kisqali is a pill that's significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant alone. kisqali can cause lung problems, or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious skin reactions, liver problems, and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain, a change in your heartbeat, dizziness, yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills or other symptoms of an infection, a severe or worsening rash, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding. avoid grapefruit during treatment. ask your doctor about living longer with kisqali.

the party returns to times square after the pared back celebration because of covid. the mayor announced a full-strength crowd will be allowed in. the outgoing mayor says hundreds of thousands will be allowed to see the ball drop with proof of vaccination and a valid i.d. if you don't want to drive the crowds, you can join me and andy cohen on cnn. let's hand it over to chris for "cuomo prime time." >> it's not new year's without anderson and andy, everyone knows that.

i'm chris cuomo. welcome to primetime. we saw something in the rittenhouse murder trial in wisconsin that you don't see very often inside a courtroom. a defendant seating the jury who will decide their fate. kyle rittenhouse had a ralph drum placed in front of him, like some bingo or lottery or something like that, and he pulled out slips of paper at random to whittle down the jury panel from 18 to 12. you get six alternates on standby just in case. the jury obviously 12. the final makeup, five men, seven women, 11 white, one person of color. day one now of their deliberations has ended. and there is no answer to whether they find the defendant guilty of murder and attempted murder or whether the defendant convinced them that he reasonably believed he was facing imminent serious injury or death that night. and was, therefore, justified in

august of 2020. the prosecution's argument, this defendant was a 17-year-old yahoo who came looking to start trouble, armed, actually provoked the people who wound up chasing him. >> when the defendant provocation the incident, he loses the right to self-defense. you cannot claim defense against a danger you create. >> will the jury believe that? let's say they don't. even if the jury determines rittenhouse did not provoke the first fatal shooting, they must still go through a specific analysis. did he act reasonably shooting and killing two unarmed men and injuring a third badly who came at him armed saying he believed the defendant to be an active shooter? defense counsel had no pity for the dead, actually saying that he is glad the defendant killed. >> kyle shot joseph rosenbaum to stop a threat to his person, and

i'm glad he shot him because if joseph rosenbaum got the gun, i don't for a minute believe he wouldn't have used it against something else. >> what a thing to say. but did it resonate with the jury? just one of them to bolster that self-defense argument. is rittenhouse a victim or a vigilante here? how hard is this case for the jury 30, something pages of instructions, all of these political overtones. we got great guests for you. one very rare. let's ask somebody these questions who just did their due to of service in a jury in that case against the police officer derek chauvin who murdered george floyd. we're going to welcome brandon mitchell tonight. and we're going to answer the key legal questions with mark o'mara, he defended george zimmerman in the trayvon case. take us inside the room for your

experience. everybody is aware, everyone's watching. this is heavy. there's a lot of political overtones. there's a huge set of instructions. one day in, what was it like in that room? >> i think the first day is always about all the jurors getting their thoughts out. they've held all this information in for the entire trial. they haven't been able to talk about it or tell anybody about it. now it's their chance to go over the points they thought were key, the evidence that they thought was key, and just get their thoughts out. i'm pretty sure they spent most of today going over what they thought of all the evidence, what they thought of rittenhouse taking the stand and the defense and prosecution's case. >> that takes that long to hear everybody vent where they are and where they're not. and then do you remember with your situation, the instructions, were the instructions an issue?

>> the instructions are tough a little bit. i think with our case, with the chauvin case, the judge did a great job of telling us what to follow and how to follow it. their instructions for this rittenhouse case is a lot more in-depth, there's a lot more charges. the language is a little bit different. i think that might be a hiccup for them. it's going to take them time to go over it and really come to a conclusive idea of what it is they're being asked because there's so much more information. but that's definitely a discussion in itself is how to interpret each one of those counts of whatever they're going for. >> how hard is it for regular people to put themselves into a situation of figuring out whether it was okay to kill someone? in wisconsin, the specific law at play is you have to say not would brandon or chris do it, but was it reasonable for this 17-year-old to do it? how hard is that for regular

people? >> i think it's extremely difficult just because it's not -- it's not a normal thing. it's not something your average person is going to do on day-to-day basis. they have to think about the situation, the scenario, the mind-set. there's so much to think about and to break it down as an average person is a tough task. it's a really tough task and that's why it takes 12 jurors to kind of talk about it and come to a conclusion amongst each other because if it's just one person -- everyone has different biases, thoughts, and views on everything in life, but together they can come together with the right choice. >> a mark omara, do you think that rittenhouse being on the stand gave at least one juror reasonable belief that this kid was scared and he had the gun and they were going to try to kill him and it made sense that he did what he did? >> i think he did a good job of presenting his case, the crying i thought was pre-tense myself, but he came across well to the jury. self-defense, you have to almost put the defendant on the stand

because he or she is the one who's got to say i acted reasonably and i was afraid and i was in fear of grate bodily injury that was imminent, all those catch phrases that can't come from the evidence in most cases and have to come from this witness. at 18, a young witness, i thought he did a good job of presenting his case and he was well-prepared and coached. >> are you surprised in a jury -- that they didn't sequester the jury and what difference could that make? >> i think we're in the day and age that any jury, particularly in that case of any magnitude like this, any publicity that's out there, has to be sequestered. it's an inconvenience, but the system has to be trusted. here's the problem, chris. back when i started, it was the newspaper. stay away from the newspaper. now social media and the internet just invades every moment of our life, and i'm very afraid that these jurors intentionally or not were infected by nonrelevant information that got to them

from a buddy, a friend, a tweet, a facebook page, anything that they may have looked at to pass the time since they're so used to it, and it could really invade the jury and really undermine the verdict. >> brandon, what was your experience with people bringing things into the room from outside? not physically, i mean ideas. >> right. yeah. i mean, for us, we took it pretty seriously. we pretty much stayed away from the media as we were supposed to and away from social media as much as possible, but like he just said, people have habits of checking their instagram or facebook or whatever. but in the derek chauvin case, we took it serious to not check those things because it would be too easy to bring something in from the outside. when we went into deliberations, we didn't bring any of that in.

>> how does it work in your experience -- because these are hot-button issues, right? are you pro-police, are you anti-police, what you thought of george floyd in your case. it's going to be a similar analysis here, why this kid went there, what it was about for him, and the people who were there helping out in the protests. how does it work in terms of people voicing those opinions even if they don't really go along with the facts and law in the case? what was the vibe like in your room in dealing with those types of things? >> i think you can feel the energy that somebody's giving based on their reasoning as they're going through why they think he should be guilty or not guilty. you start to get a vibe and the energy they're giving off as to what their political beliefs may be or whichever side of the fence you may say they're on

just by how passionate they are with describing certain parts of the evidence and certain parts of the testimony. you'll 100% get the vibe and feel the energy and you'll understand where they are with that. >> did you have any holdouts? >> even if they don't say it directly. >> did you have any holdouts, somebody who was -- one or two people separate from everybody else? >> yeah, absolutely. i mean, we definitely had a couple people that were -- they had different viewpoints for a period of time. as those viewpoints were voiced, we had to think of different ways to describe the scenario and different ways to go over the evidence to get everybody on the same page. that's where the discussion really comes in. if you have somebody with an opposing view and you're going over the evidence -- you're going over the testimonies again and you're breaking them down in different ways and different formats to help this person understand in a different manner. >> brandon, would this be an easy decision for you this case? >> this one is a tough one just

because there are a lot more nuances. i think with the chauvin case, the prosecution did a really great job. with this case, i don't think they did as good a job as the chauvin prosecutors, so i think there's going to be a lot more to go over. i think there's going to be more conversations that are a little bit combative within the deliberation room. >> what do you think the decision is? >> i think he's guilty of first degree intentional murder. >> you think he provoked the situation? >> absolutely. >> mark omara, you're shaking your head. you think this jury can find they don't believe that? >> they're going to have a tough time convicting a 17-year-old at the time of the event for what he seemed to be doing. he definitely put himself in a bad situation. the provocation is a lot more difficult to argue in this case than you might argue in the ahmaud arbery case or something like that.

they may give him a lesser included. so i see lesser included. we might see a hung jury because it is so divisive and it really is polarizing as to whether or not using a gun in that set of circumstances was justified because somebody was coming at you, or you're not supposed to bring a gun to a fistfight. that's going to be the argument. >> mark omara, thank you very much. brandon mitchell, i got to tell you something. this was really helpful. thank you for doing your duty in your trial. appreciate you. be well. >> absolutely. we got another big trial nearing an end. the defense is about to make its closing arguments for the three white men charged with murdering ahmaud arbery, the black man jogging where they lived, remember? now, one of the most important moments in terms of all the feelings surrounding it came today, but few caught it. i'll show it to you with a great legal mind. there he is, come on in, next.

your skin isn't just skin, it's a beautiful reflection of everything you've been through. that's why dove renews your skin's ceramides and strengthens it against dryness for softer,

smoother skin you can lovingly embrace. renew the love for your skin with dove body wash. as a dj, i know all about customization. that's why i love liberty mutual. they customize my car insurance, so i only pay for what i need. how about a throwback? ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ do you take aspirin? plain aspirin could be hurting your stomach. new vazalore is the first liquid-filled aspirin capsule clinically shown to cause fewer ulcers than plain aspirin. vazalore is designed to help protect... releasing aspirin after it leaves your stomach... where it is absorbed to give you the benefits of life saving aspirin... to help prevent another heart attack or stroke. heart protection with your stomach in mind. try new liquid-filled vazalore. aspirin made amazing!

kevin! kevin? kevin. oh nice. kevin, where are you? kevin?!?!? hey, what's going on? i'm right here! i was busy cashbacking for the holidays with chase freedom unlimited. i'm gonna cashback on a gingerbread house! oooh, it's got little people inside! and a snowglobe. oh, i wished i lived in there. you know i can't believe you lost another kevin. it's a holiday tradition! that it is! earn big time with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. ♪ my songs know what you did in the dark ♪ ♪ so light 'em up, up, up light 'em up, up, up ♪ ♪ light 'em up, up, up ♪ ♪ i'm on fire ♪ ♪ so light 'em up, up, up light 'em... ♪ ♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪

you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on your discover card. sustainability is essential to creating a better tomorrow. that's why cisco is committed to achieving net zero emissions by 2040. and we believe our smart buildings solutions can help. providing power to reduce emissions, intelligence to eliminate waste, and collaboration tools that help the workplace and the planet. between meeting human needs and a sustainable future, there's a bridge. cisco, the bridge to possible. ok, let's talk about those changes to your financial plan. bill, mary? hey... it's our former broker carl. carl, say hi to nina, our schwab financial consultant. hm... i know how difficult these calls can be. not with schwab. nina made it easier to set up our financial plan. we can check in on it anytime. it changes when our goals change. planning can't be that easy. actually, it can be, carl.

look forward to planning with schwab. schwab! ♪ day eight in the trial of three white men charged with murdering ahmaud arbery. the prosecution rested its case. i said in the tease that it's closing. no, i get it wrong. the prosecution rests the case. now the defense has the option, do you want to put on a case in chief? you don't have to. they say yes. now, there's a lot going on in this trial that doesn't have to do with just the facts and the law. obviously there are racial overtones here and there's a moment that must be called out, but not the one you were thinking of. kevin gough renew the efforts to limit the presence of black pastors in the courtroom like the reverend jesse jackson who sat alongside arbery's mother.

it's not first, he picked this fight. i know you've heard many criticize him and you've seen lots of civil rights activists saying how wrong this is. listen. >> if we're going to start a precedent starting yesterday we're going to bring high-profile members of the african-american community into the courtroom to sit with the family during the trial in the presence of the jury, i believe that's intimidating and it's an attempt to pressure -- could be, consciously or unconsciously an attempt to pressure or influence the jury. we don't want other black pastors or jesse jackie was in here earlier this week sitting with the victim's family trying to influence a jury in this case. if if a bunch of folks came in here with cornell sanders with white masks sitting in the back -- >> now, that's the moment that everybody's playing that stood out. this guy doesn't know the difference between al sharpton and jesse jackson? black pastors? like that's a thing? but that's not what stood out to

me. did you hear how the judge responded? he didn't just deny the request. listen to this. >> what we have now with individual members -- individuals coming into the courtroom, i will say that is directly in response, mr. gough, to statements you made, which i find reprehensible. the colonel sanders statement you made last week i would suggest may be something that has influenced what is going on here. you need to understand, everybody, that your words in this courtroom have an impact on a lot of what's going on. i'm not granting a mistrial at this point based on these arguments that are being made. >> that moment should be getting way more attention. why? look, we're not wrongly fixated on what is wrong, but when you go all in on the outrageous you may miss a remedy that's right

in front of you. the minority population in their allies must complain about injustice and prejudice. but who creates the change? the majority. that's who will create the change that we need. so why not focus on what was right here? that judge lampooned this lawyer for his ugly exclusion of black pastors. the colonel sanders comment as part of this absurd request is using it as a caricature of a southerner behind the times. this judge is proof of how change happens. he mocked it. not only are you wrong on the law, but you're just plain wrong. that's how you change culture, you change morays. if we reward what is done right, you'll see, you won't have to shout so loudly about what is wrong. i want to bring in criminal defense attorney joey jackson. always good to see you. now, we know what he's doing, this defense attorney. it's just stupid for him to be doing it because since when is it new to have supporters of a victim's family coming into a

courtroom? >> it's not new at all but it's troubling to hear statements like that. it reminds you of why we're in that trial to begin with. a person running down the street and this is what occurs. it's part of a larger mind-set. what makes you think that's okay? you're a person who studies the law. you're an attorney, and you're there for an educated person. but it's more than that. we know courtrooms are public accommodations. we know courtrooms are come one, come all. courtrooms are about the rights of an individual to have a public and fair trial. you're saying and minimizing and otherwise suggesting there's certain people that should be excluded from that? but we know something else. we know jurors are given specific instructions. what are they? you focus that case on the evidence before you. i don't care about who's sobbing in the gallery. i don't care who comes into the gallery. i don't care what's written in the press. i don't care what people tweet. i don't care what they put on facebook. if you are sworn to be a juror,

we know that you evaluate the case based on what you hear and see. and so for an attorney to be saying something like that and meaning it -- and let's remember you showed that clip from them, he renewed the same notion that, you know what? we deserve a mistrial because of the influence people have. no, i respect jurors more than that. i do not respect any person who is a member of the bar or otherwise who would engage in statements like that. no place for it. the fact that it's happening now is a disgrace. >> now, they're going to put on a case and it's going to be self-defense. it's going to be, listen, we wanted to stop this guy, we wanted to talk to him, he turned and came at me and he grabbed the gun and now it's no longer my gun, it's the gun and i had

to defend myself. how compelling on the facts? >> well, if you get there, all right? the prosecution has done a very good job at potentially not letting them get there. what do i mean, chris? i mean this. in order for you to avail yourself of self-defense, you have to now get the benefit of the citizen's arrest law. that's why the judge instructed the jury on burglary, for example. burglary with intent to steal, criminal trespass. why? because the jury has to conclude that a crime was committed in their presence, the three defendants, or that they had immediate knowledge of a crime, goes a step further, not only the crime, but it has to be a felony to implicate you chasing them. we're not there yet. we know the defense will put on a case if they choose and there will be closing arguments. but the jury before they get to argue self-defense, they have to get through the hurdle where the jurors are convinced that they otherwise were entitled to engage and interact with ahmaud arbery. >> that's why they can't argue traditional or perfect self-defense like in the rittenhouse case. >> correct.

>> because they provoked the situation clearly. >> that's absolutely right. in addition, you have the whole initial aggressor issue too. so the defense has a lot of hurdles. now, if they get to what you asked me, now potentially you can have an argument if you're the defense that it could have been the collective gun, right? but before you get to that argument of was it self-defense, was i in immediate fear, did i acts proportionately? let's see what the jury allows, we'll see. >> very understandable. thank you very much, appreciate you, joey jackson. we got big political news, a very familiar name, i think, is trying to become texas's next governor. former presidential candidate beto o'rourke is here fresh off his announcement. he's going to try to unseat republican greg abbott. a democrat in a deep red state, he's fought this fight before. what makes it different this time? there he is with his peeps, there he is with his peeps, next.mover,

club soda and a roll of paper towels. [sfx: doorbell rings] lifesaver! [blegh] you're weird, man. to each his own. bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ what can i du with less asthma? with dupixent, i can du more....beginners' yoga. namaste... ...surprise parties. aww, you guys. dupixent helps prevent asthma attacks... ...for 3!... ...so i can du more of the things i love. dupixent is not for sudden breathing problems. it's an add-on-treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma that can improve lung function

for better breathing in as little as two weeks. and can reduce, or even eliminate, oral steroids. and here's something important. dupixent can cause serious allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. get help right away if you have rash, shortness of breath, chest pain, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection, and don't change or stop your asthma treatments, including steroids, without talking to your doctor. are you ready to du more with less asthma? just ask your asthma specialist about dupixent.

beto o'rourke is running for governor of texas. you know him. ran for senate against ted cruz three years ago, came very close to winning. he had democrats dreaming of a purple lone star state. i don't think they've won statewide in texas, i think,

since ann richards in 1990. and then he ran for president two years ago. how he's launching his third campaign in as many years, mounting a challenge to republican governor greg abbott. starting out nine points behind the governor in the most recent poll, but what does a poll mean right now? let's bring in beto o'rourke to talk about why he can do it. beto o'rourke, thank you very much. appreciate you joining us. the good news for you, governor abbott sliding in approval ratings. put him up for the audience because i want to ask you why you think this is. 52%/28%, approve, disapprove. now he's upside down. why do you believe that is for you? >> it's because of people of texas, like those i'm with tonight in laredo, we want to focus on the things we can do together like creating great jobs, ensuring we have great schools and making common sense agreements on things we agree

on, like medicare. greg abbott has failed the people of texas, literally the power grid in the energy capital of north america failed the people of this state in february. millions were without power and hundreds, including an 11-year-old boy, died. he died in his sleep because greg abbott could not guarantee the most basic level of government for the people of texas. when you add to that the 72,000 who have lost their lives in his incompetent response to the covid crisis and the fact that he wouldn't allow local schools to require masks in the classroom, and as of september this state led the country in childhood covid deaths, then you understand why approximate the people of texas want a change. they want companies in their government. we want to put his politics behind us and get back to the future, the future that texas should own.

>> how do you deal with the voter who says you're on the wrong team. you democrats are crazy, and that's why in 2020 democrats had big floss hispanic texas regions because the party is out of step with the people of texas. texas has gotten more red, not less. how do you deal with that? >> i think when we see each other exclusively as democrats or republicans, or define each other by our ethnicity or race, when we focus on the things that divide us, we're never going to make progress, we're never going to win elections. but when we instead see ourselves as texans first and foremost and focus on the things that the people of texas want, like making sure that in our classrooms kids are getting a world-class education, they want that. and right now what we see is that 7 out of 10 kids in a fourth grade classroom cannot read at grade level in the state of texas. it might help if we paid

teachers in the state a real living wage so they don't work a second or third job so they can focus on their most important job, unlocking that lifelong love of learning in that child before them. that's not a republican issue. that's not a democratic issue. that is a texas value. and the folks in this state want us to get back to focusing on just those things. so that's how we bring people together. that's how we win. chris, it is the only way i could hope to serve everyone in the state is by bringing people together. that's why i'm here in laredo tonight with great people. >> how do you avoid what happened in virginia where the republican made the case of all talk of education, the kids have to read but it's about what they read also. and these democrats want to teach them that if you're white, you're a problem and that you have to apologize for everything that's happened and they're going to judge your kids? it worked in virginia on that

issue of education. how do you stop that from happening in texas because abbott is on the same page? >> first thing we need to make clear is we want every parent involved in their child's education. my wife amy and i are really involved in our high school son, our middle school daughter and elementary school son's education, meeting with teachers, showing up at school board meetings. i expect that of every texan. that produces a better education for those kids in our classrooms and it's another way of supporting those teachers who have the most important job that i can think of. but we also need to make sure that we're focused on the outcomes and the results. i could what's going on in those fourth grade classrooms right now. we also have a real challenge in graduation rates and the ability to get a post-secondary degree or certification, apprenticeship or bachelor's degree. those are the things to help you more in your life and give back to the state of texas. all of us as parents want that to help.

let's get past the culture war stuff and the divisive issues and get back to the basics of reading, math, making sure that we're good to one another and looking out for each other. that's the texas way. when the power grid failed and those in power failed all of us, we put our differences behind us, got together, and helped one another out. that's how we came through that crisis. that's how we'll meet these challenges before us. i have a lot of confidence in this state, very proud of texas. i know that we can do it. >> one thing's for sure, you guys came through the crisis, but you didn't fix the problem, so there's definitely work to be done down there. beto o'rourke, good luck. appreciate you coming on primetime. >> thank you, chris, appreciate it. [ cheers ] a vote is coming tomorrow in the house to censured republican paul gosar. why? because he posted that anime murder fantasy video depicting himself killing one of his

colleagues, swinging swords at president biden. is that really just a joke? is the only way this guy seems to like to joke. he's constantly threatening people in the other party. what should the consequence be? should he be stripped of a committee assignment? let's take it to someone on his side of the ale who says he's more in trouble with his own party for gosar is for doing the wrong thing. how is that possible? next. heartiness? yes! living life to the flavor-fullest? heck yes. panera. live your yes. now $1 delivery. as a dj, i know all about customization. that's why i love liberty mutual. they customize my car insurance, so i only pay for what i need. how about a throwback? ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪

[uplifting music playing] ♪ i had a dream that someday ♪ ♪ i would just fly, fly away ♪

is the only rule in the gop these days hate dems or else? why are their members being threatened just for voting to improve roads and bridges? meanwhile, marjorie taylor greene, the qanon creep is shrugging her shoulders. congressman tom emmer says it's the price of politics. quote, unfortunately in the world we're in right now, we all get death threats no matter what

the issue is. is that really just okay now? it's hard to find anyone an an "r" next to their name that will call out paul gosar for the tweet that is about to get him censured tomorrow. my guest's voters and constituents want him. congressman tom reed, thank you. >> good to be with you, chris. thank you. >> what does it mean to you that you've got more trouble in house than somebody who's putting up stupid cartoons, cutting off democrats' heads and going at the president with swords? >> well, obviously my vote for infrastructure was something that part of my party rejected and did not agree with. but i'm proud of that vote because i believed i was doing the best interest of my district, our state and our country. at the same time, i recognize that people are going to not

agree with that, but at the end of the day, i'm going to do what's right for the people of our district and of our state and make the call as i see it, as i'm representative of them, not of people in washington, d.c. >> what do you think is driving the people who are coming after you with all the ugly threats? >> i think there's a lot of misinformation. i think there's this thought process in washington, d.c., and politics today that to motivate folks you got to scare them, you have to instill fear. i'm of a different mind-set. i believe leadership means you govern, you have to get to "yes" to get things done for the american people. it's easy to vote "no" when it's very difficult to vote "yes" in this environment. and so i encourage my colleagues, you know what? it's time -- our problems in america is "r" so large that we need to solve problems rather than engage partisan politics 24/7 and that's what's driving a lot of the animus in the country today. >> engage my cynicism. as someone who grew up in politics, i look at your situation, i know you, we've

talked a number of times. why do you keep doing this right now? they're doing ugly things to your kids. they're constantly throwing bricks through the windows of your office. is it worth it? >> you know, i still believe in the institution of congress. i still believe in america. and it is worth it. it is worth it to roll up the sleeves and get something done for the american people like yesterday. i went to the white house, stood on the lawn with my colleagues on the democratic side and said, look, i'm going to try to send a message to those back home and to those young men and women in particular that congress can still work. and we have those moments just as recently as 24 hours ago. so i'm going to continue to try inspire leaders to step forward. >> isn't it just a one off the infrastructure bill? and your party is resolutely against working with democrats,

literally opposition is their position. isn't your party going in the opposite direction of what you say you should be doing? >> trying to influence the party from within as best i can, but i've always watched in the democratic party chris, with all due respect, there's this thing that the republicans are the enemy of the state. and that happens on both sides. i'm not going to point fingers on our side and i'm not going to point fingers on the other side for those members that are willing to set aside the extremism that is influencing both sides of the aisle. >> within your own party, what does it mean to you that there's either not much being said or there's some protection, subtle or not protection given to paul gosar? but guys like you have a target on their back? >> i understand it and it's frustrating, and i just try to express how i feel about it with my colleagues. i deal with it as i do with anything in my family in regards to the -- i'm the youngest of 12. how best we handled our differences, how best we handle our criticism of those in our

family is to go to them, look them in the eye and is, really? is this what you really want to do as an example not only for the family, but also for the nation and the state. and i think that resonates better and i would encourage all members of congress, do that. stand up, go talk to them eyeball to eyeball and look them in the eye and say, you know what? we can do better than this as members of congress. and that's what i've on. >> so if you've done that, how are you going to vote on the censure motion? >> i appreciate it. i got up in front of the conference today and condemned violence, recognized his mistake in regards to this video being put together and sent out. my hope is he reaffirms that tomorrow. if he does that, then i'm willing to give my fellow colleague an opportunity to reconcile himself. >> what if he doesn't show? >> we'll have to wait and see. but right now where i'm at with it, i talked to paul and expressed how i feel. and he did express it to the conference, and i give him credit for doing that. i might also point out democrats

claim the touchable self-righteousness on this issue. be careful who you're pointing the finger at because there's always three fingers pointing back on you. this is a pox on all of our houses and we must stand up in regards to our individual families to deal with these issues. >> congressman tom reed, appreciate you being on the show. >> chris, always good to be with you, thank you so much. >> stay safe. more subpoenas may be coming this week from the january 6th committee. as the panel weighs how to handle mark meadows' noncompliance, the lawyer for steve bannon who's charged with contempt of congress comes to cnn and makes a wild case for bannon's innocence. my next guest calls it a layer cake of bs and is about to deconstruct it. do you deconstruct a layer cake? we will, next. as someone who resembles someone else, i appreciate that liberty mutual knows everyone's unique. that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh, yeah. that's the spot.

only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ i strip on public transit. i strip with the guys. i strip all by myself. breathe right strips open your nose for relief

you can feel right away, helping you take in air more easily, day or night. why hide your skin if dupixent has your moderate-to-severe eczema, or atopic dermatitis under control? hide our skin? not us. because dupixent targets a root cause of eczema, it helps heal your skin from within, keeping you one step ahead of it. and for kids ages 6 and up, that means clearer skin, and noticeably less itch. hide my skin? not me. by helping to control eczema with dupixent, you can change how their skin looks and feels. and that's the kind of change you notice. hide my skin? not me. don't use if you're allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur, including anaphylaxis, which is severe. tell your doctor about new or worsening eye problems, such as eye pain or vision changes, or a parasitic infection. if you take asthma medicines, don't change or stop them without talking to your doctor. when you help heal your skin from within, you can show more with less eczema.

talk to your child's eczema specialist about dupixent, a breakthrough eczema treatment. ♪ baby got back by sir mix-a-lot ♪ unlimited cashback match... only from discover. i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... ...me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there for her. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is the #1 prescribed biologic for people with crohn's disease. humira helps people achieve remission that can last. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas

where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. learn how abbvie could help you save on humira. kevin! kevin? kevin. oh nice. kevin, where are you? kevin?!?!? hey, what's going on? i'm right here! i was busy cashbacking for the holidays with chase freedom unlimited. i'm gonna cashback on a gingerbread house! oooh, it's got little people inside! and a snowglobe. oh, i wished i lived in there. you know i can't believe you lost another kevin. it's a holiday tradition! that it is! earn big time with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. the steve bannon case matters because there are a lot

of trumpers trying to decide if they'll follow his lead, be a martyr, get a platform. chief among them the former president's chief of staff. during the insurrection, mark meadows, he was all over the place trying to spread stick. the january 6 committee is still trying to determine about what to do about his refusal to testify. he and his lawyers are following the bannon case, i promise you that. they'll wait to see whether these arguments hold up in court. bannon's lawyer david schoen was supposed to be on the show tonight to make that case directly to you. he bailed. but we got a sampling of his offerings on new day this morning, so we'll take you try it. let's take his case and give someone a chance to counter it. how about norm eisen. welcome back. good to have you. >> thanks for having me back, chris. >> now there is a main assumption in bannon's argument, which is this. a letter from the former president's lawyer to his

lawyers saying they intend to assert privilege and not to testify is enough. is it enough in form, first of all, meaning to them, and not to the committee and in substance? >> chris, the letter is not enough. bannon had an obligation to do what we see the former chief of staff mark meadows doing. you have to negotiate. you can't just rely on a paper by fiat. bannon is not the judge in his own case. and chris, you have to show up and take the questions one by one, like jeffrey clark, the lawyer from the justice department did. he refused to answer him, but at least he showed up. and chris, the letter has to make some sense. bannon wasn't a member of the executive. so executive privilege, which

bars information from being shared can't apply to him. many of the subject matters were about his podcast or his conversations with people who were not in the government. the whole thing is a lot of nonsense that schoen was peddling on "new day" today. >> why didn't congress litigate the issue with trump, get it out of the way. and then there is no good argument among any of the people they subpoenaed about whether or not they can come? >> chris, time is of the essence. we know that what president -- ex-president trump wants is to tie congress up in litigation knots, to lose a series of battles but win the war. we saw that in the litigation that we mounted against him as part of the first impeachment. on garbage privilege claims like this, there is no obligation to go to court. this is a subpoena. if you or i did not answer this subpoena, we would be in the

same boat. if we were subpoenaed to court and we didn't show up, they would send a marshall out for us. you can't defy the law this way. congress has no obligation to go to court. bannon should have shown up. >> how do you prove if you're merrick garland and co., et al, as we say, in latin, how do you prove the mens rea element of the statute that he willfully disobeyed the congressional subpoena if he says listen, i got this letter from the former president saying don't do it. i'm not willfully disobeying. i have to take this under advisement. >> well, you look at whether there is reason to believe that that's a lie. and in bannon's case, we know that is not a good faith argument because it makes no sense for him to be able to assert executive privilege. the guy is a podcaster. is there going to be a podcast privilege now? chris, if i didn't want to talk about a conversation we had to

get ready for the show, am i going to be able to assert the guest privilege? there is no such thing. so you can't claim something when it's so ludicrous. and more evidence of willfulness, outside of the fbi yesterday when he surrendered himself, he said "we're taking down the biden regime." okay. that his state of mind, not compliance, not good faith. defiance not compliance, chris. that won't cut it. he acted willfully. >> defiance, not compliance. when it rhymes, it's cogent. norm eisen, thank you very much. i appreciate you making the case. >> thanks, chris. >> all right. we'll be right back with the handoff. your skin isn't just skin, it's a beautiful reflection of everything you've been through. that's why dove renews your skin's ceramides and strengthens it against dryness for softer, smoother skin you can lovingly embrace. renew the love for your skin with dove body wash. bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance

from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ my songs know what you did in the dark ♪

♪ so light 'em up, up, up light 'em up, up, up ♪ ♪ light 'em up, up, up ♪ ♪ i'm on fire ♪ ♪ so light 'em up, up, up light 'em... ♪ football, is a game of inches. but it's also a game, of information. because the nfl is connected. and at any moment, the fate of the season can come down to this. billions of secure connections, per second.

when the game is on the line and the game is always on the line touchdown! the nfl relies on cisco.

hey, don't forget tomorrow night we have a special conversation with bill maher. he is here for the whole hour. he talks about his warning of a slow-moving coup to help donald trump, the state of play with our politics in this country, what he thinks the left is doing wrong and the wokeness debate.

that and much more with a smart man, bill maher, tomorrow on "prime time." thank you very much. i want to get you now to the big show, "don lemon tonight" with its big star, d. lemon, monitoring all that is going on in these massive cases in our midst. >> the cases, the massive cases including that of steve bannon and what is happening with congress in and the subpoenas about contempt of congress, it is really unbelievable, chris, that we live in a time right now where people who are supposed to believe in the law, the law and order folks are defying the law. people who have been in congress before are defying what they did once they were in congress. the standards that they held other people to, they're not even living up to that. i'm talking about mark meadows. and steve bannon really making a mockery of america by standing out on the courthouse steps and, you know, the way he talks about the government and the administration and then really what he was doing it for was his podcast. and these are the times that we're living i