the constitution does not tolerate an assault on our government. those are the words of maine's defends her decision to remove

donald trump from the state's 2024 primary ballot. what this means for the election as the supreme court faces another consequential case. plus, russia launching the largest air attack on ukraine since the war began nearly two years ago. dozens people killed, many more injured. ukraine now renewing its call for more international aid. and quote, this conversation is over. those words highlight a new report about a contentious call between president biden and israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. just the latest sign of daylight significant daylight between two leaders. we're following these major developing stories and more all coming into right here to cnn news central. it is the top of the hour. hi there. i'm before he anna juarez sanchez in washington. former president trump just take a major hit in the battle to

keep his name on state ballots in 2024. maine just joining colorado in banning his name from its state primary election. based on the 14th amendment's ban on insurrectionists holding office. secretary of state shenna bell lows ruled last night that trump is disqualified based on his acts tied to the january 6th attack on the capitol. >> she sided with three main voters who filed a challenge against trump. they are all former state lawmakers and it's a bipartisan group. one of them, the former mayor of portland, told us earlier he's now looking to the supreme court to make the ultimate call as maine republicans vow to file an appeal just as the part did i in colorado. here's part of our conversation. -- party did in colorado. here's part of our conversation. >> any time the courts have ruled against him or the people voted against him to be a rigged decision, and he opposes it every time. so i think on our side, those

who are really trying to make sure the constitution and the rule of law applies will accept whatever decision comes down. i hope that donald trump and his supporters will as well. >> cnn chief legal affairs correspondent paul reed joins us now. paul, this is just complicating the 2024 election further. >> yeah, absolutely. look, it's clear. the supreme court has to weigh in here. right now we have a split across multiple states in this country on several key constitutional questions. this is what the supreme court does. they are the final word, right, on the meaning of the constitution, and also, they are the ones who resolve disputes between the states. if they don't weigh in here, this could really be a disaster for the 2024 election. let's take a step back and look at what's happened here. over the past several months of trump's ballot eligibility has been litigated across different states with varying outcomes. as you noted, colorado and maine have both concluded he should be

removed from the ballot under the 14th amendment of the constitution. section three of that 14th amendment bars anyone from holding office who has engaged in insurrection. and those two states. in one case, the state supreme court of colorado. in the other case, the secretary of state. the first stop for questions of ballot eligibility in maine, both concluded that not only did he engage in insurrection, but that this applies to presidents, which some other states have said is not cleared and removed him. but we've seen in other states -- minnesota, michigan, arizona, new hampshire -- they have gone the other way. i will note in some of those cases, they haven't even gotten the merits. just procedurally. they have not opted to go through a trial and conclusions. in california today the secretary of state opted to include not to take him off the balance waiting for oregon. it's so interesting earlier this week, trump has not appealed these decisions. we expect he will, but the republican party of colorado filed an appeal of the supreme court earlier this week and it crystallizes the three big questions that need to be resolved.

the first, does the 14th amendment, section 3, does that apply to presidents? because it doesn't specifically say. some judges who looked at this said it doesn't apply to presidents, so it shouldn't apply to presidents. others see it differently. the next question is ok, if it applies to presidents and are states the entity that should enforce this? is there some rule for congress? as other constitutional scholars have seen. and the other question is ok, if all of that is true does, this possibly infringe on another constitutional right? the first amendment? other republicans to choose who they want to choose as their candidate. this is a series of fascinating constitutional questions. there's no clear answer. it must come from the supreme court. i think this is going to be the slowing and for eyes on the supreme court to see what they do, the first of many questions. if they don't resolve this, this will continue to be litigated by election day. >> yeah, layers and layers of legal arguments. really unchartered territory. >> as we always are with former president trump. he brings up all these

constitutional questions that have never been conthem played before. >> paula reed, thank you for reporting. staying on interference in the 2024 election, cnn has learned details of the frenzied overturn donald trump's election for -- the plot involves opera tifz trying to fly fake ballots to the capitol. >> the certificates were from the key swing states of michigan and wisconsin. zach cohen is part of the team that uncovered this exclusive and very important story here. zach, what are the emails and audio reporting showing about this? what did we not know here before? >> yeah, guys, they really shed new light on the extent to which campaign officials, operatives and even some republican members of congress were working together to try and prevent joe biden from assuming office by using these fake electors. that plan was predicated on getting physical copies of these fake elector certificates from seven swing key states from

those states to washington, d.c. before january 6th. then we will learn new details about a mad scramble that took place on the eve of january 26th when trump campaign officials realized two of those certificates were stuck in the mail. take a listen to what has been described by prosecutors as the architect of the plot. what he told investigators in michigan about this scramble and about the sort of panic that ensued when they realized the certificates were stuck in the mail? >> the general counsel from campaign is freaked out that roman reported that the michigan votes are still in a facility in michigan, which doesn't look like they are going to get to pence in time. so the general council of the campaign was alarmed and was chartering -- didn't have to charter a jet, but they did commercial. so yeah, this is a high-level decision to get the michigan and wisconsin votes there. and they had to enlist, you know a u.s. senator to try to

expedite it to try to get it to pence in time. >> so according to chezborough getting these in the hands of mike pence was so important they considered chartering a private jet and staff to washington, d.c. they had to fly them commercial. they had tone list the help of a u.s. senator to get those documents to pence. we do know when approached about the documents, pence and pence staffer refused to take them and ultimately certifiededen's win. really looked behind the curtain of what was happening behind the scenes as trump officials were trying to on january 6th. >> zach, some of the reporting shows one trump attorney may not have given the full truth to the house committee that was investigating january 6th. >> yeah. according to chezborugh, matthew morgan who was the general trump

lawyers was helping to oversee the day-to-day, sort of operations related to the fake electors plotted. no emails he was given to prosecutors in michigan show morgan was communicating with him and other operatives about how to get the certificates to washington, d.c. now that does not match up with what morgan told the january 6th committee. said he tried to distance himself from the fake electors plot. he had a problem with him and was concerned it would make life the he was still engaging in these discussions as late as a day before 1y567bth. it will be interesting to see how morgan squares they say he stands by his january 6th committee. but really a gaffe there and it does show how the two teams of trump operates of and lawyers wasn't mess -- was messy and a lot of overlapping there. >> zach cohen, appreciate the reporting. thanks so much. let's dig deeper now with michigan's top election official secretary of state jocelyn

benson. secretary benson, thank you so much for being with us. you were on cnn last night talking about your desire to see a wide net that would bring all those involved in the scheme to account. not just the fake electors, but also campaign officials and significantly, lawmakers who we learned aided in this effort. i'm wondering what you think that looks like. and is a federal prosecution beyond what the justice department? >> well thanks for having me. and to start, i do think the justice department is casting a line net. certainly, in my testimony and my conversations and everything that i have observed. this is a leave-no-stone-unturned investigation, as it should be because the goal is not just to seek justice and accountability for those who were part of this unprecedented effort to undermine, overturn and block the will of the people, but also to make sure it doesn't happen again, that there are clear consequences when these types of things are attempted. so the wide net is critical.

in addition to that you do need the state level prosecutions particularly in the battleground states like georgia, michigan, like we're seeing because none of the high-level machinations and plans would have been operational if you hadn't had willing conspirators at local level in the states. so you've got it look to the states as well to see accountability. that's what's playing out in michigan, as well as georgia, and other states as well as weed. >> i'm curious, secretary, about the lawmaker aspect of it. senator ron johnson of wisconsin who was involved in this plot. what does accountability in your eyes look like for him? >> well there's always been two paths of accountability. legal accountability where the law applies and where criminal or civil proceedings could seek justice. but there's also political accountability. i think voters need to take seriously their responsibility to look at a wide array of issues on the ballot. but when you have lawmakers, politicians, who have lied, who have spread lies, who took part to undermine the will of the

people voters have the power to hold them accountable at the ballot box and speak clearly that's not the type of leader they want representing them in washington. >> so in michigan, the attorney general there has charged 16 fake electors. one of them has decided to comply with the investigation. all charges have been dropped against him cooperation, in exchange for his cooperation. but now that the full scope of this plan has come into focus, it appears that the pressure was mounting on these fake electors. i'm wondering what the message is to those facing criminal charges? >> i think as we've seen, i believe in wisconsin, and potentially other states, cooperation at this point is far more beneficial. i say this as well as former dean of a law school than in cooperating with the process. it helps us get to justice for individual who's were at the bottom wrungs of the scheme for the state level of the scheme,

to help us uncover and help investigators uncover the depths at which and highest levels of which that this went and seek accountability for the high-level pieces as well. so cooperation helps that. a lot of the discussion among people that has been public, among those who have been charged, that we don't know what we were getting into. if that is possible and now certainly, they knew what they were a part of. and now is the time to say you know what? this is not something i want to be a part of and i want to help those seeking justice, as opposed to those standing in the way of seek accountability. >> i want to get your reaction to the decision by maine secretary of state to kick donald trump off the primary ballot there. a similar effort failed in your state, though the door is still opened for future challenges. how do you think the supreme court is going to weigh in on that case? and further, how are you preparing for the possibility that we may see this tried again with a general election ballot? >> we're preparing for all those

possiblities in all things looking to the u.s. supreme court to provide clarity for election administrators, for voters, for the republican party and sooner rather than later. i think a lot has been made or tried to be made that it's a cut and dryish the really not. the legal definition of insurrection and aid and abetted has really never been decide or interpreted by the u.s. supreme court in this type of context. our country needs. that ultimately, the supreme court's job is to provide that clarity if we're going to move forward into this 2024 election cycle with our ducks in line and with voters in power it make the best decision for themselves. so we'll continue to call and be a part of any effort to push the supreme court to make a decision sooner rather than later on the merits. in some ways, this lack of clarity or the lack of consistency we're seeing among the state decisions, i hope, will compel the supreme court to make that merit space decision, sooner rather than later. >> jocelyn benson, thank you so much for your time and

perspective. we appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. >> of course. still to come on cnn news central, dozens are dead after a massive air attack on ukraine. russia's largest bombard started. ahead, how this could impact talks on ukraine, now at an impasse on capitol hill. also, it's being described as one of the most frustrating conversations between president biden and israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. we have new details on the sticking points in this contentious call. and congresswoman lauren bobert says she will run in a different colorado district in 2024, quite far away from the one she currently represents. we'll speak with the challenger who was looking to unseat her. we'll have that ahead on cnn news central.

>> today ukraine is calling for an urgent u.n. security council meeting following russia's biggest air attack on the country are since the start of invasion. dozens of people are dead. more than hundreds are injured after russia targeted multiple regions across ukraine. this is video from a city showing heavy damage to a maternity hospital after a missile strike. officials say several expectant mothers and newborn babies and unhurt after fleeing to the bomb shelter before the building was hit. let's discuss it now with

michael, a former spokesman for security in europe. michael, thank you so much for being with us. help us put into perspective the scale and significance of the timing of this most recent attack. >> sure. good to be with you, boris. well that's a heck of a lot of muscle. ukranian forces are saying 158 drones and missiles were sent including hypersonic ones. they managed to shoot down 114. we have not seen such a big barrage since about november of last year when some were sent ukraine's way. look, as for timing, it's hard to say. it's hard to get into the twisted mind of mr. putin, but part of me believes that this is payback for ukraine's missile or drone attack on qeet a big shismt russian naval fleet -- quite a big russian naval fleet.

it destroyed 20% of that fleet. the russians might have also been targeting critical infrastructure, but they hit other targets instead. or this could be a harbinger or precursor to other attacks, ground offense on ukraine. one more thing, boris, which is absolutely mind-boggling when you think about it, is that one of the russian missiles, according to the polish military spent about three minutes or 24 miles in polish airspace. now this is not the first time that's happened, but that is the longest time i believe a missile entered polish airspace and entered back into ukraine. nato's response to that is we're going to remain vigilant. but look, it was either a malfunction or incompetence on the russian part, or the russian there's probing, testing nato defensess of course, will be an interest to the president of china, who is looking carefully how united states will respond to a possible invasion of taiwan. >> yeah, a range of possibility whiz it comes to why that

missile went -- possibility of reasons why that missile went into polish airspace. i'm wondering if how you think if that might spur lawmakers that might provide more aid, the kind of aid provided by the white house. >> sure. we have $61 billion on the line from the united states and another $50 billion or so in europe. maybe that is the silver lining to all of this is that it will wake up those legislators to approve that funding. the last 250 million authorized by the white house to spend for ukraine had just been sent. so there's nothing left. and ukranians are saying if nothing comes, they will have a very difficult time. so hope come back from their break, they will prove that $61 -- approve that $61 billion. boris, i have to be very blunt with you on this one. i fall on the side of the ledger of cnn's payton wall whosh said

if one or both of those funding packages do not come through, russia will occupy all of ukraine within two years. that's what we're possibly looking at right now. >> wow. that would be potentially devastating outcome for eastern europe, no doubt. i'm wondering from the kremlin's perspective. not that the outcome isn't already predetermined, but how much does it impact the situation in ukraine that vladimir putin has this reelection coming up? how do the domestic politics of russia play into what we're seeing in the battlefield? >> well i think in terms of russian domestic politics, he's going to slide back to another term, probably life term. i think what mr. putin is very close eye on what's happening in the united states. not only, boris, in terms of the funding that's supposed to come through, but i think he's also trying to run down the clock until the elections in the united states, hoping that mr. trump or maga republican

will get in and a quick deal can be made that will not be in ukraine's favor. what the ukranians are now preparing to do in case of that eventuality that funding doesn't come through, they are, for example, tripling their domestic production of weapons. they are upgrading their drone technology, and i think you're going it see more very surgical strikes on the black sea fleet way inside russia to get as much of russian military capability, diminished just quickly. i'll throw out a figure there. with pretty limited resources although over the past two years ukraine has been able to den the about 50% of russian conventional military -- denigrate about 50% of russian conventional military. that's pretty impressive. >> we have to leave the conversation there. appreciate your time. >> my pleasure. now new details on what has been described as a difficult and frustrating phone call between president biden and israeli prime minister benjamin

netanyahu. according to reporting from azios, the strained conversation between the two leaders last weekend ended with biden abruptly saying, quote, this conversation is over. it is the latest sign of growing tension between them, as the israel-hamas war nears the three-month mark. i'm joined now by barack yeviv the reporter who broke this story. he's also a cnn political and global affairs analyst. barack, thank you so much for being with us. tell us about this big sticking point here that caused so much of the frustration on this call from biden? >> well this frustration exploded over the issue of withheld palestinian tax revenues that israel is not giving to the palestinian authority. but it was bigger than. that i think it was just the last straw. u.s. officials told me that this was from almost 20 phone calls.

that biden had since the beginning of the war in gaza. this was no doubt, the most difficult and frustrating phone call. when biden is basically after something like 30 minutes of talking about the war in gaza, he switches to this issue of the palestinian tax revenues and asking netanyahu, almost asking for a favor. and netanyahu more or less is telling him, no, i'm not going to do it. u.s. officials told me that biden is going out on a limb on many, many things. the needs to reciprocate, he basically, wasn't willing to do it -- when netanyahu. >> how do you see this? is this a personal animus that's animating this current relationship in the way that they are relating to each other? or is this just about how bebe feels about israel and how the u.s. relates to israel? >> i'm not sure it's personal

because, you know, biden and netanyahu have knownh other for more than 40 years. more or less, they had a quite decent relationship. but i think that what biden discovered, and he knew that, but he's discovered that again, that when netanyahu needs to choose between his own political survival and anything else, he chooses his own political survival. this was the case because biden told netanyahu or netanyahu told biden, listen the do this thing because i have pressure within my coalition. so biden told him, listen. i'm fending off pressure within the democratic party on the war in gaza and all the support i'm giving israel, so you should be able to fend off pressure within your own coalition. i think biden realized netanyahu is just not willing to do it. >> what did they talk about when it came to the next phase of the war, as israel is obviously suffered a lot of criticism in the u.s. for the way it's

prosecuting it and for how many civilians have died in gaza? >> se call took place last saturday when israel was on the brink of expanding its ground operation into what's called the central camps. it's several refugee camps between gaza city and a very densely populated area. and biden wanted to know what's the plan? netanyahu told them more or less it's not -- israel is not going to go into all the refugee camps but just a very specific operations. in one of the refugee camps where israel had intelligence that hamas had a command and control center, and this is what the idea has been doing for the last -- idf has been doing for i think the last two or three days. >> brashtion thank you so much. obviously, news of this call creating a lot of interest -- barack. we thank you for going through your reporting for us. >> thank you. >> congresswoman lauren boebert

will switch districts in her 2020 reelection bid in colorado. so again, we'll talk to the democrat who was preparing to run against her.

in a move to avoid what could have been a tough reelection fight next year, colorado congresswoman lauren boebert is switching congressional districts for the 2024 election. her decision underscores the narrow house republican majority and how difficult it is for them to hold onto it. boebert now represents colorado's third district in the western part of the state, but she is headed east to run in the fourth where republican congressman ken buck is retiring. now if boebert stayed in the third, she would have faced off for a second time against our next guest, democrat adam frisch who nearly lost to boebert in the 2020 elections. frisch joins us now. thanks for joining us.

we should point out the primaries have not yet happened, so we would potentially see a different democrat going up against whoever runs in that district. nevertheless, you already went up against congresswoman boebert. you lost a mere 500-ish vote. she's accusing hollywood elites and progressive money in her words buying the third district. what's your response to that? >> boris, great to see you and happy new year to you and all the viewers out there. i don't know what to really say about that stuff. she's making up excuses. she must have done a poll. she did a poll a month ago focused on general election conversations. she must have been down seven or eight points to me. that's why she decided to literally pack up her bags and try to carpetbag her way to the eastern slope, eastern plains. i'll be shocked even if she makes it in the top half of the primary contestants over there. the whole republican crowd over there has no interest in seeing her over there, just like they didn't have any care in southern and western colorado to see her

here. we had two goals two years ago and i've launched on this journey. one was boebert defeated in congress. obviously, we've checked that box and we're taking a victory lap. the second thing we're very, very focused on and i would say more importantly, is to try to break a monopoly that's affecting rural america. and 90% of these rural counties in the country are ruled by one political party. and i think monopolies are bad in politics and business, and that's why i've been in this race. that's why i've been traveling 45,000 miles and counting so far. >> it does seem, adam, like there is this division within the colorado republican party. maga folks and more establishment traditional type conservatives. we spoke to the chair of the colorado republican party yesterday and he said he did not think that boebert moving was a good move. i'm wondering for you, if you go up against a republican that doesn't have the kind of baggage

that boebert carries, don't you think that puts you at a disadvantage? you would be running a different race. >> well, no. i think we're going to run the same race. authentic, sincere. no one has worked harder. i've been home three days a month. our district is better than pennsylvania. i'm always on the road. we've done 45,000 miles and counting. i have no interest into getting any kind of conversations against team right or team lou especially the republican party voters. that will be up to the plain voters as to who they want in that district. i remain focused on team dc 3. not team red, not team blue. i'm laser focused. i'm breaking this monopoly affecting rural america and we're not getting did i good diversion of the either political party on the western slope. i have the same views in mater who i'm running against. i'm trying to convince people why people thing for us.

in a district that's only 22% registered democrat. we have 49.9% of the vote this time. obviously, i've been able to build what i call a tri-partisan coalition. we will continue to do that. all the partisans in the last cycle thought we would lose by 45 votes and we -- fewer than 550. all i can say i hope they save some of their humble pie for this cycle. regardless, if we run against a quote/unquote republican or a far extreme republican and user personality, it doesn't change how hard i'm going to work, how sincere i am and how focused i am on colorado jobs and colorado energy. and so you know, there are three republicans running in the primary. from what i can tell probably be five or six more, but i'm focused on team c-3, not who i'm running against. that's not going to matter. >> we have it leave the conversation. there appreciate your time. >> thank you very much. take care and have a good day. >> of course.

still ahead, we have new details on the chinese surveillance balloon. remember this? it navigated across the united states earlier this year. we now learn how the balloon was able to send back data to china. stay with cncnn central.l. we have ththe details s in justa moment.

just into the newsroom. we're learning new details about that chinese spy balloon that flew over the united states earlier this year. >> that's right. a u.s. official says the balloon now used an american internet service provider to locate its location back to china, which is a pretty stunning revelation here. joining us in the studio with more on. that is something alarming, katie. >> yeah. u.s. officials have been able to determine that as this chinese spy balloon was transiting across the united states it was able to use an american service provider to send these sort of short bursts data back to china,

information that was primarily concerned with the balloon's location and its navigation. so this wasn't sort of a sustained connection, so much as it was sort of the balloon periodically checking in and being like hi, here's wrim. here's where i'm going. what we -- where i'm going. what we do know is this is not believed by u.s. officials that intelligence the balloon was collecting as it transited across the united states. so as the balloon was going across the u.s. it was pick up images and other intelligence. that was being stored on the balloon itself with the expectation presumably, that the chinese government would be able to download it and view it later of course, the united states shot it down. we have been able -- the united states has been able to study that itself. but what's interesting i think about this, guys, is that the sort of revelation about this use of an american service provider. it gives us kind of an image or gives us kind of a picture into how the united states was able to track this balloon in real

time. it also gives us a sense of why the biden administration might have been willing to wait until the balloon crossed all the way over the country to shoot it down. officials told us at the time that they were collecting information from the balloon about its capabilities as it transited. this now, we understand, is part of how they were able to do that. >> that is fascinating. katie bo-lewis, thank you. we appreciate it. a university chancellor in wisconsin was removed from his post after he posted pornographic films online for years he made with his wife. that chancellor joining cnn news central next.

so we want to give you a moment because this next story deals with very mature themes. if you have any kids in the room you may want them to leave now or change the channel. the story surrounds the controversy about the chancellor who has been fired. the school has not publicly explained the reason why they removed the 63-year-old from his leadership role.

he told several news outlets he believes he's being punished for pornographic videos he and his wife made together and published on the internet. >> he also suggested that their free speech rights rock violated. telling the new york times that the couple made such videos for years and recently decided to more widely on porn websites. but the couple said they never mentioned the university or their jobs. joe gao is joining us now. thank you so much for being with us. can you tell us do you think the university found out about this and why do you think it's not ok they fired you over it? >> thank you for having me on and telling our story. we really appreciate that, my wife and i. i should say there are more than just videos. we have two books that we've written about our experiences. so this is not kind of a sensationalistic project. it's something we're really serious about. and we have had those books out for a number of years.

we wrote them under different names pen names because we didn't want to draw any attention to the university or my role there. and then recently, we decided to put some of the videos onto some sites that really you have to go looking for them for adult material to find them. and i guess somebody saw that and recognized me and told the board of regents. then they asked through their attorneys and hr people, are those your individual crows? i said yes. that's the truth. -- videos. here's what we do what we do. we're not making money from it. we're actually spending a lot of money on these projects. i thought that would be kind of the end of it. then the regents had a meeting and they informed me after the meeting that i was no longer chancellor, and i was given no due process. they never said what policy i violated.

also, there was no hearing where i could actually do as i'm doing with you now. talk about the issues. and i think really at the end of the day, it's a question of our material rule is covered by the first amendment. it's nothing illegal. we're not inciting anybody to violence or anything like that. i think it says something about how the board of regents says they want freedom of expression and free speech, but at the end of the day, they are not going to let me do that. >> sir, on the question of free speech though, there was a decision by the supreme court that stipulated that an officer's first amendment rights a public amendment officer's first amendment rights stopped after issues of public concern. in other words, as a public employee, you have the right to speak on issues that are concerns to the public, to folks on your campus, it folks elsewhere. but a pornographic video, according to the supreme court, does not fall into that

category. it's also possible that you agreed to a code of conduct, right, when you decided to become chancellor? >> well that case with that. i think it's important to note that was 2004. now that's three years before this iphone came out, and we've come a long, long way since then. so i don't know how a court would rule on this in the contemporary world. and the other thing, when i was appointed chancellor, i did sign an agreement, but it didn't say anything about a code of conduct or morality or anything like that. it did say set a good example. and i think what i'm doing with my wife is setting a good example regarding freedom of expression and free speech. >> look, no one is trying to take down your videos, right? you're entitled to have those up as you do. you're exercising your freedom of speech. there -- speech there. the internet was certainly in

full effect in 2004. whether or not there are iphones or not. what does that have to? >> well, i would make the case that adult consensual sexuality is a publish -- public issue. pornography certainly is a public issue. there are millions of people that watch it every day on the internet. so the work that we're doing comments on that. >> you did though in the books that you published and some of the videos that you publish, use a pseudo name. in the books -- correct me if i'm mistaken. you write about concern that if your actual name and public position came to light, there would be consequences. further in 2018, you paid $5,000 for an adult film star to come to campus and speak to students. there was a controversy over. that you actually wound up reimbursing the university out your own pocket. because of that controversy,

partly because it was student fees that you used. so you that this was potentially going to be an issue for you. it shouldn't have come as a surprise if the university decided to part ways. >> yeah, and i'm glad you brought that up because the 2018 experience, i was ultimately coerced into paying that money to making something of an apology, and i found that very unpleasant. so i did not want to do that again. so this time around, i said, you know, i'm not going to cave into pressure from the regents. and i'm going to do the right thing. >> are you arguing that sort of what you're doing here when it comes to pornography, that it's a public issue like it's a public service? is that what you're saying is that this is an issue of public concern? it's a public service? >> well i think we are making videos that are not violent.

they are not exploitive. they are a married couple. it's something you don't see every day. >> porn stars just to be clear, right? it's not just you. >> yeah. we do have videos with other performers and we do a cooking show where we talk to them about what it's like to be in the industry, and i think it really shows a side of the performers that you don't see anywhere else. so i would encourage people to just -- if you're interested in this, to take a look -- >> no, i've taken a look. i've looked at your books and they are pretty graphic, i will say. i don't know that they exactly -- look, if that's your cup of tea i get it. but in terms of it being, you know, a public concern or the way you are describing it, i'm not so sure that it fits that description. >> well i would say we would not

be having this conversation if it wasn't a public concern. so i think this is something that is a big part of human life and something that there are a lot of taboos around, and people are reluctant to talk about it and i think the best part -- this whole episode is that we are getting people to talk a little more freely. >> joe, very quickly, what are your future plans now that you're no longer chancellor? >> well i was set to be a faculty member here and i had announced at the beginning of the year before all this controversy that this is going to be my last year as chancellor. so i'm excited about getting back into the classroom and teaching. i taught for 18 years before i was an administrator. but you know, the university system is saying things like we're going to investigate his tenure. and i really don't know means. that's pretty ominous. i think we'll have to watch that very closely. >> joe, we will keep watching.

obviously, a lot of attention on your case here. we really you appreciate you being with us. >> thank you so much. it was a good zusmghts i fresh. >> -- discscussion. i apprececiate it.

i'm a little anxious, i'm a little excited. i'm gonna be emotional, she's gonna be emotional, but it's gonna be so worth it. i love that i can give back to one of our customers. i hope you enjoy these amazing gifts. oh my goodness. oh, you guys. i know you like wrestling, so we got you some vip tickets. you have made an impact. so have you. for you guys to be out here doing something like this, it restores a lot of faith in humanity.