for homosexuals, and the Lavender Scare lasted longer than the Red Scare.

WHITFIELD: That's extraordinary. Lisa Ling, we look forward to seeing the fuller picture this evening. Thanks so much for joining us at this hour.

Be sure to tune in this evening, an all-new episode of "This is Life" with Lisa Ling airing tonight at 10, only on CNN.

All right, Queen Elizabeth missed the Remembrance Day service today after straining her back. CNN's Max Foster is in London with details.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: The Queen pulled out of the Remembrance Day commemorations in Central London last minute and it's because she strained her back according to Buckingham Palace. She is effectively in too much pain to go there.

We're told by a Royal source that this is unrelated to the reason she has canceled other recent engagements. That was on medical advice that she needed to rest.

Now, it is a big moment for The Queen not to arrive at this event. She has only missed it six times in her long reign, four times when she was traveling abroad and twice because she was pregnant. She is Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. She served in the Second World War, so she wouldn't have pulled out of this lightly.

And a Royal source telling CNN, The Queen was deeply disappointed to miss the engagement, which she considers one of the most significant engagements of the year.

We are being reassured though, the Royal source telling CNN that the Queen hopes to continue as planned with her schedule of lights official duties next week. That is video calls, carrying out engagements remotely, allowing her to carry out her crucial Central Constitutional role, but without arriving in person, which clearly she is unable to do right now and her doctors continue to advise her to rest as much as possible.

Max Foster, CNN, Hampshire, England.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: And don't forget a new episode of the CNN Original Series, "Diana," tonight at nine right here on CNN.

All right, you are not going to believe this one, Amazon driver, Alexander Evans, maybe the luckiest man alive, and this is the proof. Just look at these pictures.

This is what is left of Evans' delivery truck after an Amtrak train slammed into it. The impact split the van in half, pushing the package compartment down the tracks and then leaving Evans stunned, still buckled in his seat.

CNN affiliate WISN talked with Evans and asked what he felt at the moment of impact.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALEXANDER EVANS, AMAZON DRIVER: The air and the pressure -- I felt the airbags and it was just, I didn't know what to feel, to be honest with you.

QUESTION: When all of us looked at that video in the aftermath, the photographs, we just couldn't believe you survived.

EVANS: I still can't believe right now myself as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Right, still stunned, understandably, Evans tells WISN -- guess what? That he is deaf in one ear and didn't hear the train's horn at first. And he says the road parallels the track before the crossing, limiting the driver's view of the tracks.

There are also no signals, no lights or warning sounds at that crossing, and then get this -- the day of the wreck was his 33rd birthday.

So that's why he is the luckiest, most blessed man alive right now.

I'm Fredricka Whitfield, thanks so much for being with me this weekend.'

CNN NEWSROOM continues with Jim Acosta in a moment.

But first, here's this week's "Mission Ahead."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RACHEL CRANE, CNN BUSINESS INNOVATIONS AND SPACE CORRESPONDENT (voice over): For decades, wind and solar have been the centerpieces of green energy, but the oceans ever constant waves and tides are also rich with renewable power that has remained largely untapped.

Off the coast of Scotland, the company Orbital Marine Power is trying to change that. Its jumbo jet-sized floating platform called the O2 has two giant rotors that sits 60 feet below the surface of the water and going to harness the energy of the ocean's tides.

ANDREW SCOTT, CEO AND DIRECTOR, ORBITAL MARINE POWER LTD: This kinetic energy is sort of the best of technology that generate the power look not too different to a wind turbine.

CRANE (voice over): But unlike wind turbines that have to accommodate for wind coming from all directions, the O2 only needs to capture energy from two.

SCOTT: You have a flood tide when the tide comes and you have an ebb tide when the tide goes out.

CRANE (voice over): And tides are far more reliable than wind.

SCOTT: You can predict those motions years and decades into advance.

CRANE (voice over): This is Orbital's third tidal turbine system to be connected to the U.K. National Grid for testing since 2012. The company says one O2 unit generates up to two megawatts which it says is enough to power around 2,000 homes a year.

[15:55:05] CRANE (voice over): Right now, the high cost of building operating and

maintaining tidal power technology means that tidal energy comes at a premium, a hurdle for not only Orbital, but for the many other companies in the industry. So for now, they are relying on government investment to help drive the price tag down.

SCOTT: What we're really asking in this stage for policymakers here in the U.K. and around the world where there is tidal stream energy is make allowance for early stage technology, hopefully, in the course of the next 10 or 15 years. Not only will we be able to deploy hundreds of O2 style machines, but we'll be able to see that levelized cost of energy fall down to somewhere that's far more competitive.

CRANE (voice over): Rachel Crane, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:00:00]