alas, he did shoot someone on fifth avenue, but he might not get away with it. i'm michael smerconish in philadelphia. it didn't have to end this way. he could have protected even polished his legacy. but his personality wouldn't allow that. the same make-up that draws the crowd, fires up the base, gives him his populist appeal also has an underbelly of selfishness and conceit. and that's what we've seen exclusively for the past two months. fraud, rigged, stolen. those are the word most heard since november 3rd. in tandem with his contradictory request which is, hey, come participate in the georgia runoff. and all the while, a pandemic

raged. but imagine a different approach, one where president trump accepted defeat when the race was called for biden, reminded us that he was an underdog who got more votes than any in history, other than the man who beat him. attention spent not griping and golfing, but celebrating the record pace of vaccine development. airport hangar photo-opes. not with raucous crowds fueled with steel. but with hundreds of sleeves rolled up with vaccinations. and the president entertaining with stories what a wild ride it's been, while ticking often accomplishments of the sort that would please his conservative base. you know, three justices on the supreme court. hundreds more appointed to the federal bench. ending the iran deal. withdrawing from the paris accord. the usmca trade deal. space force, moving the jerusalem embassy. tax cuts.

job growth. he could have laid a predicate to capitalize on whatever bumps are going to come on the road for the new administration. and there will be bumps on the biden road. there always are. but trump squandered all of that. first, he cost himself a winnable election, to invoke james carville. it was the virus, stupid! and then he tossed senators loeffler and perdue their elections and his party's control of the senate. it's not rocket science. you can't tell people that a system is rigged while simultaneously asking them to participate in that rigged system. and then came wednesday. by the way, the vulnerability of the capitol was appalling. as i told chris cuomo that night, this was not 9/11 or a sneak attack against partying haitians launched on christmas. the protesters were coming to

town was well-known the internet chatter porteurtended violence. and on the reports that iran would seek retribution one year later of general soleimani. we're lucky it wasn't worse. if they carried weapons it could have been catastrophic. the night before some confronted senator mitt romney when he knew from salt lake city to washington. in-flight for 20 seconds, they chanted "traitor." >> traitor, traitor, traitor. >> and on wednesday inside, they pregamed. donald trump jr. said this against congressional republicans. >> guess what, folks if you're going to be the zero and not the hero, we're coming for you and we're going to have a good time doing it.

>> rudy giuliani advocated trial by combat. >> and then the president said this to the crowd. >> you'll never take back our country with weakness. you have to show strength. and you have to be strong. >> you have to be strong, show strength. think about that. well, what about walking and maybe carrying a sign requires strength? no, he had something more in mind. for a little c-y-a, he did reference doing so peacefully, but the dye was cast. the fuse was lit. this was causation, not correlation. and even after things at the capitol got ugly, and he released a video after being encouraged by president-elect joe biden to appear on national tv and condemn the violence, he began by acknowledging the pain, the hurt of the protesters. told them that he loved them and made yet another claim about the election being stolen. five deaths have been tied to

the subsequent events including of that a capitol police officer named brian sicknick. close to 6:00 p.m., the commencement of a curfew with the crowd largely dispersed. the capitol under control, here was his mind-set, via twitter before his account and that on facebook were suspended. quote, these are things the events that happen when a sacred landslide victory is so unceremoniously and stripped away from great patriots who have been treat today badly for so long. go home with love and in peace. remember this day forever. you know, for four years i have resisted the knee-jerk temptation to blame everything on trump. but this time, he deserves it. yes, the president is to blame. but there's something more. this was 30 years in the making. it was the culmination of the

outsized influence on a polarized media on a small but loyal base and its control over doctrine politicians. and the myth of a stolen election. for them, it's been outdriving revenue. through radio ears, television eyes and computer mouse clicks. john mccain understood what i'm referring to. you remember -- after being diagnosed with brain cancer, he returned to the well of the senate and famously gave a thumbs down to the repeal of obamacare. that day was july 25th, 2017. and he said this with regard to a polarized media. our incapacity is their livelihood. he was right, of course. the mccain mantle was assumed by

the ben sasse facebook essay exposed his colleagues. when he wrote this, quote, when we talk in private, i haven't heard a single republican allege that the election results were fraudulent. not one. instead, i hear them talk about their worries about how they'll look to president trump's most ardent supporters. on wednesday night, when the senate reconvened, sasse summed up what brought the nation to the brink. he said, don't let the screamers who monetize hate have the final word. well, those to whom he referred are trying to have the final word, by not outright condemning the violence. by suggesting double-standards. by speculating basesly about participants. hell, on wednesday night, tucker carlson concluded a meandering monologue by saying it's not your fault. it's their fault. mitt romney who literally faced screamers the night before rose in the senate and he said

this -- >> we gather due to a selfish man's injured pride. and the outrage of supporters who he has deliberately misinformed for the past two months and stirred to action this very morning. >> lindsey graham, the president's friend and golf partner lamented the final days of trump by saying this -- >> trump and i, we've had a hell of a journey. i hate it to end this way. oh, my god, i hate it. from my point of view, he's been a consequential president. but today, first thing you'll see. all i can say is count me out. enough is enough. >> on his way home, senator graham then faced screamers of his oath, not long after he made that speech on the senate floor. >> mr. graham, you are a traitor to the country! you know it was rigged. you know it was rigged. you know it was rigged.

you are a human being and it's going to be like this forever, wherever you go, the rest of your life. >> common sense suggests the american people will agree with senator graham, that enough is enough. then again, a yougov survey announced while majority of americans see the threats as a threat of democracy, 45% support the actions of those at the capitol. lindsey graham said he hated it to end this way, but it did. and that will be the epitaph of the trump administration. i want to know what you think, go to my website @smerconish.com. answer this question. after january 20, will the gop remain the party of trump? what are your thoughts? tweet me @smerconish. or my facebook page. i'll read responses throughout the program. what do we have, kathryn?

from twitter. when you say you blame the media, partisans assume it's the other media. not the one you are listening too. good response, brian. you know from me, mix up your diet. you can't be in a silo, relying on one particular outlet. here's the thing, the partnership on either side of the aisle has been adbdicated. i'm not thinking the president, 11 days forward. they're getting their direction from largely men with microphones who have a stranglehold on gop primary voters and everybody is tethering their message to what they hear on the airwaves. that's the danger. one more, kathryn. what do we have? from the world of twitter, why are you opening with a rosy picture trump could have expressed.

>> he needs to be removed now. he incited an uprising on our democracy? rick, mcfadden, did you listen to the whole commentary or listen to the first two minutes and draw a conclusion? because what i plainly said was there was a different path he could have taken. there say list of accomplishments that he might have offered not what you might agree with or i might agree with because of that list i disagree but those that pleased his base. instead of talking about election theft, he could have toured the country with sleeves rolled up. and instead, this is the part you missed, i could not have been more crystal clear. my words were there was causation here, not correlation. he's to blame. he brought this on. and he's also got a whole host of enablers. you're part of the problem, if i can just say that. because you're hearing what you want to hear, instead of being open minded to nuance. still to come, with just 11

days to go in president trump's lame duck term, democrats are poised to impeach him for a second time which would make him the only president in history to be impeached twice. what can we expect? not only that, his main outlet of communication, his twitter account has been permanently suspended. his facebook and instagram pages shut down. while private companies are allowed to do this, that is censorship. does it set a dangerous precedent? instead of saving half the vaccines for follow-up shots president-elect biden plans to give the doses to get vaccinated sooner. a former head of fda says it's risky. and he's here explain. for supple, bouncy skin. neutrogena®.

you work hard for your money. stretched days for it. juggled life for it. took charge for it. so care for it. look after it. invest with the expertise of j.p. morgan, either with an advisor or online, through chase. after all, it's yours. chase. make more of what's yours. new projects means you need to hire.gers. i need indeed. indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a short list of quality candidates from our resume database. claim your seventy five dollar credit, when you post your first job at indeed.com/home.

as covid-19 continues to wreak a heavy toll on america, the incoming biden administration will announce a brave move. it will stop saving the covid-19 vaccine and instead get as many shots in the arms as possible. the change is meant to combat two crises, one that the

national coronavirus numbers get worse. in the past week, 20707 americans died. that's nearly the size of portsmouth, new hampshire. the current figures for vaccines distributed, 22.1 million. administered, 6.7 million. the protocols were already complicated pfizer and biontech are supposed to be two shots two weeks apart. the moderna, two shots, four weeks apart. the transition team said the biden administration intends to use the defense protection act to introduce as many doses. but some health experts believe it could delay a second dose. several countries have already decided to delay second doses to get people protected faster. in the uk, the second shot will be 12 weeks later. but the fda warns without trials

there's no way to know such delays. dr. anthony fauci has cautioned against the change telling cnn, quote, i would not be in favor of that. so, is the move wise or too risky? joining me now is dr. norman baylor, director of the office of research and vie. dr. baylor, explain to me in terms what would this exchancha entail. >> good morning, if we just step back a little bit and look at the primary data used to support the fda's authorization of the vaccine. the efficacy was based on two doses, given either 21 dailies apart. or 28 days apart. so, we don't have the data on the efficacy of the vaccine after that time. so, forth, and from the first dose. and if you think about the state da that we do have, and for the

pfizer vaccine, we had efficacy around 89% between 14 and 21 days. at the 21st day, we're giving a second dose. so, we don't know what that duration of protection is. and that's the rick. gi risk. giving the one dose and delaying the second dose beyond what was delivered in the clinical trials, we take a risk of those individuals not necessarily being protected sufficiently. we also know that the neutralizing antibodies that which the body responds to against the vaccine was modest after the first dose. and once that second dose was given, after the 21 or 28 days, depending on the vaccine, you saw a robust response. so, we know that second dose is important. i also think we need to put in context what the biden administration is proposing. so, if we think about a first -- delaying the first dose, are we

hedging our bets by saying, okay, we will know -- and we should know. we should have an idea of when that second dose is coupling before we take this risk of saying we're going to give -- the majority of the vaccine for the first dose, give that up. but you have to have an idea when is that second dose coming? is that second dose coming 21, 28 days after you give that first dose? maybe it will come in five weeks. and there's a little room for plus and minus with days. but you have to contextualize the whole plan before you can dismiss it completely. >> it sounds to me like the biden administration and i lack your qualifications so i'm just a lay person trying to understand this, it sounds to me that the biden administration is saying we'd be better served with a lot of people with some degree of protection than fewer people with maximum protection. and i think you've just

explained to me why you think that's risky. >> exactly. it's risky because you don't know the duration of protection. so, you have -- you have this population, with one dose. you don't know how long that's going to last. so, you have to hedge your bet. and you have to -- you have to know, do i have vaccine coming? do i have vaccine? will i have vaccine available at that 21 days, at that 28 days? and again, you can go a little further. but some of these proposals going out to 12 weeks, we don't know. we don't have the data on the duration. >> so, you're not alone in being somewhat concerned about this. kathryn, put up on the scene that montage. and there's one in particular i want to read to dr. baylor. a response from operation warp speed's spokesperson says

this -- if president-elect biden is calling for the distribution of vaccines knowing that there would not be a second dose available, that decision is without science or data and is contrary to the fda's approved label. if president-elect biden is suggesting that the maximum number of doses should be made available, consistent with ensuring that a second dose of vaccine will be there when the patient shows up, then that is already happening." does that spur any thoughts on your part? >> well, i would just say, your second scenario, i would just say, i hope, if this plan is implemented, we do know -- i hope we do know the -- whether and when the availability of that second dose is coming. again, there's a little window there. but to make that decision, i would say you need to have an idea when that second dose is coming. because the other thing, you're

going to have people out there who have had the first dose and think, oh, i've been immunized. so, all of the things that i had to do prior, such as social distance, such as wearing a mask, i don't have to do that anymore. but the full efficacy requires two doses. and, again, even when we have two doses until we get to a large number of people immunized in this country, and the world, we're going to still have to social distance. we're going to still have to wear a mask. we have to get up to that high level of immunization. so, it's critical that we do know what that supply is. and there are nuances to this as well. i mean, one would say, well, let's make sure that the vulnerable, the health care, front line health care workers and those in long-term health care facilities -- let's not -- let's not take that risk. let's give those individuals the

two doses. >> the double dose. >> the double dose. >> understood. the required double dose. and then those younger, healthier people, maybe we'll start them out with one dose. so there are options that you can work with this thing. but what's critical, you have to have a plan. you cannot do this in a knee-jerk. >> understood. >> you have to have a plan. >> dr. baylor, thank you for your expertise. much obliged. >> sure. thank you. let us see what you're saying on my smerconish and twitter and facebook page. i think from the world of twitter, he needs to do this even with the risk that the public starting to lose confidence they'll ever get the vaccine and the government's ability to competence to get the job done. you know, consummate loaner, interesting handle, i appreciate what dr. baylor just said. i think it applies that we're changing practice or not changing practice, and that is, once folks have that first of two shots it's essential that they close the deal. whether it's through the current

practice, or whether it's through changing this and making sure we vaccinate more, in other words, to your point, we can't allow this mind-set of, well, i got one shot, that's enough, i'm not going to go back for my second. everybody needs to get two. i want to remind you to go to my website at smerconish.com. i'm today, i haven't seen the results. i'm told the voting is extraordinary on this question today. and it's a provocative one. after january 20th, will the gop remain the party of trump? up ahead, twitter could be the least of the president's concerns as calls for his removal grr removal grow louder. nancy pelosi with that and the how does the saga end? and president trump has found himself tweetless. twitter has permanently suspended his account for rhetoric after supporters violently storms the u.s.

capitol. facebook and instagram have suspended him indefinitely. this is censorship or a bad precedent? mean whawhilemeanwhile, thi popped up with john baron, his former alias. aveeno® healthy. it's our nature.™

to syour body needs routine. system, aveeno® centrum helps your immune defenses every day,

with vitamin c, d and zinc. season, after season. ace your immune support, with centrum. you buy from us, at cayou get the freedomat car of the seven-day return policy. this isn't some dealership test drive around the block. it's better. this is seven days to put your carvana car to the test and see if it fits your life. load it up with a week's worth of groceries. take the kiddos out for ice cream. check that is has enough wiggle room in your garage. you get the time to make sure you love it. and on the sixth day, we'll reach out and make sure everything's amazing. if so, excellent. if not, swap it out for another, or return it for a refund. it's that simple. because at carvana, your car happiness is what makes us happy.

president trump's govern by tweet approach just a lot tougher. social media giants cracking down on the president's online accounts after his inflammatory rhetoric encouraged supporters to storm the u.s. capitol in protest of the election. twitter has announce they had permanently suspended the president from their platform due to a risk of further incitement of violence. they say his latest tweets can a glorification of policy. mark zuckerberg wrote that facebook and instagram will ban president trump's account for at

least the remainder of his term in office or indefinitely. he's been able to stand online for years but a dead eye ly insurrection of the capitol is where these outlets draw a line. and that is that republicans just lost power in the senate. the social media standoff with the president has provoked a debate among legal scholars over whether the constitutional protection of free speech is itself a threat to democracy. so is social media taking a direct approach by silence the president's post? joining me to discuss, jeffrey stone, a leading scholar, a professor at the university of chicago law school. professor, some get loose with their language. not every dispute about speech is a first amendment issue. can you explain that? >> well, the first amendment, like other provisions of the constitution, applies only to government. whether federal or state or local. it does not apply to private

actors. so, "the new york times" cannot violate anyone's first amendment rights nor can facebook or twitter. they are private entities. so the first amendment itself simply did not apply to the actionsch private organizations whether it be "newsweek" or cnn or twitter. >> thank you for clarifying. the "c" word, censorship comes with a heavy connotation. is this censorship? >> well, that it is censorship of a sort. it censorship means not allowing someone to speak isn't a particular context because one disapproves of the message that the individual will communicate. but on the other hand, it's important to understand that censorship of that sort is common in media. i have no right to be on cnn. donald trump has no right to have his speech quoted or transposed in "the new york times."

all of those entities, when it be newspapers, magazines, tv, radio, cable, they all have complete discretion to decide for themselves what to broadcast or what to print. or whatnot to broadcast or to print. you can call that censorship if you wish. that's part of making decisions how to decide to use limited resources. what makes social media different is that they're not limited in the same way. cnn only has so many hours in the day. "the new york times" only has so many pages in each issue. but in theory, twitter or facebook can have essentially limitless numbers of people do whatever they want on those venues. and, therefore, they're in a different position. they don't have to engage in censorship in the same way that realistically tv, radio, magazines and newspapers do. so, in that sense, they're making decisions that they don't have to make because of limited resources. and in that sense, they're making a substantive choices

that are not necessarily required by the realities of the method of communication. unlike radio, tv and newspapers. >> recognizing, as you said, that they are private actors, there's not a first amendment issue per se here, they can do whatever they like. i'm unsettled by it for several reasons. one is, i think double standards are guaranteed. there's no way that the tech companies can police all of their platforms of all of their content. so, it's inevitable, it seems to me that someone is going to get singled out. others will not get singled out. and you know that conservatives believe they're victims right now of bias by silicon valley. how do you react to that issue? >> well, i think that realities of social media that was not fully amended when it came into existence was that individuals would use it in ways that in fact are objectively highly problematic. and that if the social media

owners simply left well enough alone and let anyone say whatever they wanted, that would create a broad range of problems. social media is insulated from liability, right, section 230. in the way that "the new york times" and cnn are not. so if cnn broadcasts something that constitutes libel, they can be held libel for having done so. under existing law, facebook and to w twitter cannot. they've been given immunity. essentially turning social media into a huge public park, anyone can go on to the park, say whatever they want, no one would interfere, and park owners would not be held libel for what is said. those have over come come to realize that this can be abused in certain ways. and the question is to what extent should they monitor that

and limit what people have to say. this has to do with obscenity, it has to do with hate speech, and speech that can incite violence and criminal conduct. i think the social media outlets are wrestling with what to do with these outlets. and we've reached a point where government has to sit down and figure out a way is there a way for the government to play a role without censors themselves. which is even more dangerous. what we have is a problem, the idea that facebook or twitter can decide whether joe biden can speak or whether donald trump can speak, or senator hawley can speak, or whatever, raise s serious problem. it giveses them a power much greater than cnn or "the new york times." >> i agree. i want to get a reaction from what former first lady michelle obama said, quote, now is the time for silicone companies to stop enabling this monstrous

behavior and go even permanently banning this man from their platforms and putting in place policies to prevent their technology from being used by the nation's leaders to fuel insurrection. your reaction is what, professor stone? >> to use the social media platforms to, quote, fuel insurrection, literally, it makes sense not to permit that in the same way that cnn or "the new york times" would not prohibit that. that's a concept and the problem that puts enormous discretion in the hands of these social media platforms. so, i guess i would say we need rules that are clearly defined. and it might be that government has to play a role here. it's a little bit like when radio came into existence. and the government passed legislation to give the government the power to regulate, with the federal communications commission, the fairness doctrine and so on.

is it may be that similar types of regulation is necessary with respect to social media. the danger, of course, is government intervention is problematic because government can abuse their power. imagine if donald trump had the power to dictate what speech would be permissible or not permissible on facebook. i'm quite sure michelle obama would not want that to be the state of the law. >> i agree. professor stone, thank you. that was excellent. i really appreciate it. >> my pleasure. anytime, michael. speaking of social media from the world of twitter, i believe, what do we have -- i'm not being censored. this is a business simply saying we don't want your business. think of trump as a wedding cake for gays. interesting analogy, carol. i remember the case. my own view of this is that facebook and twitter takes some degree of risk when they start to regulate content because the protection they were provided by second 230 essentially said we are going to regard you as a

telephone line. and not as cnn. or not as a newspaper. in other words, we don't think you regulate content. we don't hold accountable sprint or bell or one of the phone companies for words that are said across their lines. and that's the protection that the internet has been affording. when you now have those tech giants starting to censor some of their speech, it puts them more, i think in the realm of cnn or in the realm of "the new york times" or some other outlet. i also worry, as i said to professor stone, they're not going to be able to police station the entire internet. and not through artificial intelligence either. so there will be contradictions and there will be double standards and people will read bias into it. i want to remind you to answer the survey question at smerconish.com. after january 20th will the gop remain the party of trump? speaking of which, what will the next 11 days of the trump

presidency look like as he faces the real possibility of, again, being impeached by the house?

your mission: stand up to moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. and take. it. on... ...with rinvoq. rinvoq a once-daily pill can dramatically improve symptoms... rinvoq helps tame pain, stiffness, swelling. and for some rinvoq can even significantly reduce ra fatigue. that's rinvoq relief. with ra, your overactive immune system attacks your joints. rinvoq regulates it to help stop the attack. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious infections and blood clots, sometimes fatal, have occurred... ...as have certain cancers, including lymphoma, and tears in the stomach or intestines, and changes in lab results. your doctor should monitor your bloodwork. tell your doctor about any infections...and if you are or may become pregnant while taking rinvoq. take on ra. talk to your rheumatologist about rinvoq relief. rinvoq. make it your mission. if you can't afford your medicine,

abbvie may be able to help. if you can't afford your medicine, listerine® cleans virtually 100%. helping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™ to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. [grunting noise] i'll take that. woohoo! 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. ensure max protein. with nutrients to support immune health. aging is a journey. you can't always know what's ahead. since 1995, seniors have opened their doors to right at home for personalized care. to be their guide. to steer them through uncharted territory. and when it comes right down to it, to keep them safe at home. after all, home is the best place to be. right at home, navigating what's to come. ♪

your happy place. navigating what's to come. find your breaking point. then break it. every emergen-c gives you a potent blend of nutrients so you can emerge your best with emergen-c. loves me not. new neutrogena® skin balancing! 3 made-for-you formulas with 2% pha exfoliate and condition for soft, balanced skin.

find the one. neutrogena® so, what will the last 11 days of the trump presidency look like? after wednesday's insurrection at the capital talks of impeachment and invoking the 25th amendment are seriously being considered. house democrats are currently planning to introduce articles of impeachment against president trump as soon as monday. making it possible for a house vote to take place early to midnext week. the latest version including one article, incitement of insurrection, with more support of impeachment this time than last. with 131 co-sponsors thus far. this comes after house speaker nancy pelosi told her caucus on friday afternoon that she prefers trump resign or the 25th amendment be invoked, also making it clear if neither happens, the house will impeach. on friday, the president

announced he did not intend to attend joe biden inauguration. joining me to game this out, the remaining days that is elaine kaymark author of two books, american politics, everything you need to know about how america nominates its presidential candidates and how presidents fail and can succeed again. what poses the greatest threat to the presidency, impeachment or the 25th amendment? >> well, i think impeachment does, because the 25th amendment amendment has to be initiated by vice president pence and members of the cabinet. and there's no indication so far that any of them are going to go that route. so, i think -- i think the 25th amendment is pretty much off the table. impeachment poses a different threat. the house can easily get it done next week. the problem is the senate isn't

scheduled to come back into office until january 19th, the day before the inauguration. so, you know, maybe they could have a trial at 9:00 on the morning of january 20th. and have a vote. but this is awfully fast to get a trial. so, it's not clear that even if the house impeached, it's not clear that the senate could convict. and there's also a question of what good does it do to convict somebody who, at 11:30 on january 20th who is out of office at 12:01 on january 20th. so, that's really -- that's really the problem here. and i think -- >> okay. >> i think they're looking at other things to do. >> i was going to say, i think an additional issue is whether you can impeach a president after he/she has left office. interestingly the fact checker in "the washington post" wrote a

different article on this, the legal community seems to be unresolved. i want to ask you about something else, president-elect joe biden, and that is do democrats really want this to be the issue, precisely at the time when they're trying to turn a page and launch a new administration? >> that's a really good point. you know, one theory says that if the trial is sort of pending or hasn't opened yet in the senate on january 19th, that then it will fall to biden and the democratic senate, because kamala harris will have the swing vote there to conduct a trial. i'm not sure that joe biden really wants to do that. i'm not sure he wants to start his administration when there's so many other pressing things like getting vaccines into the arms of americans, then, you know, worry ing about an impeachment trial. if i were joe biden i wouldn't be wild about that option. >> dr. kamarck, that tweet of

the president. and i should have given up long ago trying to read this mind, but the one where he buys into -- kathryn, but that up -- where he buys into the peaceful transfer of power saying i'm not going to the inauguration. i interpreted that to say i'm not going to the inauguration. i'm going to be quiet now. put my tail between knew lmy le the next 11 days. i know, people are laughing. it seemed to be an over to the ride out his fintime. you get the final word? >> yes, that, too. as one commentator on cnn noted last night, it was like a hostage talking. because he didn't seem to have his heart in it. i think there's another issue for the congress which is getting through the next 11 days without the president doing something extremely dangerous. it's mostly in foreign policy. because domestic policy, you need a lot of actors to enact.

so i think there are other issues on the minds of the congress which is, how can we make sure that this guy who is clearly unhinged, or a lot unhinged, how can we make sure that in the next 11 days he does not do something that is dangerous to the nation? and so there, i think, is another avenue which hasn't gotten a lot of attention. what kinds of constraints can they put on his power, so that he doesn't stem thepend these l days wreaking havoc somewhere in the world. we know that nancy pelosi spoke to milley, the joint chief of >> doctor, that was excellent. thanks so much. >> thank you. >> checking in on social media, twitter and facebook, pelosi's talk of impeachment at this late

date serves no purpose other than to incite the opposition. i think the real purpose is to preclude them from running in 2024. that's what i think it's about. the question that i raised with dr. kamarck, is it really fair to joe biden? it's his turn, right? he wants that page appropriately turned on the 20th, and if the senate comes back on the 18th or 19th and now they're taking up an impeachment trial that would spill obviously into the first few days of the biden administration, is that really fair to joe biden? my hunch is that he would want his own fresh start and enough allowing trump to dominate the news. still to come, your best and worst tweets and facebook comments and we'll give you the final results of the survey question. here it is, just talking about it, on january 20th, will the gop remain the party of trump? go to smerconish.com and vote.

enjoying freshly squeezed orange juice. now no fruit is forbidden. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn?

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ anywhere convenience. everyday security. bankers here to help. for wherever you want to go. chase. make more of what's yours. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. what if i sleep hot? or cold? no problem, with temperature balancing you can sleep better together. don't miss our weekend special. save up to $1000 on new sleep number 360 smart beds. plus 0% interest for 48 months. ends monday.

will you look at that? we have never recorded so many votes. like 48,000 people, after january 20, will the gop remain the party of trump? 60% say no. quickly, one more, catherine, if i've got time. wow, what voting. unbelievable. people who need to hear you, my parents are unfortunately watching fox news and i mean absorbing. guess what? tweet to them the commentary that i delivered at the outset of the program. i'll see you next week. keeping your oysters business growing

has you swamped. you need to hire. i need indeed indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a resume data base claim your seventy-five-dollar credit when you post your first job at indeed.com/promo who takes care of yourself. so why wait to screen for colon cancer? because when caught in early stages, it's more treatable. i'm cologuard. i'm noninvasive and detect altered dna in your stool to find 92% of colon cancers even in early stages. tell me more. it's for people 45 plus at average risk for colon cancer, not high risk.

false positive and negative results may occur. ask your prescriber or an online prescriber if cologuard is right for you. i'll get on it! that's a step in the right direction.

>> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. >> hello, everyone. thank you so much for joining me this saturday. i'm fredricka whitfield. we have breaking news just into cnn, new arrests in the capitol hill riot. cnn's senior justice correspondent evan perez is here with more. what do you know? >> reporter: good morning. we have another arrest. it's basically become a national roundup of some of these people that have been seen on social media pictures who invaded the capitol. the latest arrest, his name is adam johnson. he was picked up in his home