If people are held to what they are said prior to being in this house, if Majority Party gets to decide who sits on what committees, i hope you keep that standard because we have a long list to work within your own. Paul thursdays near partyline vote came a day after House Republicans overwhelmingly chose cheney in her leadership post after she came on fire from some numbers for voting to impeach president trump. Lets bring in our panel. Deputy editorial page editor, dan henninger, Colonists Can Strassel and kyle peterson. Why did liz cheney her leadership post even after members were saying her fate was sealed. The boat wasnt even close in the end. Kim i think its because were hogans came to understand this was a symbolic vote in a way, it would send a terrible message if they were to vote her out because it would suggest they were purging her from the party were disagreeing with donald trump. The reality is, theres a lot more going on here, a lot of frustration among the ranks over the past year. There are other things she did but in the end, this is what it came to because her vote on impeachment, thats what made it boiled over. Kevin mccarthy made a strong pitch they needed to come together and unify it seems to hold in the end. Paul most replicants included this would play into democratic hands. Kim they know democrats are trying hard to stoke divisions and the only way they will be able to win back the majority is to come back together as a party. Paul kyle, lets turn to Marjorie Taylor green. Kevin mccarthy had a sit down with her and considered stripping her of Committee Seat and offered to do so with the democratic Majority Leader saint we will take her away from education and small business. They said they wanted to go to a vote and did. First, why did the republicans handle greene the way they did . Kyle they are arguing is a brad that President Set if the Majority Part can dictate the assignment of the party. Thats not something that has happened in the past and thats what Kevin Mccarthy has said in the past. They have said wacky things and power changes back and forth in the house. They will stay democratic forever. Paul the idea is the democrats and others will be up or could be in the future because democrats said that president , is that what youre saying . Kyle exactly. The democratic response has been that Taylor Greene said she regretted past statements but she didnt exactly apologize. I understand the argument but i still think theres reason to worry about and escalating tit for tat in the house. Paul dan, what is the motive here they do have vulnerability, lets face it. That many members of the house every two years, you will get a lot on both sides. Over the years, weve had that. Why are they trying to play so hard on the single freshman from georgia . Dan lets make clear what they did, they stripped greene of her seat. Its unprecedented in modern house history, its never been done for a long time. Eventually, it nullified the district in georgia. There larger purpose is to associate greene and the things shes said in the past with the rest of the Republican Party. The whole idea is to keep raising over and over again the events and january 6 attacks, a Conspiracy Theory said Marjorie Greene associated herself with it and all republicans with that cudgel and upset the public about that. Marjorie greene went into the house and repudiated the past years. They said it was sincere but you will never see Maxine Waters going to the house and repudiate some of the views they have expressed as outrageous as hers. Its a clear double standard. Frankly, i dont think it will succeed on the democratic side. Paul kim, the larger strategy here is a run between now and 2022, running against the capital riot january 6 donald trump and anybody and all things associated with trump because trump endorsed greene. Greene said i have Donald Trumps support. Kim in their minds, donald trump will forever keep giving the gift. They want him to have the event of january 6. The Republican Party is a bunch of crazies that believe in qanon. Its not just what greene said in the vote on this cheney but having Mitch Mcconnell and Kevin Mccarthy, and all leaders in the Publican Party say we do not abide any of this in our party and we condemn it, in that regard, it was a strong statement. Paul all right, thank you all. Democrats move forward with a 1. 9 trillion covid Relief Package. Making it clear they will push it through with or without republican support. The new president talks about unity but the white house staff and congressional leadership working with a different playbook. U. S. Economy adding 49000 new jobs in january, return to Growth Job Losses in december with the jobless rate falling to 6. 3 . Democrats moved ahead this week with President Biden, 1. 9 trillion covid Relief Package with a clear message for republicans pass it with it without you. We cannot delay, we cannot dilute because the troubles nation has and the opportunities we can bring are so large. We are united as one, a big and bold package working with republican friends when we can. Paul we are back with dan henninger, kim strassel and kyle peterson. Even if the jobless rate did fall, i looked at the report and focuses on job losses on those areas affected by the pandemic and lockdowns. Hospitality, service oriented, that is clearly the big problem here. Not some spending issue. Thats right. Business and professional services were up in nonetheless, democrats are sticking with their game plan. Chuck schumer came up with the new ones that ive heard, Dog Will Day Delay in dilute. I like that but what they want to do is im putting this nearly 2 trillion into the economy and there is a real dispute, a serious dispute between an economic economy is reviving, the vaccines will release more people into the economy, hospitality, restaurant will probably reopen by middle summer and theres a lot of pent up savings. We know that and the economy can revive on its own. Democrats, joe biden and Chuck Schumer believe the economy needs a massive injection of spending to reduce unemployment. Its an enormous amount of money, people show republican Centers Point out billions of dollars weve not spent from the previous bills. Thats essentially the court of the debate. We can get into the particulars about state and local spending but its a massive injection into the democrats want and republicans up with pushing back against. Paul kyle, the view from the democrat from 2009 when they spent 800 billion stimulus, it was too small. When you look at it, employment was heading to 10 , recession wouldnt be over until june 2009. The recession here has been over six months, unemployment down to 6. 3 . The economy is growing. A lot of people are affected by lockdowns who are hurting but you can help them with a lot less than 1. 9 trillion. Kyle Larry Summers pointed out the pandemic is out of earnings income, 38 billion a month now. Bidens plan would feel that with about 150 billion a month five times that. They are worried about inflation and that even before you talk about unrelated provisions in here like the 15 minimum wage. Paul which would have a bad effect on employment for the same workers who need jobs in small business. Kim, republicans, Tent Republicans offered a plan was about 700 billion. That was their first offer, it could sell somewhere in between that and 1. 9 trillion. There are so many numbers, i have a hard time keeping up. The president sat down with them for a couple of hours but in the end, decided we will plow ahead why do you think that is . Kim what they were offering i think is support from moderates on the democratic side, which is led to give money for more vaccine distributions, things that are needed and necessary, thats target those most hurting because of the lockdowns. The president is a no go. I think part is the left side, they are pushing a bill we all understand is not necessarily all about stimulus, it democratic long time Spending Priorities and they see this as a vehicle to pop money to the State Government schools and different sectors and theyve got this under the guise of covid and they will not give up on that to keep responding to that. Paul dan, i am puzzled by this. Joe biden has been preaching bipartisanship. Why not take a trillion dollars is a heck of a lot of money in itself. You leave some physical space open for infrastructure and others, if you pass it now on a partisan basis, it will be harder to pass a future bill. Dan it is but increasingly, it really does not look as though the biden presidency is turning out bipartisan, as moderate as we thought it would be. You get the feeling really strongly progressive, driven by people like Bernie Sanders who is driving the minimum wage bill despite some states cannot afford minimum wage. I think the state that are driving on the democratic side our state like california, illinois, new york, new jersey, they are losing population. They somehow feel this is a train leaving the station, they need hundreds of billions of dollars right now to shore up there spending because they are under a lot of pressure from the pandemic and i agree with you, would pass a smaller bipartisan bill, work on these issues later but the Democratic Party seems to want things done right now. Paul when we come back, Donald Trumps second Impeachment Trial underway next week. Both sides plan to argue their case and why the former president is refusing to testify. When you switch to xfinity mobile, youre choosing to get connected to the most Reliable Network nationwide, now with 5g included. Discover how to save up to 300 a year with shared data starting at 15 a month, or get the lowest price for one line of unlimited. Come into your local xfinity store to make the most of your mobile experience. You can shop the latest phones, bring your own device, or trade in for extra savings. Stop in or book an appointment to shop safely with Peace Of Mind at your local xfinity store. Both sides laying out legal strategies the second Impeachment Trial of donald trump set to get underway in the senate next week. House democrats argue tuesday the former president is singularly responsible for inciting the capital right. Defense responding it would be unconstitutional to convict the president after he left office. Lets bring in jim, former Justice Department prosecutor and partner at the law. Good to see you again. Lets distill the prosecutors, house managers argument, what are they charging . The main charge, its repeated in a number of fashions in this document, incitement for causing insurrection, causing a violent overthrow of the u. S. Government. They spent a good amount of time chronicling violence against police and essentially concluding from their perspective that president trumps words lit the match to the violence that happened january 6 at the capital. Paul so the incitement to violence as part of the charge rather than simply incitement not to count the Electoral College votes which they were doing on that day . I ask this because as you know, incitement for violence is a criminal charge, not just impeachment charge. The bar for that is pretty high and you have to make the close link. Are they really charging incitement of violence . Not literally criminal indictment yes, they use the language of insurrection but they expanded talk about how impeachment can cover non crimes, misconduct that may not fit into a federal statute. I think they want the best of all worlds which is shoot for the stars and settle for the moon. We think we can prove incitement for causing insurrection but at least a violation of oath to the constitution and that is the murky area of impeachment being the political process, General Board warned about, it is a crime. We may be in that territory with a trying to take expansive reading on a more narrow allegation. Paul in the president s defense, how would you distill that . I guess the short version is, its a long memo type of response. I wouldnt say its full on defense yet, i suppose we will have to see that next week but its essentially taking exception to the thought of a former officeholder being subjected to impeachment. They have a different take than the house managers but theres at least some concentrated argument about how his words have to be given their normal meaning and they were not calls for violence, it may have frustrated people but they were not literally a call for any criminal activity, on the contrary, they call for peace. The process of saying the president cant be subjected to this at all. Paul a constitutional question obviously, i have lawyers and constitutionalists, i respect on both sides saying it is or is not constitutional to try a former president. If you were former president trump, would you litigate this question and do the managers of congress and bring it to the court . What i would love to get the whole Snap Impeachment before a court. Id explore the option and create a record, litigating in listing all complaints i have about impeachment that took place seven days after the physical act for the criminal investigation is still ongoing. The fact that there are hundreds being arrested, giving statements and being provided discovery while there is contrast of the president elected by or voted by 70 Million People being told we will disqualify you based on what we know, theres not much to process their. I spent a lot of time on his and talking about how outrageous Snap Impeachment is even if its not a little criminal proceeding, its very important that should have fundamental fairness. Paul he did sue and it went to the courts, this is a question for judges, its for the Political Part so debated their. The Supreme Court showed, all courts showed reluctance for the political question of the fairness of the election. Most of those findings is the Trump CampaignPeople Associated with it based on procedural obstacles by the court. It reflected distaste for resolving purely political questions. I think the Supreme Court is probably not chomping at the bit and have to decide things like the validity of this Impeachment Proceedings and Justice Roberts is even attending which you would normally see in a removal type proceeding so i think if you trump, he built up a record as well as the substantive problem in this charge and hope if you have to, you might get traction. Paul thank you. We will see how it fold next week. When we come back, academics and progressives calling for Government Crackdown on political speech. Realities are going to an Administration Near you. Calls for academics Progressive Press to police conservative political speech In The Name Of combating what they call disinformation. New York Times Technology columnist, floating the idea of a Biden Administration putting together cross Agency GovernmentTask Force Tackle Disinformation and domestic extreme is him which would be led by Something Like reality are. We are back with dan henninger, kim strassel jason. Jason, give us The Big Picture here, what are we seeing among journalists and progressive academics and politicians talking about political speech. I think The Big Picture is in america, we voice it is agreed. They think its false and we have typically sorted out by arguing with one another and trying to win elections but with what they are increasingly seen, temptation among some to say we are in power, we won, the debate is over and now we will use unusually coercive measures boycott, perhaps new regulations and setting realities to enforce a review sidestep our traditional political process. Paul the voices you hear on this, these arent obscure. They are not just a couple of cranks, these are mainstream dominant politicians and journalists institutions, give us an example. You have the New York Times columnist call for boycott on fox shows, Washington Post media columnist chiming in on that. You have academic, New York University without report for a Digital Regulatory Agency so i say people are flushing victory, they just want an election and control the government, they control most of the powerful cultural and media institutions and they say why do we bother with this pesky descent and alternative views we are the ones in power. Paul so is the motivation here that they now have this new friend of theirs in the white house and in the administration and in power and now is the moment to strike . What is motivating this . Is a just another reaction to trump . I think it is and a reaction people are quite alarmed by the capital riot. I think the judiciary was strong protection of the First Amendment right to Freedom Of Speech but we have increasingly seen institutions that control ideas, nonprofits, academics, social media companies, those institutions now instead of adversary or, they share same priorities, maybe they can Work Together and collaborate and thats what makes it, in my view, more dangerous, this sense of the private sphere working hand in glove with the government. Paul kim, i would probably recognize my profession these days, journalists. You have journalists calling for the boycotting or restricting of speech of author journalists. What happened to the fact that only a couple of short months ago with a Different Administration in the white house, it was an existential threat to Freedom Of Speech . Now the government is our friend . Ive never seen anything like it either. You ask how did we get here . I think it does have to do with the partisanship of the press which we have seen over the past four years, in particular is always there but it was so pronounced open, a matter of pride, almost. Thats how you get in a situation which you said a few months ago, one of the on Freedom Of Speech and suddenly a different view when you have democrats in office because opportunistic. Partisanship is always opportunistic but its a bayer duty. How Many Industries have entire amendments set up to protect them . Our industry has an obligation as a result to protect that First Amendment and you see most of the Media Establishment establishment sailing. Paul dan, defined for me what you think realities are here. Dan ill tell you the realities, its something similar to what many had in the communist Era Secret Police who kept millions of people accused of false thinking. One wonders whether these academics, writers the New York Times understands how close they are getting, the cynical view would be there simply trying to create a cartoonish figure of what the right and conservatives believe so nobody can bring themselves to vote for them but that would be my view. I think a lot of them actually believe the entire population voted for donald trump, i would that would strike me as a form of irrational thinking. Paul jason, is this going to go anywhere or is this just a Heads Talking . As our Political Parties stratified by education and you have increasingly intellectuals and professionals concentrated in one party and another party, a more working class, i do think it creates a problem because the institutions we are talking about of the press and large corporations, they are increasingly done by people who disagree politically so i think that creates and enduring clash we will continue to see. Paul fascinating. Still ahead, Biden Administration will ship the Covid Vaccine directly from pharmacies across the country. More shots into more arms and a new variance. The latest, next. Johnson johnson applying for Emergency Use Authorization for the food and drug make ministration with one dose Covid Vaccine after releasing data last week showing 66 effective at protecting against the virus. The news comes as the cdc says just over 60 of Covid Vaccines distributed in the u. S. So far have been administered. Some states and Hospitals Holding up vaccines for sequential doses but minus next guest, highrisk americans should be priority before going out for second shots. Professor of Health Policy at the Johns HopkinsBloomberg School of Public Health i want to get to this issue of the doses bullet step back a bit and get The Big Picture on the vaccines. It seems we are accelerating the delivery of 1. 2 or 3 million doses a day now. Is that fair or are we still way behind . Thats where we are, three weeks late meeting the initial goal of 20 million vaccines by the end of the last calendar year but since then, Railroad Tracks have been built and the train is running. Roughly 61 of all vaccines shipped have been administered and we are at that right now, 1. 3 million a day, on track to well exceed by 100 days. Paul so make your case for getting one dose into more arms than two doses into your arms faster. Overall, news on where we are is good. 50 reduction in daily new cases over the last four weeks but right now, vulnerable americans are still struggling to get the vaccine and its not fair to them. When we get a second dose, immunity from the first dose from 80 90 , up to 95 and at the same time, denying any dose to vulnerable americans, we can save more lives. Moderna vaccine is 80 90 effective just from the first dose and the Pfizer Vaccine similarly 91 effective from the first dose. It may be more durable protection if you get the second dose but right now, two to 3000 americans are dying a day, we should emphasize first doses. The Biden Task Force known for speaking his mind openly, came out and said that this week. He said should focus on first doses colliding with guidance from the cdc. The uk has already said, get your second dose closer to 12 weeks and we should do that. Paul i got my first shot, when they said were going to be 50 covered, i thought thats what you get with the first and 90 95 with the second. I think thats not true . 9490 protected even now . 50 effectiveness is three weeks from the first dose but we know with all vaccines, immunity of protection increases during the second month. If you look closely at the trial result, seven days after, there was a 91 level of protection in Reno The First Seven Days of the second dose, the vaccine hasnt kicked in so 91 protection protection is attributable to the first dose, second dose. First dose hasnt kicked in. Paul if j j is approved, 66 effective, if you have the choice of taking the j j vaccine is moderna or pfizer, do you think one would be better than another or should take the first want you can get . I would just take the first one you can get. J j effectiveness was about roughly 50 72 effective depending on its strength tested against its not apples to apples comparison to moderna because they were done before they were circulating at large, the new variant. Paul after we get through Healthcare Workers and next Nursing Homes residents, after we get through the age 65 and above, where to go next . Some states say we should do Essential Workers and they define Essential Workers very broadly. People say we ought to go by age, 65, then 60, 55 and so on. I think the least political way to do it, the one thats the simplest and scientific is just go by age. What you think . Simple age based allocation is why israel and the uk are light years ahead of us in terms of vaccinating their population. 80 over 65, if you look at new york, theyve been going out a tremendous amount of vaccine because the structure and regulations are not officially disturbing. If we use age based, we get more lives saved. Paul why do you think the cdc put Essential Workers categorization instead of age based . I think theres a disconnect between power and whats happening on the ground. I think these structures makes sense but on the ground, the reality is we are ration scarce resources and weve got to do it more efficiently. Paul thank you. Appreciate coming in. When we come back, joe bidens equity for Asian Americans. Federal use of terms like wuhan virus, racial preferences at yale. Justice department this week withdrawing a lawsuit against yale, they charged the university with this ruminating against Asian American applicants for admission. Under bill barr, the d. O. J. Charged that yells racial preference violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The move comes a week after President Biden singled out Asian Americans as Executive Orders to vote it was advancing Racial Equity including an order banning federal use of terms such as wuhan virus and another requiring Justice Department to better track hate crimes against Asian Americans. We are back with dan henninger, kim strassel and kyle peterson. Kyle, explain to us and our audience why the distinction between the Executive Order Banning Discrimination against Asian Americans and get eliminating the lawsuit against yale. Kyle i think you can probably classify this President Bidens agenda on equity. Equity distinct from equality from progressive is treating people different the end up at the same race but if you are a young Asian American, especially from working middle class family, youve scrapped your whole life and then you dont get into yale essentially because of your race, that does not sound equity to you. Paul right. Results here, not equal treatment under the law which is what i always thought was certainly the essence of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Kyle part of it is trying to eliminate cut down on disparities but the problem is, that means treating individuals differently which does not seem fair, it doesnt square with equality as americans have starkly understood it as part of the reason, its not even clear the way the politics cut here because there was a referendum in california last year to revive racial preferences and it failed and it didnt fail by the margin, it was 14. Paul 50 and a small number of counties. Kim, this is parallel with the harvard suit related to, there have been Asian Americans that have sued for discrimination and theyve lost at the District Court level but the may end up going to the Supreme Court. What you think about prospects there . Kim this was a group called students. For admission. They already signaled they would appeal to the Supreme Court, they are hopeful Amy Coney Barrett on the court, the court might take this and finally clean up whats been tortured and messy affirmative action. Affirmative action ruling from the court but interestingly, that group has suggested they may step in and revive the lawsuit against yale as well which would provide two different vehicles to get the Supreme Court. It could be hard for the court to ignore this. Paul is a potent issue. Step back a bit from just gayle, what about the overall essence, the Biden Administration is doing when it comes to this issue of equity as kyle describes, what is it attempting to accomplish . It made susan rice in the white house, advisory to look through all the agencies on equity grounds. Is obviously disconnection between rhetoric and reality. I think what it is basically, an extension of the events that happened this summer. The protests, Riots Over Minneapolis and this was led by black lives matter. The argument was the United States was guilty of systemic racism. Make no mistake, they are talking about Black Americans, specifically the relationship with police, criminal Justice System but its pretty clear that under this argument, other minorities such as hispanics or Asian Americans fall a little further back into line, there is a special category for Black Americans who they believe are victims of systemic racism. The Biden Administration will push hard on these Equity Arguments that i described, Justice Department will do it, the Labor Department about the education department. The question is whether, by making that argument, the Biden Administration is pushing way beyond whatever election mandate they may have felt they had from the american people. Most polls suggest about 70 of americans do not like this kind of one Class Favoritism so it will be an issue for the next four years. Paul we have to take one for break. When we come back, hits and misses of the week. Im still exploring whats next. And still going for my best. Even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. So if theres a better treatment than warfarin, im reaching for that. Eliquis. Eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. Plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. Eliquis is fdaapproved and has both. Whats next . Im on board. Dont Stop Taking Eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. Eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. Dont take eliquis if you have an Artificial Heart Valve or abnormal bleeding. While taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. Seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding like unusual bruising. Eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. Tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. Ask your doctor about eliquis. And if your ability to afford your medication has changed, we want to help. Paul time now for hits and misses of the week. I can barely believe im doing this but its a hit for San Francisco pursuing its own School District for failing to reopen. The mayor of San Francisco gave an emotional speech this week in which he lambasted the district and pointed out they had abandoned 55,000 children and pointed out private schools could successfully reopened. Even elected democrats abandoned Teachers Unions you know they have got a problem. Paul all right, kyle. I would give a hit to the nfl. When the Coronavirus Has Preseason Football was canceled and dozens of players stayed on the bench but the nfl put Covid Protocols in place laid all 256 of its season games. They were at moments like the game the Denver Broncos paid played without the regular quarterback but here we are with this Epic Super Bowl tom brady versus patrick mahomes. Im looking forward to the game. Its my one chance a year my one excuse a year to eat until i i feel sick. Paul all right. The weak cannot pass without this Program Giving a mr. John kerry who famously flew to iceland on a private jet to pick up the climate leadership award. His excuse the best he could come up with is people like him have to fly on private jets. This brings the Barack Obamas constant comments about the 1 . He was talking about wealth but its now clear theres a political 1 that includes people like john kerry whose politics are completely disconnected from the way most people live. Paul all right and remember if you have your own hit or miss tweet us at jer at fnc. Thats fnc. Thats it for this weeks show and thanks to my panel and all of you for watching. Im paul gigot and we hope to see you here next time. We begin with chaos in the st. Louis jail as dozens of inmates set fire and smashed windows and cause flooding at the justice center. Hello and welcome to americas news headquarters i am arthel neville. Hi. Eric thanks for joining us. Im eric shawn. This is my ongoing situation you can see the inmates have been setting their bedding on fire and dropping them. This happened last night from broken windows. The riots happened overnight as pandemic restrictions have limited visitations installed corporate savings there. Live with more in this j