china, one on the uk. >> okay. >> china, mentioned about competition and president biden's hsr campbell saying he hopes for a stable computation, saying what the kwwhite house i looking for and you just mentioned about a comprehensive strategy. what can we expect of him? >> i appreciate all the questions and i don't have a preview when we will have more specifics on our strategy. i've tried to convey overarching, the president's overarching approach. again, this is a relationship that we are going to be communicating with and working with partners and allies on. there are a number of calls that will happen over the coming weeks with key partners and allies and sure this will be a topic of discussion as well as democrats and republicans on the hill, and we are going to approach it with patience.

>> and on the uk, we now over the weekend, president biden had phone call with prime minister boris johnson, and mr. johnson say they talk about the free trade deal. however, the white house redon't see that. does the president support the free trade deal with the uk? >> i haven't talked to him or jake sullivan about that. i'll venture to do that and see if i can get more for you on it. thanks, everyone. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. all right. i want to bring david chalian and gloria borger back in to talk about the white house briefing we just witnessed. a few headlines. learned there will be coronavirus briefings, returning and expecting about three a week. so that's significant. something a lot of people were b relying on when the trump administration was doing them until they turned out to be

inaccurate. we expect these to be accurate and a march deadline for the covid relief deal and psaki admitting the administration doesn't have a handle how many vaccines is available in the u.s., a big deal, and right now the treasury, an aside one, but the treasury is looking to speed up harriet tubman on the dollar bill after stalled in the trump presidency. gloria, what stood you? start with you? >> all stood out plus one more which is on the covid relief package itself. i think jen psaki hinted willing to use the budget route. you know what that means having covered the hill a while. that means they may end up going the route just needing majority of votes rather than a 60-vote margin and talking to democrats and republicans, and seems clear to me they believe this is a very urgent matter. lots of it needs to get passed. they're not talking about dividing it up. she said they don't expect to get everything they want. this is how the process should

work, she said, but it's clear to me that they are willing to use the budget as a way to get this package passed by march. >> and what was interesting about that, david, was, she was saying it's this type of tactic, budget reconciliation, doesn't mean that republicans can't vote for it, but the point is, it's a simple majority threshold rather than a 60 vote threshold and means the democrats can go, david, without requiring republican support. it means they don't need republicans to vote on it. it is significant. >> yeah. it moves the goal posts, right? something that can get done with democrats only, versus something, or an approach where you will be required to get some republicans onboard. i thought also interesting, though, when jen was pressed on, what does unity mean? heard a theme in the inaugural. heard biden talk about a notion of unity. what are benchmarks for the american people to sort of use and that the administration is

using for itself to determine the success that biden is having on this sort of unifying project in america? one of the things jen said, bipartisanship is a piece of that. approaching legislative proposals through a bipartisan lens is a piece of that project, why joe biden going into this prefers to attempt a bipartisan bill here, rather than just from the outset say, we're setting this up that we can go democrats alone. that's why you haven't seen a full embrace of that just yet, but you can hear from a lot of democrats on the hill patience running thin how long they're going to sort of let the administration just put out this idea they can get folks onboard. brianna, i want to note. what you said about the cdc and whether or not they know what sort of the quantity is of how many vaccines exist, where we are. i really do think the biden administration, there's only so much time that you can say it's

day five, or day 12, or day 15, and we're getting arms around this. on wednesday, when those health care professionals come before cameras and answer questions about this, they're going to be hard-pressed no the to have their arms around exactly what is the vaccine situation? what is the quantity? i just don't think you can go much further in the aed min stmin -- administration with, we're still getting our arms around this. and kaitlan collins, this is the question, perhaps, most pernt nan pertinent to lives of americans which is how many vaccine is available in the u.s.? you heard david chalian they can only get away with that answer for so long. >> reporter: i think they're aware of that. trying to see what the state of the vaccine and supplies were. several officials were

disappointed what they were left with. it's raising questions. gus pardon a started with the trump administration and is still around. yesterday cdc said she doesn't no and can't tell state and local officials. that's critical information what exactly they should expect. that is something we'll follow-up with the white house on to find out exactly what that looks like. it's complicated if you speak with health officials in this administration and the last one finding out what that number is, because some is shipped. some distributed's some injected. a lot to get your arms around. still, a ballpark figure of clarity is what officials will be looking for. so i think that's one notable aspect. another is she says that president biden is not going to be attending every single covid task force meeting but expects he will be briefed far more regularly than president trump was. of course, we know as we got

several months into the pandemic, president trump was often not being briefed by people like dr. fauci and others but instead by officials like dr. scott at llas brought in in special position and be dr. birx being critical of the data the last president was getting. we've watch, but they will be bringing back briefings with health officials, being able to update us on what's going on with the task force. david is right. getting more clarity starting wednesday. updates on what the pandemic situation is looking like and how much covid vaccine there heal is in the federal government's stockpile. >> gloria, odd that president trump at the time was a part of those kind of day-to-day briefings so much. clearly wanted the visibility. maybe no surprise bd bien's goi togoing -- biden's going to do that. the bar isn't that high for how well this briefing will need to

go, but eventually, you know, the biden administration is going to have to stand on its own merits when it comes to its response? >> this is the first test, as we've all said, early days of the administration. she said clearly, we are eyes wide open with knowledge. we were not walking into a circumstance when a concrete plan was handed to us. we understand that. what she's saying is, look. we're starting from scratch on planning and figuring out how we can get these vaccines into the arms of people. but the president has said he will move heaven and earth to get those vaccines into people's arms, and that is the way early on people will judge him, and i think he understands that. i think jen psaki understands that. i think his new white house chief of staff ron klain understands that, that people want to get back to life. and that vaccines are a huge part of it and they've got to figure this out, and do it on a very short timeline.

>> yes, they do. all right. thank you, everyone, for that. kaitlan, great questions. thanks for being with us. following breaking news from the justice department. inspector general is launching an investigation into whether any doj official tried to interfere with the outcome of the presidential election. cnn chief national affairs correspondent jeff zeleny is with us now. what are they looking for exactly, jeff? >> reporter: really extraordinary behind-the-scenes meetings taking place between top official at the justice department and the president himself. we did not know this at the time really in the final days leading up to the certification of the electoral college vote but reporting over the weekend in the "new york times" and "wall street journal" is shining a light on what will be investigated. jeffrey clark head of the civil division at the time department of justice was back-channeling with president trump. having a meeting at the white house talking about ways the justice definite could intervene

in the final hours of the last gasp of the president's race. the second inspector general's report, investigation that's going on into the election. n now, this matters now, because, of course, impeachment trial is just getting under way in the next two weeks or so. anything the department of justice inspector general will has the freedom to weigh in and look into bizarre meetings that almost led to a saturday night massacre at the department of justice when all of these top officials in the department were threatening to resign if jeffrey rosen, the acting attorney general, would have been dismissed by the president. >> and you mentioned the house will deliver the single article of impeachment to the senate. what pressure at this point in time does what we're seeing at

the doj put on republicans? any? would this change any minds looking to whether to convict or not? >> brianna, hard to imagine really any other information that could come forward that is not already on the minds of these republican senators. they're going to be jurors, know what the president said, saw all of this with their own eyes. the reality is, at least as of now, shaping up as essentially a political vote. is there the stomach or will to convict the president? there are a lot of outside pressures happening on these republican senators. many simply just want to move on beyond the trump era. the question is, if they actually convict him he couldn't run for office again but it's very hard to imagine that 17 republican senators would come forward to vote to convict based on what we know now, even based on what we can imagine finding out. this is at the heart of the redefining, if you will, are the republican party. we saw really some shocking news earlier this morning on capitol

hill. senator rob portman, republican of ohio, really a long-standing, well-respected, i guess call him a moderate. a conservative saying i'm out. not running for re-election in 2023. one of three republicans not running for election, all impacting this entire discussion over the rebranding, if you will, of the trump republican party as we move beyond the trump era. is it still trump's republican party? as of now, absolutely it is. one of the reasons rob portman, senator from ohio says i'm out. no room here to do actual work. it's become too partisan. >> maybe the trump party but it's getting smaller, what we've seen. it's contracting as well. >> jeff zeleny, thank you for that. now the ten-figure attempt to crack down on conspiracy theories. election technology firm dominion voting firms is suing rudy guiliani for $1.3 billion

for defamation. dominion accuses president trump's attorney of constantly pushes baseless fallacies that pushed the "big lie" on election fraud. giuliani's lie, the lawsuit aless includes venezuela controls dominion and they stole votes. the loss to its reputation is immeasurable and ongoing as giuliani refuses to retract any of his false statements. >> he knew from the outset that the complaint alleges that there was no evidence that the election was rigged. and that's why even mr. giuliani didn't make those claims in court. but he made them on television. and online, where they would do maximum damage to dominion, but face minimal scrutiny. >> giuliani says he'll countersue saying "the amount being asked for is quite obviously intended to frighten people of feint heart and another act of intimidation by the hate-filled left wing to wipe out and censor exercise of

free speech as well as of abili of lawyers to defend their clients vigorously." white house counsel, key witness in the watergate investigations and co-wrote the book a "authoritarian nightmare: trump and his followers." i wonder what you think about rudy guiliani's defense there, saying it's a left-within attempt sort of to silence him? but this isn't the left wing. this is dominion voting systems? >> no. it's a very weak public response. he doesn't deny that he made any of these statements, because he can't. the complaint which is 107 pages of really all of his charges, false charges against dominion is imposing. i'm sure he wishes he hadn't said all of the things he had said, but now he's got to deal with it, and claiming it's a left-wing attack just doesn't work. >> so right now dominion is

suing rudy guiliani, they're suing sidney powell, another trump attorney. this is what the lawyer for dominion says if it's going to sue former president trump. >> we're certainly, we're not ruling anybody out. one of the things that you have seen from dominion, they're very careful, taking a very evidence-driven in both complaints filed, and looking at everybody. >> if they're suing giuliani, and they feel like they have grounds to do it, in your view, considering what trump said, would they have the grounds to sue trump? and if not, then, why not? >> it's possible that they could be, trump could be sued. there is a case from the nixon era called nixon versus fitzgerald. the supreme court ruled president doing official acts

has total immunity regardless what he says unless he does have egregious violation of the law in that act. but the question is, did trump defame or attack dominion in a way that's clearly outside of his official functions? campaigning would be outside of his official functions. so i'm sure -- i haven't seen a lot of the trump charges. i can no longer search his twitter feed. so that's not available to look at. but obviously, they're looking at trump, and there could be a basis for a lawsuit, yes. >> so i want to turn now to this story. the president reportedly trying to remove acting attorney general jeffrey rosen in order to put in place a justice official jeffrey clark will be to file lawsuits to overturn election results in speck states. the reason that this didn't happen is that then president trump would have faced the resignation of multiple senior

leaders at the justice department. just learning the inspector general for the justice department launched an investigation into this. upon finding this out, what did you think? >> well, i was delighted to see that michael horowitz had started, inspector general investigation. because it's extraordinary that a middle-level attorney at the department of justice was negotiating and dealing directly with the white house, and contrary to the policy of the department of justice. so there's going to be ramifications for this. now, mr. clark has not been terribly forthcoming, other than to deny some of the press accounts. so we don't really know what he did and when he did it or the full sequence. the pretty much all hearsay out there right now, but that will get sorted out, and as your earlier segment with jeff went on, this could influence the impeachment trial. it is evidence that shows the president's state of mind. his general effort to try to reverse the election.

his, we have the information about georgia. it's understandable why justice didn't do this. they really had no case to bring. he couldn't force them, the lawyers there, to file a suit they know would be thrown out by the supreme court, and maybe get the reprimand from the supreme court for even filing it. this was just nonsense that trump was pushing, but, again, it shows his desperate effort to try to reverse the election. >> and the politicization of the justice department for sure. >> yes. >> john dean, thank you so much for being with us. really appreciate your perspective. >> thanks, brianna. next, republican senator marko rubio calling the idea of a second impeachment trial for president trump stupid. the same man who once touted role of congress in holding people accountable, we will roll the tape on that. plus, the white house mentioned those covid variants. so we'll talk about what we're learning about how deadly they

are, and how one hospital is under quarantine because of a particular strain. when dehydration gets real... ♪ hey! that's mine. i'll buy you a pony. advanced hydration isn't just for kids. pedialyte helps you hydrate during recovery. hey frank, our worker's comp insurance is expiring, should we

just renew it? yeah, sure. hey there, small business owner. pie insurance here with some sweet advice to stop you from overpaying on worker's comp. try pie instead and save up to 30%. thirty percent? really? get a quote in 3 minutes at easyaspie.com. wow, that is easy. so, need another reminder? no, no no, i'm good. uh, yes please. oh. ho ho ho, yeah! need worker's comp insurance? get a quote in 3 minutes at easyaspie.com.

the republican party has long tried to claim it has monopoly on valuing law and order but when it comes to seeking accountability fob the siege on the capitol they're looking the other way instead. >> i think the trial is stupid. i think it's counterproductive. we already have a flaming fire in this country and it's like taking a bunch of gasoline and pouring it on top of the fire. >> florida senator marko rubio doesn't want to hear about an

impeachment trial. doesn't want to know what responsibility donald trump or his republican allies in congress bear for their roles in inciting the violence. on the symbol of american democracy would like to move on from the ins sir recollection that resulted in at least five deaths including at least one capitol police officer and injuries of many more officers who protected rubio and other lawmakers from the violent mob. move on, he says, for unity. but historically rubio has valued accountability insofar as its a political wep ton use against democrats. here's what he said about the attack in benghazi that killed four americans including two navy s.e.a.l.s and ambassador christopher stephens. an event that occurred while president obama was in the white house and hillary clinton was secretary. secretary of state. >> this is not about politics. about accountability. someone needs accountable and preventing it from happening in the future. not hurting anybody political but getting to the truth.

>> rubio's perspective changes more quickly than the weather on a florida afternoon. >> you know, some of them unfortunately adherence of conspiracy theories others caught up in the moment and the result a national embarrassment. >> caught up in the moment. that's what he says. prosecutors now charging some of these rioters with conspiracy saying these groups planned and plotted this, arrived dressed for war. many of whom said they came because the president told them to and it was only after that riot that rubio piped up to say that then vice president mike pence could not overturn the election. >> many of those in that mob were believers in a ridiculous conspiracy theory and others were lied to, lied to my politicians that were telling them that the vice president had the power to change the election results. >> but rubio fails to mention another group of politicians. those who stood idly by silent

in the days and weeks leading up to the breach. like him. he didn't publicly counter this lie until after whisked away to safety in the capitol. it was too late. can't contradict trump when the president told supporters he would win the presidency of mike pence who will come through for them. and reached out to the senator today. no response yet. had the "miami herald" contacted him for a reason why he had no comment. his office had no comment. marco rubio is not alone taking a pass on holding president trump accountable. he finds himself in the same place as republicans who voted to overturn the results of a democratic election like house republican leader kevin mccarthy. >> a vote to impeach would further divide this nation. a vote to impeach will further fan the flames of partisan division. >> understanding where kevin mccarthy stands at any one moment has been harder than traversing california's grapevine in the winter. he has swerved from lane to lane

and back again since the riot careening more clumsily than a runaway tractor trailer. remember, before the capitol siege he challenged the election of joe biden in the courts. in congress. and also on tv. he refused to acknowledge biden was president-elect until the riot when he realized the game had become real. >> the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. >> i don't believe he provoked it. listened to what he said at the rally. >> i also think everybody across the country has some responsibility. >> you do. and like rubio kevin mccarthy incessantly pushed benghazi investigations. unlike rubio said the quiet part out loud. not so much about accountability as politics. >> everybody thought hillary clinton was unbeatable. right? but we put together a benghazi special committee, a select committee, what are her numbers

today? her numbers are dropping. why? because she's untrustable. but no one would have known any of that had happened had we not -- >> i agree. >> that was a whoopsie daisy and mccarthy admitted as much. >> well, that wasn't helpful. [ laughter ] yeah. i mean -- i -- i -- i could have said it much better but this -- benghazi committee was only created for one purpose. to find the truth on behalf of the families for the four dead americans. >> he values finding the truth on behalf of the families of dead americans, unless it isn't politically prudent for him. struggling to figure out what is politically prudent for him. and then there's lindsey graham. >> you talk about unifying the country. if you do not stand up against the impeachment of president trump after he leaves office, you're an incredibly weak figure in american history. >> so it's weak, he says, to pursue accountability for an

attack on u.s. soil at the u.s. capital? against a congress certifying outcome of a democratic presidential election? weak, says lindsey graham, usually a hawk, all for congress holding people to account after an attack on a u.s. compound not too long ago. >> i've considered this a major national security failure that you could see coming, that no one's been held accountable for and yet to have accountability you have to have information. why can't we talk to the people who were attacked and hear from them what happened in ben gauze ji if that's too much for congress to ask, god help us all, and in this reluctance and unwillingness an refuse toll allow the congress to talk to the people who are on the ground during the attack will not stand. and we're asking something that's reasonable. and we're demanding action.

not because we're republicans, but because the nation needs to know. needs to know how these people died. what the administration actually knew and were they misled by the administration eight weeks before an election? >> he said if it's too much to congress for ask for accountability, god help us all. well, this all has nothing to do with accountability and it is weak to pretend it does. next, new details about one of the rioters accuses of attacking police in the capitol riots. his own brother is a secret service agent who used to protect michelle obama. plus, dr. deborah birx, a former member of the white house coronavirus task force becomes the latest trump official trying to change the narrative about her role in the disastrous pandemic response. see how her story has changed.

did you know you can go to libertymutual.com to customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need? really? i didn't-- aah! ok. i'm on vibrate. aaah! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

new evidence suggests the uk variant of coronavirus may have a higher death rate than other variants, and it's also easier to spread. that has u.s. health officials on alert. in an interview this morning the president's chief medical adviser dr. anthony fauci talked about the data. >> when they looked at it it did not look at on a case-by-case basis that is was actually more virulent is the word used namely more likely to make you seriously ill or kill you. when they went andular and look became conventioned it is in fact a bit more virulent namely

making it more difficult when you get to the point of serious disease and even death. so i believe they're data. i haven't seen all of it but from what i heard, i believe the data. >> an associate doctor of medicine and contributing medical editor of "health" magazine. doctor, great to see you. we see moderna today announced their covid-19 vaccine is expected to protect people against the new variants. i know that is very much top of mind for so many people. how hopeful are you that these new variants can be kept under control? >> well, i mean, it's certainly somewhat distressing news, what we just heard this morning, actually in fact the british variant may be more deadly or cause more serious disease. a few weeks ago we were not hearing that. now more hopes are resting on the vaccines in ability to prevent the prior variants but these new ones as well. moderna said a good news/bad

news story offered protection g south african but not as it does for the other variant. there's a difference there. talking about actually developing a booster vaccine or a different vaccine to actually deal more effectively with the south african variant. this is adding another layer of complication to this whole vaccine story and much as i usually love to be optimistic as you know, brianna, i think this is something we have to look carefully at and deal with kind of on a case-by-case basis. talking about two variants right now. there are some others and more may develop in the future. good news is the vaccine companies, the pharma companies, seem well-equipped to react in realtime in terms of develops new vaccines or variants of the vaccine to deal with potentially more deadly variants. >> what is a booster, then? say if you get a vaccine, and it doesn't have as much protection against the south african

variant or some other variant that could still be yet to come, how, then, do you supplement your protection that you have in the vaccine? >> great question. so if you think about it this way. talking about the regular, old covid-19. they developed a vaccine for that. normal variant. you have a a lot of protection against it. right? said 95% protection. those antibodies should last quite a long time. still don't know what but say it's a year and a half. looks like the south african variant year not going to development as much protection right off the bat. starting at a lower level, running out more quickly. might need a booster more quickly. six months to a year as opposed to other booster variants. meaning get yore vaccine specifically addressing that variant you didn't get protection for much before, so that you are at the higher level, so that you can be protected and not get sick. >> thank you so much. i mean, look, we're all just

getting used to this information. i know we have concerns, appreciate you alleviating the concerns and speaking with us, doctor. >> thank you. apology tours and reputation rejuvenation are quite en vogue now in the weigh of president trump's exit from the white house. that includes the curious case of dr. deborah birx, who appeared on cbs news. >> did you ever consider quitting? >> always. >> last march, birk began the pandemic buttering up president trump, even as he denied science. >> he's been so attentive to the scientific literature and the details and the data, and i think his, his ability to analyze and integrate data that comes out of his long history in business has really been a real benefit during these discussions about medical issues. >> turns out she was being very generous in her description there of trump as dr. birx made

clear sunday when she told "face the nation's" this? >> i wrote a daily brief went to senior leaders. >> did president trump read them? >> i don't know. i don't know. >> so while birx actually had a very large platform, she said early on trump was "attentive to the literature and data." now she says. >> i saw the president presenting graphs i never made. so -- i know that someone or someone out there or someone inside was creating a parallel set of data and graphics that were shown to the president. >> it's unclear how far along in the pandemic it was, but at some point she knew trump was looking at the data and telling us -- now -- when people were actually listening to what dr. birx said which she was speaking from the white house briefing room, from the podium, she initially

claimed trump was "so attemptive to the scientific literature and had the ability to analyze and integrate data." that's how she described him while he was describing coronavirus like this -- >> call it a germ, a flu, call it is virus. call it many different names. i'm not sure anybody even knows what it is. >> back in march she aided trump promoting a google site for testing nationwide, a google site we later learned did not exist. >> google has 1,700 engineering working on this right now. making tremendous progress. >> we want to also announce this new approach to testing. which will start in the screening website, up here. facilitated by google. >> that was bunk. 1,700 google engineers, no. google quickly knocked it down saying they weren't running a

project. a separate company was. it was a company that had 1,000 employees total, with a brand new project that was only in the stages of coming up with a pilot website to roll out any single city. >> to wake up this morning and see people creating dnr, do in the resuscitate situations for patients. there is no situation in the united states right now that warrants that kind of discussion. >> except there was. that discussion was happening in at least one hospital system. in michigan, for example, on that very day, henry ford health system confirmed a letter detailing life and death guidelines during the pandemic as a worst-case scenario and unfortunately has only expanded as the months have gone on. in los angeles, ambulance drivers told, only bring patients to hospitals who have a chance to live.

one of the most infamous moments involving birx is when the president decided to bring storm ways to treat coronavirus patients with unproven methods that would actually kill them. >> supposing we hit the body with ultraviolet or very powerful light. i think you said you've going to test it. i said supposing brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and i think you said you're going to test that, too. sounds interesting. right. and then i see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. one minute. and is there a way we can do something like that? by -- injection inside or -- or -- almost a cleaning. heat and the light relative to certain viruses, yes. but relative to this virus? >> that is a treatment.

certainly fever. >> yeah? >> is a good thing when you have a fever. it helps your body respond. but not as -- i've not seen heat or -- >> i think it's a good thing to look at. >> on birx's reputation rehab tour this is how she describes that moment. >> as i prepared for that, no. i wasn't prepared for that. i didn't even know what to do in that moment. >> sometimes people say, tony fauci, when that happened to him he would sort of gently come back up to the podium and set the record straight. >> well, he was given the opportunity to do that. >> you don't feel you were given the opportunity to respond? >> not until he turned to me and said, could this be a treatment, and i said, not a treatment. >> yeah. that was it. that was the opportunity to respond, to tell people not to ingest or inject bleach. it was as glaring as a blinking neon sign and she missed it, and after that moment, she defended

trump's musings on fox. >> he gets new information, he likes to talk that through out loud and really have that dialogue. so that's what dialogue he was having. i think he just saw the information at the time, immediately before the press conference, and he was still digesting that information. >> when asked by cnn's jake tapper he blamed the media for focusing on it essentially calling it old news. >> as a doctor, doesn't that bother you, you have to even spend any time discussing this? >> well, i think -- it bothers me this is still in the news, i worry we don't get the information to the american people that they need when we continue to bring up something that was from thursday night. i think the president made it clear that physician hs to study this. i think i've made it clear that this was a musing.

>> study what? study ingesting disinfectant into were the human body? her milk toast answers gave life to really bad advice from trump. and keep in mind, the cdc had to put out a warning on ingesting din infectants after a spike in calls to poison centers. later in june trump bucked all advice and held a rally in tulsa risks likes to see a big crowned chanting his name and he said this. >> so i said to my people, slow the testing down, please! >> but when asked if he had actually asked the administration to slow testing, birx backed the president up. >> no, he did not tell me that. and he's never told us that. i think he's very proud of what he's been able to bring to bear for testing. >> proud? of what? testing was a nightmare then and trump didn't have to tell them

not to test. he saaid it publicly and blamin the rise of cleveland on what? on testing. on the number of tests being done and did it over and over and over again. doctors believe that if we test more it will help us open the economy back up sooner. it eventually like most relationships with trump on the other end, birx' relationship turned sow. trump shunned her advice and started listening again instead to dr. scott atlas cherry picked from fox. no credentials once had a tweet removed questioning mask wearing as cases and the death toll rose and rose. around this time as trump tweeted birx was pathetic saying publicly the virus was spreading she started taking the truth on the road warning states the pandemic was out of control. >> why would you be sneaking around? you're the head of the covid task force and tens of thousands

of americans are dieing. why is that a covert operation? >> because this isn't working and you're not going to get that to work. you have to find another solution. >> except for many americans and their families, that solution came way too late. months too late. instead of saying it out loud birx went on a tour telling officials privately what they weren't hearing from the president. and as reporters like maggie haberman note she wasn't really interested in speaking with reporters. >> i always feel like i could have done more, been more outspoken. maybe been more outspoken publicly. i didn't know all the consequences of all of these issues. >> so why didn't she? there is a pattern of miscalculation in many of trump's orbit have made. trying to stay in good greatses in public acting like a

guardrail. perhaps with the doctor it was that, working alongside the president in private and affecting policy in the inside that kept her quiet? >> you did the -- >> exposure. >> i had very little exposure to president trump. >> all right. never mind that theory. whatever reason dr. birx had for going along with misinformation, only she really knows. her explanations are weak, woefully insufficient, an insult after more than 400 it,000 americans died. to scientists, birx is a cautionary tale about letting politics and power warp science until it is no longer science. that a doctor can spend 40 years building a reputation that garners respect being a champion of science and serving others, but if they don't stand up for science when it counts, when lives are on the line, their reputation can be wiped away. all it takes is a little bleach and in her case a small ray of sunlight.

next, a secret service agent who once protected michelle obama now learned his own brother was part of the mob that attacked the capitol. .

. cnn has learned that one of the accused capitol rioters is the brother of a secret service agent who once led the detail for former first lady michelle obama. preston fairlam is the secret service agent and his brother is facing five charges that his brother was unaware of, his alleged actions during the capitol riots. what more can you tell us about the charges against scott fairlamb and what his brother is saying about it >> reporter: it's a very weird change of events and really strange story and layer. we know that more than 100 people have been charged, scott

fairlamb facing charges for assaulting a police officer. we now know that police officer is one of at least 65 people within the metropolitan police department who was injured, and, again, what makes his case so much stranger is that his brother, as you said, is a member of the secret service. we haven't heard from his brother directly although scott fairlamb's attorney says that his brother had no knowledge of his alleged actions that day, but we're piecing this a little bit together through the former first lady's own memoirs. she writes about preston fairlamb really very glowingly in her memoir saying all of us grew close to our agents over time. preston fairlamb led my detail then. she also goes on to say none of us ever stepped outside of the bubble. the bubble moved with each of us individually. again, this is just one of a long list of people who are being charged with assaulting police officers. it's so much stranger because you might think someone who has a family member in law enforcement might have taken another route that day, would be on another side of this, but it just goes to show one of the

main themes that we've seen throughout reporting on these prosecutions is you just don't know who is in the crowd that day. brianna. >> yeah. that's a very good point. thank you so much for that report. and we're following breaking news that the justice department watchdog is now investigating whether anyone at the department tried to help overturn the election. plus, resistance is forming among some republicans to president biden's covid relief package. details on what's behind that next.

do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy, even a term policy, for an immediate cash payment. call coventry direct to learn more. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized that we needed a way to supplement our income. our friends sold their policy to help pay for their medical bills and that got me thinking. maybe selling our policy could help with our retirement. i'm skeptical, so i did some research and called coventry direct. they explained life insurance is a valuable asset that can be sold. we learned that we can sell all of our policy or keep part of it with

no future payments, who knew? we sold our policy. now we can relax and enjoy our retirement as we had planned. if you have one hundred thousand dollars or more of life insurance you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit conventrydirect.com to find out if you policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.

hi there. you're watching cnn on this

monday. i'm brooke baldwin. thanks for being with me. this hour president biden will sign another executive order. if you are keeping track, he has signed more than 30 thus far in his first five days in office. this one today is aimed at strengthening the government's rules to buy american products, but over on capitol hill you have two battles unfolding that could really set the tone for the president's relationships with republicans in his first 100 days in office. this evening the house is set to deliver the article of impeachment against former president donald trump to the senate. trump's second impeachment trial is scheduled to start in just two weeks but the number of republican senators opposing that trial is growing, as is the number of moderate republicans pushing back against president biden's stimulus plan, the $1.9 trillion on the line for americans struggling financially during this pandemic. >> the president himself has conveyed the urgency of moving this package forward, and that's