Tonight on 360, after years of allegations, with precious little evidence, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy launches an impeachment inquiry into President Biden details on what happens now. Also, the escape killer already dangerous, apparently desperate, and now he's armed. Plus, our Gary Tuckman aboard a storm tracker flight with the latest on where Hurricane Lee is heading. Good evening, thanks for joining us.
We begin tonight, keep him honest with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's decision to launch an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. Here's what McCarthy told Breitbart News just a couple weeks ago, quoting now, "'To open an impeachment inquiry is a serious matter, and House Republicans would not take it lightly or use it for political purposes. He went on to say, if we move forward with impeachment inquiry, it would occur through a vote on the floor of the people's house and not through a declaration by one person. So not through a declaration by one person is what he said.
And to his credit, he's been firm on that point for years. Here he is in 2019 saying, quote, Speaker Pelosi can't decide on impeachment unilaterally. It requires a full vote of the House of Representatives. So Democrats, Republicans, it appeared, it didn't matter.
It's a Speaker McCarthy. You don't just go around unilaterally launching an impeachment increase. Well, here he is earlier today. These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction, and corruption.
And they weren't further investigation by the House of Representatives. That's why today I am directing our House Committee to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. So after years of saying one thing today decided another, pulling on three House committees to run the proceedings and investigate President Biden and his family, specifically his son Hunter. Now, as you likely know, many Republicans, perhaps most locally, the former president, were the Biden's as the Biden crime family.
They made plenty of allegations over the years, linked trying to link the president with his son's business activities. As for evidence, though, there hasn't been any. Here's Congressman James Comer, who chairs one of the committees now running the investigation, on Fox News back in May after making some of those allegations. You don't actually have any facts to that point.
You've got some circumstantial evidence. The other thing is, of all those names, the one person who didn't profit is there's no evidence that Joe Biden did anything illegally. We're at the very beginning stages of this. But in talking with the informants that we have, some of the former Biden associates that nobody's heard from yet, we know that Joe Biden was actively involved.
And we're still looking for more bank records that we believe will implicate Joe Biden's active participation in this at the end of the day. Now, that was back in May on Fox. And by mid-summer, House Republicans were touting that they said would be evidence from one of Hunter Biden's former business partners, a man named Devin Archer. And in his testimony, before the oversight committee, Archer certainly agreed that Hunter Biden's family name helped in dealings with foreign businesses, including the Ukrainian energy company, Burisma, who was paying Hunter Biden to be on their board.
However, in closed-door testimony before the committee, here's what he said about whether he knew of any wrongdoing by then Vice President Biden. The transcript, by the way, was published by the Republican Control Committee. Question, are you aware of any wrongdoing by Vice President Biden? Answer, no, I'm not aware of any.
Question, so based on everything you saw, heard, and observed, did you have any knowledge of Joe Biden having any involvement with Burisma? Answer, no, not direct, no. Question, no involvement of Joe Biden with Burisma? Answer, no.
That was the star witness who may have painted a not-so-flattering picture of Hunter Biden, but who also supplied the evidence whatsoever that his father did anything wrong, which takes us back to Speaker McCarthy in his 2019 tweet complaining about Nancy Pelosi's decision to launch impeachment proceedings against the former president over Ukraine. Quoting this time from point three, for Dems, this is all about politics, not about facts. Well, keep it a monist by that point, the central fact of the scandal had already been known for several weeks, namely that the former president had issued a veiled threat to withhold military aid from Ukraine unless President Zelensky said he was launching an investigation to smear Joe Biden. This time Republicans have found evidence tying President Biden to any wrongdoing, so why is Speaker McCarthy doing what he's doing?
Well, one answer, in fact, the answer might be found in a video back in January. On the right, Congressman McCarthy, during his arm-twisting marathon to win the speakership. On the left is Florida Congressman Matt Gates, who changed his vote from present to yes, on the 15th ballot. In exchange, McCarthy agreed to a series of concessions to right-wing lawmakers, including a provision allowing a single member to force a vote to oust him.
And for weeks now, members including Matt Gates have been pushing for impeachment. Last night, Congressman Gates said he would be speaking today on the House floor and would attack the speaker for not complying with parts of that deal. Today, despite what certainly appears to be an effort to appease him and other conservative members, Gates did just that, dismissing McCarthy's impeachment talk as quote, a baby step. Joining us now is Colorado Republican Congressman Ken Buck.
Congressman, thanks so much for being with us. Two days ago, you said that the time for impeachment is when there's evidence linking President Biden to a high crime or misdemeanor. You said quote, that doesn't exist right now. Do you still feel that way tonight?
I have not seen any of it and said links to President Biden to under-vibing activities at this point. I will be getting a briefing later in the week. I'm looking forward to understanding more of what the oversight committee has uncovered. But at this point, I have not seen that evidence.
So, Speaker McCarthy certainly doesn't have to hold a full House vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry, but he has always said that he would. He said so two Fridays ago, is it clearly what changed other than the threat from the Matt Gates'es? Yeah, what changed is that he doesn't have the votes, Republican votes, to pass a resolution to open an impeachment inquiry. He had been trying to get those votes.
I don't believe they have the votes. So, why is he doing this? Well, because, well, that's a great question. Why is he doing it?
The three committees, the Oversight Committee, the Judiciary Committee, the Ways and Means Committee are investigating. They're investigating hunters' Biden's activities. They should be investigating. They're uncovering interesting information.
Like I said, they haven't found that link yet to Joe Biden if it exists. But what Speaker McCarthy is doing is he has President Biden on the one hand, or I'm sorry, President Trump on the one hand who is demanding that the House open an impeachment inquiry and begin an impeachment of President Biden. On the other hand, he has spending bills that are coming up and he needs the support of members of the Republican conference to help get that continuing resolution passed and appropriations bills. Yeah, I mean, in your opinion, does this impeachment inquiry take away from focus in the House on government spending and voting a shutdown?
I believe it does. And I believe it was a shiny object from the beginning. And I think it was a mistake to start talking about the impeachment inquiry. I think it's a good thing that we aren't voting on it on the floor because we've got a lot of work to do if we're going to pass a continuing resolution by September 30th and avert a government shutdown.
So by not doing it on the floor, it does allow you to continue on the continuing resolution. Exactly. It allows us to focus on spending rather than other issues like the impeachment. Yes.
So Congressman Gates today downplayed what McCarthy is down. He downplayed the impeachment announcement as a baby stab renewed his threat to seek McCarthy's removal. If the speaker doesn't come into what he called immediate total compliance with the deal that gave him the speakership in the first place. Hey, do you know what that even means?
And do you think McCarthy survives this as a speaker? I think Kevin McCarthy survives for several reasons. The main one being nobody else wants to be speaker in this place. But I do think I do think that's not a great job description there.
No, it's not. I guarantee you won't see Speaker Buck in the same sentence. But I do think that he survives this. It's important that we make sure we get funding for the next year.
And Kevin McCarthy is the only person that most Republicans are going to support in that process. You mentioned this. CNN is reporting that the former President Trump spoke today with the House of the Jupy Conference here, at least Stefanic about the impeachment strategy. Is he really the one driving this?
I don't know whether he's driving it directly or indirectly. Certainly as he participates in social media and talks about this on social media, he is driving the activists to call members of Congress and get involved. So whether he called McCarthy directly or whether he is just sort of getting the troops riled up. I'm not sure which way it happened.
But certainly members of Congress are hearing about it. So what happens now in spending? The continuing resolution. Well, first thing is we're going to try to pass a few spending bills, appropriations bills this week and next week.
So we'd like to get three or four bills done by the end of next week. And then we'll focus on the continuing resolution in the following week. And hopefully by September 30, we have a deal. Congressman Buck, I appreciate your time.
Thank you. Thank you. Yes, Congressman Jimmy Raskin, ranking Democrat on the House over psych committee, put out a memo, rebutting allegations surrounding President Biden. Quoting from a portion of it, he said, this is a transparent effort to boost down Trump's campaign by establishing a false moral equivalency between Trump, the four-time indicted former president, now facing 91 federal and state criminal charges based on a mountain of damning evidence for a shocking range of felonies, including lying to the FBI, endangering national security by illegally keeping classified documents, and conspiring to subvert the US Constitution.
And President Biden, again, assumed there is precisely zero evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever. Congressman Raskin joins us now. So thank you for being with us. You heard Congressman Buck, and what is your reaction to Speaker McCarthy launching this impeachment inquiry?
Well, it's ridiculous, of course. I mean, you've got people who voted not to impeach Donald Trump for inciting a violent insurrection against the Union, either because they don't think that's a crime or because they don't think the evidence was there, even though the evidence was overwhelming. We did have 10 Republicans who joined us in the House, and seven Republicans who voted to convict and send it. But in any event, you've got all these Republicans who could not bring themselves to vote to impeach Donald Trump, who tried to overthrow a presidential election and attacked our constitutional order, now moving to impeach Joe Biden for reasons unstated.
Now, so I think that that's absurd. I applaud Congressman Buck from Colorado, who was a district attorney, who was the chief of the Criminal Division of the US Attorney's Office in Colorado. He is someone who understands the criminal law, and understands the constitutional law, and he knows that the whole thing is absurd. There's no evidence of treason, bribery, or high crimes in misdemeanors.
There's no evidence of any crime at all by Joe Biden. And so all of this is clearly being driven by Donald Trump, who wants to establish this counterfeit moral equivalency between the two of them, just so he can say he's running against another impeached president. So it's really silly, and they are extracting this as their price for going along at least this week with not trying to shut the government down. But I think a lot of the inside critics of what's happening in the Republican Conference will tell you that they really do intend to try to shut the government down before the end of September.
What do you think changed? Because I mean, as recent as two fighters ago, McCarthy was saying he would only launch an impeachment inquiry through a full House vote. Is it pressure from the former president, essentially? And Gates and others?
What's a combination of that escalating political pressure within the GOP, but also enough of them coming forward and saying that they will not play ball on the budget this week unless he launches the impeachment inquiry. Now, they're not satisfied with what McCarthy has done on either front. On the impeachment side, all he's really said is that the three committees, Ways and Means Judiciary and the Committee I serve on now is the ranking Democrat oversight. We'll continue to do what they've been doing.
He's not forming a new impeachment committee. And the oversight committee is supposed to be leading, but each one is going to do their own work. And so I think that very quickly the Matt Gates, Marjorie Taylor Greene caucus, is going to grow frustrated with that. That's not going to be enough for them.
And they're also in this rule or ruin mindset, really hoping to get the Republicans to drive the economy into a ditch and to shut the government down again, which, of course, they did a few years ago. So we'll see whether McCarthy will actually be able to subdue the tumultuousness going on within the Republican conference. You really believe the Republicans want to drive the economy into a ditch for political purposes? Because when there's a government shutdown, it doesn't hurt the folks on Capitol Hill who made it happen?
Well, I'm not sure that you can always rationalize the behavior of the megacock as they're constantly pushing for the most extremist and fanatical actions. There's no program really that unifies the Republican conference ever since Donald Trump took everything over. I mean, they literally had no platform for four years, and their real platform consists of whatever Donald Trump tells them to do. So I think that they do have a rule or ruin mentality.
If they're not going to be in charge, they're going to try to create as much trouble as possible. I mean, they didn't work with us on the $1.2 trillion infrastructure investment package. They did not work with us on the inflation reduction act. And inflation is down from 9% to 3%.
And we had this massive investment in climate action, as well as lowering everybody's prescription drug prices. We didn't get a single Republican vote for any of that. They're not interested in making progress unless they're in control. And of course, when they're in control, progress is just massive tax cuts to the wealthiest people in the country and cheating women out of their constitutional rights.
Republican Senator Mitt Romney, who obviously voted to convict them, President Trump, in both of the impeachment trials, he was quoted today as saying, and this is a quote, the fact that the White House has been singularly silent and coddled Hunter Biden's suggestion inquiry is not inappropriate. I mean, you can't really paint him as a MAGA extremist. Do you think the White House should have, could have handled the Hunter Biden saga better? You know, I'm not closely watching the White House.
What I'm doing is engaged in the Work of Oversight Committee. So for seven months, we have watched the Republicans on the Oversight Committee and Chairman Kramer get all of the witnesses they want, all of the documents they want within 12,000 pages of documents. And there is no evidence of any criminality or wrongdoing by Joe Biden. There's 91 criminal charges against Donald Trump right now, 13 criminal charges against Congressman Santos, who was just on the show a few moments ago.
They have nothing to say about that. There are no charges against Joe Biden, and they want to impeach the guy. That's obviously coming from Donald Trump. It's sort of like January 6th.
January 6th would not have happened, did Donald Trump not got all of the right-wing groups to change their permits from the National Park Service from January 20th, where they were just going to have an inaugural protest to January 6th. And it's the same thing here. If Donald Trump were not demanding impeachment, does anybody think this would be going on? Congressman Raskin, I appreciate your time tonight.
Thanks for having me. Coming up next on The Hunt for the Skip Killer, who is now armed as well. And also, Larry Geretukman saw from a NOAA Stormchaser plane above Hurricane Lee. I'm CNN tech reporter Claire Duffy.
This week on the podcast, Terms of Service, the idea of riding in a car with no driver can feel daunting. And this technology raises questions about safety and the future of transportation. That's why I'm here with Nicole Gable, head of business development and strategic partnerships at WeMo. We've always been about safety.
No distracted driving, no drunk driving. WeMo follows the rules of the road. Listen to CNN's Terms of Service, wherever you get your podcasts. Craig Ferguson is going coast to coast to unpack what it really means to be an American today.
What could possibly go wrong? Craig Ferguson, American on purpose. New episodes now streaming on the CNN app. Go to cnn.com slash watch to subscribe or log in with your TV provider.
If an escape killer on the loose, alluding police day after day while stealing a van and burglarizing homes weren't already troubling enough, now there's this, that same killer convicted in one brutal murder and wanted in another, now has a rifle reporting tonight from the man hunting eastern Pennsylvania, here's CNN's Ryan Todd. Armed and dangerous, that's how authorities are now describing Danello cover content. He's killed two people previously. I was suspected he's desperate enough to use that weapon.
That weapon is a 22 caliber rifle the escaped convict stole from a garage last night. The homeowner was there and shot at the intruder several times with a handgun, but he escaped. The rifle he took also had a scope and a flashlight attached. What is most concerning is with the rifle and the scope that he could set up an ambush or if he sees the officers coming through the woods, he's able to preposition and get ready.
There is no evidence the fugitive was injured by the shots fired at him. Cavacontae stole the gun just two hours after yet another reported roadside sighting. Police responded within minutes, but found only matching footprints in the mud and discarded prison shoes. A pair of boots then discovered missing from a nearby porch.
Locals say many residents know how to use firearms against a trespasser. Got to help him if he tries to, you know, anything like that. Upwards of 500 officers are now involved in the search, working shifts as long as 20 hours. The search area now eight to 10 square miles, 20 miles north of the prison he escaped from.
Over the weekend, he managed to steal a van from a dairy farm and ring the doorbells of at least two former work associates. He has spent time in that area in the past, so he is familiar with it. Residents in the search area receiving this warning by phone. Lock all external doors and windows, secure vehicles and remain indoors.
One nearby school district closing today, three others keeping kids inside. We do not have evidence at this time that there is assistance being rendered to this individual. In fact, quite the contrary, we've had wonderful cooperation from the public. If you do anything, anything to try and assist this individual, we will hold you accountable.
Calvoconta was sentenced to life in prison without parole for killing his former girlfriend in 2021. He has also wanted in his native Brazil in a 2017 homicide case. It's a possibility that he'll attack the police to try and get away. It's a possibility he would attack a civilian.
It's a possibility he would be a suicide by cop. Brian, what are police saying about any advantages that he might have right now? Does he know the area? That's right Anderson.
One advantage that he could have is that according to police, he has been to this area of Chester County before and is familiar with at least some parts of it. But one key disadvantage that he could have tonight, he could be moving around shirtless. Police say he ditched a green hoodie and a white t-shirt at the foot of that driveway of that house where that homeowner fired upon him last night. And at last word today, they said they had no reason to believe that he had any other clothing on him.
And Anderson is expected to rain heavily overnight tonight. All right, Brian Todd, thanks with me now. Seeing a chief law enforcement and intelligence analyst, John Miller. So he's got a gun and he knows the area.
That doesn't sound good. Well, it's not good. He's between Phoenixville where he has friends, family, contacts and that meal, which is much more rural and wooded. So theoretically, he has been hiding in the woods again during the daytime and maybe moving again tonight.
So how concerned, I mean, certainly the public should be concerned, they put out this reverse 911 call, although this guy left his garage door open with a rifle leaning up there. Yeah, so that's actually, you know, there's an escape prisoner on the loose, leaving a loaded rifle leaning up against the garage. Sounds very questionable. But to get back to the change, this was a game of cat and mouse and now it's a game of cat and cat.
He is armed in a similar way that law enforcement is. He's got a weapon with a full magazine of ammunition and it has a telescopic scope, it has a tactical flashlight and he's carrying that around. Now that can work in his favor in that he is now evenly matched as an armed escape prisoner. It can work through disadvantage because he doesn't have anywhere to put it if he's gonna go out into neighborhoods and try and surface again to see people.
Other than just being vigilant and checking past contacts or anybody he may have had contact with and even in the distant past, because we know he did go to some distant coworkers that he knew, well, what are you doing in a case like this? I mean, they have that perimeter. This has been a challenge because he has used his advantage, his ability to survive in the wild and to sneak out of those perimeters, but they've got a lot more people. Also, it's important to note, the rules of engagement have changed.
Now he's a threat to the public, he could carjack someone, I mean, what he needs is distance and cash. He could rob a store, he has this weapon and when I say the rules of engagement have changed, this authorizes the Pennsylvania State Police, the US Marshals to operate under different rules, which is if they encounter him and he does not surrender right then and there and tries to flee or do anything else, they are authorized to shoot at him, which normally with a fleeing felon, unless they're presenting a deadly threat to you, but in that he's got one murder behind him, he's wanted for another, he's escaped and he's armed. That makes it different. I mean, it's frustrating on the outside looking at this because you hear that he was sighted, the people call police, by the time police got there, he had disappeared, how far can he have gotten?
Well, he's made it in leaps and spurts. I mean, he's made it 20 miles from the jail he escaped from. He covered a lot of that distance in the van he stole and now he is looking for that opportunity, which is, is there another vehicle I can jump in? Did somebody else leave the keys?
Is there a car running in front of a house or outside a store while somebody runs in to get something? And then there's the need for resources like money. And again, that gun is the changing factor here. So, I mean, there's the fact that he has armed that literally changes the rules of engagement for police?
It does. And again, if he were a burglar, somebody from a nine violent crime and he was running for police, they wouldn't be able to shoot at a fleeing felon according to the Supreme Court doctrine on this. But it's too homicides, he's escaped from prison, he's eluded police, he's armed now, and that does change the rules of engagement. And the police have been instructed to that point.
I'm really, thanks so much. Coming up next, I'm going to go on apparently on the verge of meeting with Vladimir Putin. The media's reporting could happen any hour now. Mystery still surrounding their anticipated summit.
She's in a chief international anchor, Krishan Nalman Porges, who joins me with her perspective in a moment. Russian state run media is now reporting that Vladimir Putin could meet with North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un, as soon as later tonight, which would be Wednesday in Russia. The expected summit still shrouded in secrecy without details on when and where they'll actually meet. Kim arrived in Russia today on his armored train.
It's a rare trip for the leader who rarely leaves his country. We have this new video from Russian state run media showing that Kim earlier today, when he met with two Russian government officials, when he met with Putin, the US warns they will likely reach an arms deal that Russia needs for the war in Ukraine. In exchange, Moscow may offer North Korea cash or food or missile technology. Respect to now from our chief international anchor, Krishan Nalman Porges, who's also celebrating 40 years here at CNN.
I want to talk to you about your 40th anniversary, which is extraordinary moment. But let's talk about what's happening in Russia, Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin meeting two prizes. It's extraordinary. It is.
And to be honest with you, that is how the United States and its allies are framing it. In other words, everybody's sort of, oh, my goodness, what's going to happen? Is there going to be huge arms transfers? They're going to get materially changed the battle plan in Ukraine.
Most people I'm talking to, including the British Foreign Secretary, who just stepped down the defense secretary, basically says that the most Russia can hope for would be some old weapons systems, like 1960s weapons systems, and maybe some artillery shells. But it does go to prove, and I've heard many senior security and military analysts say, that Russia is desperate. It is a long war. There's a huge amount of expenditure of ammunition.
And also the Ukrainians are hurting. But the idea that Russia goes to Ukraine, or rather to Kim Jong Un, cap in hand, to prop up its imperialistic empire dreams, is really a telling sign. And what does North Korea potentially get out of it? Well, it has been said that North Korea might get money, although, I don't know, Putin, I don't know, I mean, his under sanctions might get technology, maybe missile technology, maybe nuclear submarine technology, that kind of thing.
But South Korea has said, and I think China would say the same thing, that, look, please be responsible. North Korea is an irrational pariah state, which has been sanctioned within an inch of its life. And there's reasons for that. China's not friendly with Kim Jong Un, obviously, North Korea, or South Korea.
So they don't want to see this happen. They don't want Putin to do this kind of deal. What do you make of Vladimir Putin at Russia's Eastern Economic Forum, referencing former presidents? Donald Trump?
It's a little rich, isn't it? But the fact of the matter is that he did say that the trials and the charges are politically motivated. And he went on to suggest it shows America is rotten. Well, fine.
He's a dictator who doesn't have to address or answer to any judiciary, any independence, any democratic mandate. And of course, these dictators and authoritarians, they'd really rather like Donald Trump. He's been nice to them. And yes, they would rather see him in office.
And even Kim Jong Un, who, as you know, we were there together, has met with Donald Trump twice. Nothing came of it. And who knows what would have happened if Trump had been in office when Putin illegally interfered or rather invaded Ukraine? And so, of course, Russia doesn't want to see a strong democratic leader, Biden, with a strong democratic consensus, NATO, and the EU propping up the defense of democracy.
I got to talk to you about 40 years at CNN. I mean, you started when you were three. That's terrible. It's true, but I'm only 40 years old.
But I mean, in all honesty, you have always been a journalistic idol of mine. I was in the early 90s when I was trying to make it overseas. I would see you, I first saw you in Somalia. I saw you from afar in Sarajevo.
I saw you later on in Kinshasa for the fall of Mabuto. I remember you 94, so the exile of Raoul Seidras. Oh my gosh, in Haiti, in the Montana. I would look at you from afar and I would just watch what you were doing.
I was too shy to actually follow. And then also. Yes, you did it. But what is it that keeps you so engaged and so motivated after 40 years?
Well, it is an incredible, incredible adventure. There is no doubt about it. Obviously, with a platform like CNN, which is so powerful as you well, though, you've been doing this for 20 years. Congratulations.
You know, you really have an opportunity, not just to tell stories and to pursue the truth, but maybe to change things a little bit for the better. Maybe to help explain other people to an American audience and to a global audience. Maybe even to focus your lens and your storytelling, to the extent that it might even maybe prod our democratic governments into doing something good. Like in Bosnia, for me, that was my most important body of work.
It's had the most profound influence on me personally and professionally for what I had to understand and learn there about the world and about how you don't treat aggressive and victim safe, how you don't do both side-arism when it's not appropriate, how you don't create any kind of false equivalence or factual or moral. Bosnia taught me that. And in the end, because all of us kept that story, the human story alive, it finally forced the US and its allies to actually come in after Srebrenica after yet another terrible marketplace massacre against civilians to just do a little bombing for 20 days. And I say that not flippantly because they weren't bombing people or civilians or even soldiers.
They were bombing military emplacements and they stopped the war in 20 days. Does it ever surprise you what human beings do to each other? It's horrifying. I think I've become unfortunately used to it.
It does surprise me and it is unacceptable and I will never be cynical enough or hardened enough to say, oh well, that's just the way of the world. But I think my way of making it matter and your way of making it matter is to keep telling the stories and to keep going there and to be the eyes and ears for people who want to know because people are good, I think. No one does better than you. Thank you so much.
Thank you. Coming up with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's impeachment announcement in part to please the extremist wing of this party, we thought a good time to talk to the authors of the bestseller, How Democresies Die, about their new book, The Tyranny of the Minority, and why they say there's reason to hope. Returning to our top stories of Speaker Kevin McCarthy's launching of impeachment inquiry into President Biden, as we mentioned, one of the reasons Speaker McCarthy is choosing not to hold a vote on whether to have it in impeachment inquiry is that by all reports, including CNN, he doesn't really have the votes to formally open one. It's a faction of his own party, a vocal minority in the house pushing to use a very serious mechanism to impeach the sitting president despite failure so far to find any evidence actually linking him to a crime.
My next guest are two Harvard professors who in 2018 wrote the bestseller, How Democresies Die, about the former president of the erosion of longstanding democratic norms. Their new book, Tyranny of the Minority is Out Now, I'm joined by Harvard government professor Stephen Levitsky and Daniel Ziplat. Daniel, what do you make of Speaker McCarthy's decision to launch impeachment inquiry into President Biden? Particularly because it's at the behest of the very vocal minority.
Yeah, so it's really being pressured by the most radical wing of his party. I think what it shows, something that we've seen time and again that the Republican party has radicalized. I mean, this is a political party that for most of its history was fully committed to democratic rules and norms where the party's radicalized over the last 20 years. You focus on this in the book, I mean, how did it happen so fast?
Well, it's been a long time coming. I mean, I think it's two big things. I think are driving this. Number one, over the course of the last 50 years, American society has transformed dramatically.
It's become a very diverse society. The Republican party has not changed. I mean, it's still fundamentally throughout the early 2010s and after the Obama era of all white party, you know, increasingly diverse society. And this has two big consequences.
First of all, it makes it harder for the Republican party to build majorities because as society becomes more diverse, the party has this kind of hardcore white core to it. It makes it hard to win elections. And second of all, it means that a lot of the voters, not all Republican voters, obviously, but a lot of Republican voters are fearful of the changes coming to American society. So this is certainly a big thing that's propelling the radicalization of the Republican party.
You write in the book that in the wake of January 6th, Kevin McCarthy was among Republican leaders who represented what you call the banality of authoritarianism. You say they didn't actually seek to undermine democracy. They simply prioritize their career goals over its defense. Do you think McCarthy is still doing that?
Yes, I think so. I mean, really to be a loyal committed to democracy, if you have a politician or political party committed to democracy, you have to follow three basic rules. Number one, you have to accept election results when you lose. Number two, you have to not use violence and try to gain a whole lot of power.
And number three, and this is really critical, if you're a party leader or a politician, you have to distance yourself from allies who engage in those first two behaviors. And so when you violate that third principle, we call this a semi-loyal politician. You essentially are allowing your career interest to motivate you in a way that you overlook violations of Democratic rules in North. Some Republicans watching this will say, well, aren't there plenty of Democrats who care about their career more than they do about it?
This is a set of criteria that applies to any party anywhere in the world. You have to be a Democrat. You have to follow these three, committed to democracy. You have to follow these three basic rules.
Our concern is that when we look at American politics today, we see more violations on the side of the Republican party. But these are certainly criteria that ought to apply to any politics. So can you deny democracy in your opinion? Can democracy survive if one party, major party, doesn't follow those three policies?
We look throughout history at the breakdown of democracies. Certainly when people engage in violence, this is a problem. But one of the crucial determinants of whether democracy survives or not, whether or not the mainstream politicians in the political system act as semi-loyal Democrats, or do they act as committed to democracy? If they don't distance themselves, as the mainstream politicians and parties, don't distance themselves from extremists.
This is really historically what's gotten democracies into trouble. I would say the answer is no. In a two-party system, if one major party is not committed to playing by Democratic rules of the game, democracy is in serious trouble. So why is it that you right now that the Constitution now protects and empowers an authoritarian minority?
How so? The US Senate, if you go back to 1996, it takes three elections to fully renovate the Senate, right? We elect a third of the Senate each year. So if you take a three election period for six years, going back to 1996, the Democratic party has won the popular vote for the Senate in every six-year period since 1996 to 2000.
And yet the Republicans have controlled the Senate for almost half that time. The Democratic party has won the popular vote for the presidency in every election except for one since 1988. And yet the Republican party has controlled the presidency for nearly half the time. That is minority rule.
2016, just to be a little more concrete, the Democrats won the popular vote for presidency, the Republicans won the presidency, the Democrats won the popular vote for the Senate, the Republicans won the Senate. And that president who lost the popular vote in that Senate that didn't represent a majority of Americans went on to nominate three Supreme Court justices and create the Supreme Court, the conservative majority we see now. That, I can't think of another term other than minority rule. So to someone listening to this who hears you and thinks, well, these guys want to change the Constitution to protect Democrats and to ensure my Democrats in power, what do you say?
It's not partisan to think that the person who wins the most votes should win office. And so we have an electoral college today that allows the loser of popular elections to win the presidency. In other democracies, this is not the case. Every democracy in the world has gotten rid of its electoral college.
Or the last democracy in the world with an electoral college to pick president. For people who hear this and are just like a more spare, what is the hope? Yeah, so there is a way forward. I mean, at the end of the book, we propose 15 different ideas for reforming our constitution and our democracy to make our constitution and democracy more Democratic.
Just Democratic, small, small, big Democratic to make the law of the authorities to speak. Another reason for optimism? Yeah, please. We argue in the book that one of the main reasons we're in this really heavy political storm right now is that the country is undergoing a transition to what we call multiracial democracy.
And the radicalization of the Republican Party, fundamentally, is a product of the fact that the party was out of step with the new America that's emerging in the 21st century. You believe that's what's at the core? That's what's at the core of the Republican party's radicalization. But that is going to change.
If you look at younger generations, particularly millennials, Gen Z, they are much, much more inclined to embrace the two fundamental pillars of multiracial democracy. They accept the toleration for diversity and supporting racial equality. Those two principles, which seem pretty basic, are much, much more intensely felt and embraced by younger Americans, which gives me hope that we're going to eventually get through this storm and become really one of the world's first truly multiracial democracies. Stephen Daniel, thank you.
Appreciate it. Just ahead, a bird's eye view of Hurricane Lee, still a category three hurricane that has a potential hit the Northeast in the coming days. Gary Tuckman joins us from the US playing tracking it next. Moments ago, the National Hurricane Center issued an update on Hurricane Lee, the powerful cap three, turning in the Atlantic, under to Miles, South-South-West, or Bermuda right now.
It's producing hazardous surf and rip currents at beaches across the southern US coast. The storm has been growing in size since the weekend. It's currently expected to turn toward the north on Thursday, increase in speed. A lot of uncertainty right now about whether it could hit the Northeast US or Gary Tuckman joins us by phonies aboard a NOAA plane tracking the storm.
So Gary, what have they been seeing up there? Well, Anderson, right now we're in hour seven of an approximately eight hour flight aboard a NOAA Gulfstream 4, 11 seats aboard this jet. It's essentially a flying weather station, Anderson. We're near the end of a 3,287 mile flight that is taken as above Hurricane Lee and far, far, Hurricane Lee around the hurricane and sometimes below it.
But the scientists aboard this plane see the very large storm, but they are telling us it is quickly losing its ability to strengthen. The wind are expected to slowly diminish as the week goes on. The flight director on this mission tell me that while it's a category three, the struggling category three, but because it's so large and increases the danger because of its huge wind field. We're watching now amidst turbulence, the scientists dropped airborne sensors known as drop zones through a hole in the bottom of the jet that is called a launcher.
The sensors, which are tubes, which are tubes, go through the launcher. They measure temperature, humidity, wind speed, wind direction, and temperature pressure. That information is evaluated and is a major component to the National Hurricane Center updates, Anderson. Can you talk about what it's like to be on a mission like this?
Because obviously you're flying above Hurricane Lee. You're not, I assume you're not kind of jostling about. Well, we are still jostling. That's what's interesting.
We were just about 30 miles away from the hurricane high. And as we circled around Lee, about 400 miles north of Puerto Rico, the turbulence was consistent and sometimes intense, but not as intense as another hurricane hunter plane that is used to P3. That P3 goes through the high wall. That plane's lower altitude, compliments this plane, which lies at a high altitude, we're 45,000 feet right now.
And they're complimented together. They help all of us assess the risk we face as hurricanes come calling Anderson. Gary Tuckman, thanks so much for the report. Now to the extreme weather in Libya and the horror, it has wrought devastation.
In the northeast part of the country, after heavy rains, relief agencies and officials said today at least 5,300 people are believed dead, more than 10,000 missing, two dams gateway. Whole neighborhoods are there are believed to have been washed away. So many dead bodies outside some morgues, they're just being left there, which are full. Many hospitals are not probable.
The International Rescue Committee says the country faces, quote, an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. Complicating matters, the country remains split after civil war, led to two opposing governments vying for control of Libya. Next, an FDA panel says popular over the counter, decongestant found in medication for battling colds and allergies doesn't actually do either. Why and what's being done about it ahead?
You might want to check out our Medicine Cabinet today Food and Drug Administration Advisory Panel unanimously agreed that the decongestant fennel efferent does not work in pill form. Last year Americans spent $1.8 billion on products containing fennel efferent. The FDA is now going to decide whether they should continue to be sold or be swapped out for another ingredient that actually does relief congestion. That said, it is considered safe to continue to use.
The news continues to source, with Caitlin Collins starts now, see you tomorrow. From the descendants of history makers involved in the Louisiana purchase to the Lewis and Clark Expedition, discover the untold stories of American expansion in the CNN original series, This Land, premiering June 7 on CNN. Hey, I'm Anderson Cooper. On my podcast, all there is, we explore grief and loss in all its complexities.
As Ken Burns said on an earlier podcast, the half life of grief is endless. Mariska Hargate knows that very well. Jane Mansfield was killed in a car crash in 1967. Mariska was in the car with her.
After decades spent coming to terms with her past and wanting to learn more about the mother she doesn't remember, Mariska has made a remarkable documentary called My Mom Jane. Our vulnerability is our greatest strength and our greatest connector. And so in telling the story, I don't feel vulnerable. I feel free.
We all have a story and you never know what somebody else carries. Talking grief, building community. That's what the podcast is all about. This is all there is.
Listen and follow wherever you get your podcast.