>> thanks. one interesting question. i wonder if you gave that survey a year ago how it would compare to now. people change their minds with the fatigue setting in. i wonder if it changed their views on this issue as well. >> i have asked the same thing about the monoclonal antibodies. two people show up hypothetically, one vaxed and one unvaxed. i feel like we are rewarding bad behavior if we go with the unvaxed. my two cents. >> there has been a carrot stick approach for three years now. which will win out. breaking news tonight. president biden's on the defensive about the lack of a sufficient number of covid tests in the country. as the highly contagious omicron variant spreads rapidly across the country, americans standing in line outside in the cold winter air or sitting in their cars. sometimes for hours.

just trying to get tested as they prepare to spend the holidays with family and friends. and the president acknowledging his administration is struggling to meet the growing demand, but he is denying that it dropped the ball. >> no, i don't think it's a failure. i think it's a -- you could argue we should have known a year ago, six months ago, two months ago, a month ago. i have ordered half a billion of the pills. 500 million pills. excuse me. 500 million test kits that are going to be available to be sent to every home in america if anybody wants them. but the answer is, yeah, i wish i had thought about ordering half a billion pills two months ago before covid hit here. >> now, he meant to say half bill tests. but speaking of pills, there is some good news today on that front in fight against covid-19. the fda authorizing pfizer's antiviral pill. the first-of-its-kind which is

called paxlovid. it's designed to treat infected people now at home when they are experiencing mild to moderate symptoms and before they get sick enough to be hospitalized. and that should help ease the severe strain covid is putting on our nation's hospital systems. tonight nearly 70,000 americans are hospitalized with covid. and most of them unvaccinated. the daily number of new cases is spiking, now over 151,000 per day. that's a 24% jump over last week. and the number of people dying from the virus each day, that's also on the rise again. i want to go first to dr. william shaffner, medical director for the national foundation for infectious diseases. happy to see you tonight. this is concerning to some degree, right? i mean, the president is saying, doctor, that the testing issues were -- they are having are not a failure.

nothing has been good enough yet, but was the administration, do you think, banking too much on either vaccinations or the confidence or the running towards the vaccines to get us through this winter or did this variant truly, dr. shaffner, take everyone by surprise? >> laura, i think it's a combination of both things. yes, we all wish we had been smarter about testing, but clearly omicron surprised us and came on us and is so much more contagious than any of us would have imagined. in that context, at the holiday season where people want to meet with their families and get together and have reunions, the need for testing and desire for testing skyrocketed. i don't think any of us could have anticipated that. but that said, i like your optimistic note. paxlovid has, indeed, been approved by the food and drug administration and that's a little ray of sunshine. >> dr. shaffner, it certainly

is. i wonder though, do you think people will look at this and say, you know what? if there is a way to treat it, then why vaccinate? is that a risk people are thinking about trying to mistake that the pill is somehow a substitute for vaccination and prudent vaccination and testing? >> well, we do like pills in the united states. i have already heard people express that very same point of view, that now there is treatment. we don't have to get vaccinated, which i think is a false concept. prevention first, treatment second. why would you want to begin to get an infection and have the risk of getting seriously ill when you could have prevented it on the front end? and getting paxlovid is not like going to a machine and getting a candy bar. it takes a series of events. first of all, you have to be tested to find out that you are positive. look at all the problems we're having with getting tested. then you have to take that result quickly to a health care

practitioner and get a prescription. of course, that doctor or that other health care provider has to assess you to see whether you are eligible for the medication. not all of us will be eligible. so there are those issues, plus potential side effects of the drugs in some people. so there are cautions there. so put all that together, i would much rather get vaccinated and prevent the disease or make it much milder on the front end than have to cope with treatment on the back end. >> making the case that, again, prevention is better than cure and there is not that straight line from, you know, a to z here. dr. shaffner, your colleague dr. fauci is laying out what we know about omicron today. let's talk transparent. he is confirming that the variant is, as you say, highly transmissable, making up at least 73% of cases in the country, and could even already

account for 90% of cases in some states. i mean, omicron wasn't here even a month ago and now it's the dominant variant. how concerning is this for people? >> well, it's absolutely stunning that we have a virus mutation, a variant, that could exceed even delta in its transmisibility, in its being contagious. clearly, clearly omicron has done that. and it's taking over. it's outrunning delta. it will, by the first of the year, clearly be the dominant strain across the united states in all corners of our country, i'm sure. this is concerning. now, in addition to its contagiousness, there continues to be debate about how seriously ill this variant can make us. and there are data on both sides of the question. we shouldn't take refuge in the hope that it makes you less seriously ill. i promise you, this variant in an unvaccinated person can put that person sick, really sick,

in the hospital. so let's get vaccinated. >> i mean, there is a transmisibility, there is a severity, but if omicron is so contagious that many people -- more people can get it, would it negate the benefit of it being less severe? in other words, is the prevalence of it enough to cause concern even if the severity of it is not? >> if it spreads too many, many people, even if it makes a small proportion ill, that's still an awful lot of people. people will get, be in the hospital, stress the healthcare system. nevermind, being a threat to their lives and causing agony to their family and friends. so, yes, i keep coming back to vaccination. people who haven't gotten vaccinated, get that first dose. those who are eligible for

boosters, get theirs. and, parents, let's bring in the children 5 and older. they are all eligible for vaccines right now. >> let's talk about what dr. fauci says about how vaccines are holding up now against omicron. we're talking about the necessity of getting vaccinated. he says that two shots of pfizer or moderna are not enough on their own to protect against omicron and the protection from two shots, well, wanes over time. so a third, a fully vaccinated adults have been boosted. is it time to change the definition of what it means to be fully vaccinated given all of this, dr. shaffner? >> well, certainly in our minds we ought to think of this as a three-dose series. yes, we've had our first two doses, but in order to complete the series we need the third. the booster in order to secure our protection for a longer

period of time and to solidify that protection. that's clearly important. we need to all get that into our minds. get that third dose. >> again, prevention better than the cure. dr. shaffner, thank you for your time. nice speaking with you. >> thank you. now i want to bring in cnn's senior commentator john kasich, the former ohio governor. nice to see you this evening. how are you doing? >> hey, laura, he was so good. i'm sitting here listening to him. he was like -- he was so clear and so good. i hope he is proud of himself for his appearance tonight. it was, i thought, very effective. i hope you agree. >> i do. should i go back to him instead of you, governor? we can cut your segment, if you like? >> it might be better. whatever is going to help people. >> you know, i have said goodbye. he is incredible and the information so powerful. hopefully, it counters the misinformation that's out there. i want to turn to you, though. i am glad you are here, governor.

something that feels like a christmas miracle, president biden and his predecessor are trading praise over the vaccines. listen to this. >> thanks to the prior administration and our scientific community, america is one of the first countries to get the vaccine. just the other day former president trump announced he had gotten his booster shot. maybe one of the few things he and i agree on. >> and then, continuing with the miracle of sorts, former president trump telling fox news, quote, i'm very appreciative of that. i was surprised to hear it. you know, it has to be a process of healing in this country, and that will help a lot. pretty remarkable exchange on that. what are your thoughts, governor? >> well, you know, i intend to watch "a miracle on 34th

street." this was a miracle on pennsylvania avenue. look, it's one we welcome. it's great these two guys are talking. it's great that trump went out and got his booster, and actually is critical at times i have been at him, he did a terrific job in terms of investing the money and putting the vaccines together. i am glad he got credit. that's the way it ought to in our country. everybody thinks that people who are not vaccinated are all trumpers. that's not true. there is a group of people out there on right and left who don't believe in this vaccine. but every little bit helps in terms of getting people to get their vaccine, but mostly, and you said it earlier, it's not enough to just have two. you've got to get boosted because what happens is these vaccines, they lose their effectiveness and what the booster does is boosts it back up again. that's the name, booster. so i am glad they cooperated on that. that's a nice christmas present for a lot of americans undecided. >> you know, it is. let me tug on that santa claus beard for a second because it's good news that trump does seem to be coming out in favor of the vaccines and the boosters. that's true.

but we are two years into this and for most of that time he was saying things, well, like this, governor. >> supposing you brought the light inside the body, what you can do through the skin or in some other way. and i think you said you are going to test that, too. sounds interesting. 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? injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you say it gets in the lungs. >> there is that and then there is, obviously, what happened when he talked about or maybe allowed parts of his base to think that the vaccine was, you know, the persona non grata, so to speak. is his message too little to late, or is the miracle there

still might be people who will listen? >> well, there will be some people who will listen. but, laura, it's, you know, what he -- think about when he came back when he had covid. instead of standing at the white house and saying, you know, look, i mean, i'm the toughest guide in the world. i got it, almost knocked me out. by the way, wear a mask. later to insist on people getting vaccines. it could be a much different world today. but that's only speculation. i believe it would have made a difference. what he is doing now, better, you know, i'm glad he's doing it and give him credit for it and give biden some credit for having the humility to give him some credit. that's the way the political system needs to work and we are fighting a big common enemy and when we are united we are going to do better than when we are splintered and casting aspersions on any of the treatment we ought to get. so, you know, let's count our blessings. >> well, give credit where it's due. absolutely true. the era of good feelings between trump and biden, well, i mean, it might be short lived. this was the president's response when he was asked by abc tonight about running for re-election.

listen to this. >> and if that means a rematch against donald trump? >> you are trying to tempt me now. sure. why would i not run against president trump? that would increase the prospect of running. >> it would increase the prospect of running. you supported president biden last time, governor. would you support him again if he were -- if he were -- against donald trump again? >> look, i supported a guy who was much different than the joe biden i see today. and i think that's part of his problem. joe's not showing passion. the passion that i think he has in terms of connecting with the other side, bringing people along. the other thing that concerns me and concerns me as an american, you know, republican is very not important to me as it compares to being an american. joe biden needs to appear much stronger. his interview tonight, there was still confusion. if you are going to go on network television, know the

difference between the pills and the tests. i mean, we just got to see him stronger. we got to see him more clear and we got to see more passion from him. you know, we are only one year into his presidency. we got three more to go and we all have to hope for the best for whoever the president is. the fact is, is that he really needs to step it up. and his people need to stop kind of hiding him and let him get out there and because people are saying, laura, you hear it, i hear it, does he know what's going on? is he really in charge? he needs to show it. i believe he is. i believe he is an intelligent man but he's got to be stronger. >> well, he is the president of the united states and who surrounds him has to fortify that perception. we will see what the american people think about that. thank you, governor. >> yeah, thank you. thank you, laura. >> more breaking news out there. congressman james clyburn revealing that he has tested positive for covid-19. a breakthrough case. south carolina democratic who is house majority whip says he is fully vaccinated and he is also

asymptomatic. this diagnosis comes less than a week after clyburn was with president biden at his alma mater. south carolina state university's commencement ceremony. congressman saying tonight, quote, america is in a new phase of this pandemic. no one is immune. i urge anyone who has not done so to protect themselves by getting vaccinated and boosted. we send our best wishes to representative clyburn tonight. and three days of deliberations and now no verdict. the jury in the trial of the ex-police officer who shot 20-year-old daunte wright at one point signaling they may not be able to make a decision. the attorney representing wright's family tells us what they are thinking about all this. that's next. i could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance so they only pay for what they need.

(gasps) ♪ did it work? only pay for what you need ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ spider-man no way home in theaters december 17th

at fidelity, your dedicated advisor will help you create a comprehensive wealth plan for your full financial picture. with the right balance of risk and reward. so you can enjoy more of...this. this is the planning effect.

tonight still no verdict. the jury wrapping up day three of deliberations in the manslaughter trial of former minnesota police officer kim potter. she mistook her firearm for her taser when she fatally shot daunte wright. joining me now, jeff storm, an attorney for the wright family. jeff, nice to see you. must be a very difficult time for this family. i mean, tell us about how daunte wright's family is feeling right now. we're coming up against a major

holiday and, of course, they know that there has yet to be a verdict in the case that is so impactful to them personally. >> well, laura, an experienced lawyer like yourself knows that it's agonizing for attorneys, let alone a family in this situation. you know, every single second that goes by is an incredible struggle for the family, particularly given that they paid very close attention to the evidence and the feeling a lot of us have is that, you know, we have concerns about what you would know to be injury nullification, the concerns that they will make their decision based on something other than the law, because that was very much the defense strategy here. and that aspect and dwelling on that is certainly agonizing for the family. >> did the family have a reaction to the really emotional moment of testimony from kim potter? i wondered while i was watching it what was going through the minds of the family.

i mean, obviously, there is that notion of jury nullification, sympathy towards the defendant. but, of course, tears have been shed for their son, daunte wright. so what was that like for them, if you know, to watch that moment? >> i don't think any family member left that room feeling like those tears were genuine and for the loss of daunte wright. more so than they were a reaction and tears or, you know, supposed tears really stemming more from, you know, kim potter's fear that she is going to be held accountable for her unlawful actions. >> so on that note of accountability, i mean, were you worried by the jury's question what happens if they cannot reach a consensus? what do you think is behind the potential split perhaps between these jurors? >> you know, i think, as you know, laura, that's not an unusual question early on in deliberations, which was that was. when you start to get really

nervous as a lawyer is when you start getting notes from the jury that lead you to believe there is just no chance that this jury is going to be able to reach a resolution. so given the stage that that came, you know, i think that, you know, my advice is always to clients in those situations not to read too much into that at this point, particularly given that the other two questions show us that the jury was likely carefully analyzing impeachment evidence and evidence related to a critical theory of the case, the physical construction of the gun. that shows us that we have an active, intelligent, and working jury at this point. >> first, the impeachment-related evidence, you mean the idea of trying to cross-reference her statements on the stand to what she did or did not remember with a psychologist at one point in the trial as well and the idea of the evidence.

this comes down to the idea of was it reasonable, was it reckless, was it negligent to mistake one's firearm for an obviously distinct taser. the jury asked the question to have the zip-ties removed from potter's gun so they to could actually hold it. they are trying to put themselves in her shoes, i guess, by doing that. is that, in your mind, to her benefit or the benefit of the prosecution to have them deliberate what the distinctions may have been? >> well, you're right on point, laura, on both of those pieces. to get to the gun aspect of it, you know, personally i think it benefits the prosecution because those of us who have observed both weapons, touched both weapons know how both weapons operate. we are hopeful the jury is going to see what we heard explained through expert testimony and what we can see with our own eyes, you know. it's negligence, culpably neg negligence to say you made a

mistake confusing those weapons. that shouldn't happen. >> i mean, this killing of daunte wright came during the middle of another extraordinarily high-profile trial, the trial of derek chauvin, and it's noteworthy that this officer also resigned after doing this act. and i wonder with all of the temperatures, all of the thoughts in minnesota, you have philando castile, you know, what happened to daunte wright, what happened to, of course, george floyd, and many more in between, unfortunately. what is your message to the public if the jury reaches a decision that you do not believe is just or on the perhaps maybe unlikelihood or likelihood that one is not reached at all? is there a message you want to convey to the community about what this would mean to your clients, the family, of daunte wright? >> you know, with respect to the community, i do want to wait and

see what that decision is. but i actually want to focus more on prosecutors. i hope that prosecutors around the country continue to have the courage to charge these types of cases because even if there were an acquittal in a case like this, no one can doubt after having seen the evidence that this is a very worthy trial and that kim potter should have been held accountable for her actions in a court of law by a jury of her peers. so if this does not come down the way we want it to, i certainly hope the community continues to engage in its efforts to support holding law enforcement accountable and that the government continues to show courage in the prosecution of these cases. >> courage is the right word. also just prudence. you're right about thinking about criminal justice reform. it takes conversations around what is a reasonable use of force. what is the benefit of the doubt

we extend to police officers or should withhold and what standard they must be held according to their own actions even if intent is not a requirement in the law in this instance here. thank you for your time. please extend my condolences to the family of daunte wright, trial or no trial. they want their son. >> we appreciate that, laura. thanks for the time tonight. >> thank you. well, there is no verdict yet in the potter case. and no verdict in the ghislaine maxwell case. and there is no verdict in the elizabeth holmes case. what will the juries decide? we'll talk about that next.

meet stuart and byron, owners of sml, a tiny home architecture firm. they were getting ready to travel to portland, maine for a pitch when their 3d-printer broke. luckily, sml is with american express business platinum, and has access to over $1000 in value per year with the business services suite. so they got new software and created a full augmented reality experience. sml won the pitch, and with their membership rewards® points, extended their hotel stay for a few extra days. they had a whale of a time. get the card built for business. by american express.

your plain aspirin could be hurting your stomach. vazalore... is the first liquid-filled aspirin capsule clinically shown to cause fewer ulcers than plain aspirin. try new vazalore. aspirin made amazing! ♪ the only thing a disaster can't destroy is hope. ♪ donate now at redcross.org thanks for coming. now when it comes to a financial plan this broker is your man. let's open your binders to page 188... uh carl, are there different planning options in here? options? plans we can build on our own, or with help from a financial consultant? like schwab does. uhhh... could we adjust our plan... ...yeah, like if we buy a new house? mmmm... and our son just started working. oh! do you offer a complimentary retirement plan for him? as in free? just like schwab.

schwab! look forward to planning with schwab. xfinity rewards are our way of thanking you just for being with us. enjoy rewards like sing family fun nights! rent sing for $1 then belt out all your favorite tunes from the movie with sing karaoke. plus, see sing 2 in theaters with buy-one-get-one free fandango tickets. join over a million members by signing up for free on the xfinity app. our thanks. your rewards.

so all eyes are on jury rooms across the u.s. in minnesota the jury is still out in the trial of former police officer kim potter. in new york a jury is now on a four-day break in the ghislaine maxwell sex trafficking trial. and the jury in elizabeth holmes' theranos trial will be back deliberating tomorrow. joining me now cnn legal analyst joey jackson. good to see you, joey.

you know, this has been quite a week of trials and waiting and waiting on jury watch all this time. what do you make of the fact that there is still a jury out in the potter trial and no notes, no questions today? take me inside that room with the mind that you have. what's going on? >> yeah, sure, laura. good to be with you, of course, as always. what happens in potter, i think, is that there is a clear distinction. on the one hand the defense made the case that this was a terrible mistake, she feels so badly about it, they put her on the stand, she had authenticity, and i think jurors are not going to convict or who are loathe to convict saying she is an officer, she made a mistake, she deserves the benefit of the doubt. on the other hand, i think these juror want accountability who say, listen, she testified. she indicated it was a mistake. she indicated she didn't mean to use deadly force. she said she was sorry. she said she should have known the difference. she admitted to every material element of reckless conduct in addition to culpable negligent conduct.

the prosecutors have proved the case. 26 years, she is trained in this all the time, she is a trainer herself. there is a distinction between design, et cetera, with respect to the taser. she should have known better. she is getting convicted. the other size it was a honest mistake, we like her, jury nullification, which is allowing and executions the bail your and send her home. i think that's the fight and i think that's why we haven't heard boo today with respect to that case. >> that phrase loathe to convict, i think it's important for the audience to understand even though they may be loathe to convict, maybe it's an easier case if the prosecution had to prove intent. but as you and i know, when it comes to these charges, intent is not what needs to be proved. there is not an element of either crime. it's about what was foreseeable,

if you created an unreasonable risk. that's confusing to jurors when you have a manslaughter charge. hold on, you mean somebody could not intend something and still be held accountable? we do it all the time in the law, right, joey? >> yeah, you know, it's a great point that you make because when people think about someone dying at the hands of someone else, you think about intention, deliberation, premeditation, et cetera. but of course we know that not all crimes, right, require that element of deliberation, intentional conduct. instead, they require something else like this, which is the distinct between first-degree and second-degree. were you reckless with respect to the fact that you used a taser or meant to use the taser but used the firearm instead. and if you weren't reckless, which gets you 15 years, were you negligent, careless with regard to that? in the jury concludes that, she is convicted. i do believe that there are

jurors that are saying of course she was and then you have those other jurors that are saying, well, she may have but we heard from the psychologist, the psychologist said that people who really could be experienced could make this mistake, it happens all the time, you saw her testify, she didn't need to do it, and i think that's the fight and why today we didn't hear peep from anybody in the jury. at the same time, laura, we know that people don't like to convict police in general, think they are doing their jobs. i think they are fighting hard to reach an appropriate outcome. >> cops get the benefit of the doubt from the supreme court. it's codified in some of the most informational and informed precedent. let's turn to the maxwell trial. that jury did ask for questions. they asked for more transcripts of witness testimony today. what are they zeroing in on when they are asking for this testimony? are they trying to assess the memory, the credibility of the accusers? what's their focus, do you think? >> yeah, i think it has to be that.

here's why i believe this. it hinges on those four victims who were then girls who are now young women. remember this occurred between 1994 and 2004. what did the defense attack? the defense attacked, number one, their motivations as it related to money and settlements, et cetera, and in addition to attacking their motivation, money, money, money, also attacked their memories. in fact, the defense called in an expert witness to talk about false memories, how things are suggested, things change over time. defense made such hay with respect to their inconsistencies. there was an fbi agent and other evidence with which would suggest when the victims told the story earlier on, they did not indicate that miss maxwell was involved. so i think because the defense has targeted those issues, they are really trying to see that it's the jury, what did these victims say? is it credible? are there contradictions? can we believe them and should we convict her. that is what they are doing, i

believe, in that jury room. >> taking several days off dom back, as you know, to come back and deliberate. another trial, joey, elizabeth holmes trial about theranos. that jury is back tomorrow, too. they are also up against the holiday. i mean, christmas eve is friday. christmas on saturday. what do you expect in that case? will it be one to light a fire and, obviously, we can quibble will whether that is appropriate in terms of rushed justice or deliberation for a holiday or any other event. this part of what the calculus might be for them? >> you know, i really think so. so that case is a bit different because, remember, she testified for about 24 hours over several days. of course, she is charming and very convincing. this is a person who at 19 dropped out of stanford built a mega company, convinced some really high-profile people to join her. she had the former secretary of defense on her board. this is a person who can talk

and who is relatable. i think the jury in that case has to draw the distinction, did she exercise appropriate business judgment and was she wrong and -- look, no company, of course, when you put it out there, is completely solid. there is risk in investment. and that's what she is saying. that she acted in good faith, exercised her best judgment. the prosecution saying, you engaged in fraud. it was a deck of lies. you knew what you were doing. you were misrepresenting everything to people. so i think they are fighting over that and finally, to your point, it's coming up on christmas. so do they -- and there is 11 counts here. so there is a lot to consider. the last point also, the jury actually asked to take home with them, right, the 39, you know, count information so they can look at it and determined what she did, what she didn't. i think they are focused hard on

that. while they want to have their christmas, we all do, i think they want to make the right decision. let's see if that plays in their calculus when they render a verdict, which will be soon. >> until then, we are drinking from a fire hose on jury watch and verdict watch. nice to see you. merry christmas if i don't talk to you before then. i am sure i will pester you before then anyway. >> thank you so much, laura. always a pleasure. >> take care. up next, a reminder for yet a branch -- another branch of government seems to think that it's above the law. i'll make my case about that after this.

and that's just basic wavy guy maintenance, right? next up, carvana. oh, boy. carvana just doesn't seem to understand how the test drive works. they give their customers seven days. and if they don't like it, they give 'em their money back. wait, they take the car back? that's crazy! what if it was driven by like a zookeeper? or a mud wrestler? or a guy who's on the outs with the missus

and he just needs a place to sleep for seven days? yeah. (vo) buy your car online. love it or return it. with carvana.

no one is above the law, a phrase people once thought was reserved for the president. a reminder that even the head of the executive branch, whose job it is to enforce the laws, doesn't get to evade them. now it seems, however, that the phrase must be a reminder to those we entrust with not just enforcing those laws, but actually making them.

congress. and here we are watching members of congress continue to thumb their nose at even their own colleagues and pretend they don't have to follow the laws that they have made. now, we focused on the dangers of the big lie. concerned about the potential for the electorate to doubt that we, indeed, do have fair and free elections. that there is still integrity in the world role model for democracy. propaganda and misinformation on that demands you to only believe in our electoral system if your candidate wins. well, that is as absurd as it is toxic. there is also a danger in another big lie. one not wielded by those who lost elections, but by those who won them. a sitting member of congress who promotes the lie that congress has no legitimate legislative or

oversight function in investigating what led up to and what occurred on january 6th, which was an attempt to prevent them from performing their legislative role in certifying the electoral college as was required under law, by the way, and also compelled by the people's vote, a suggestion that congress is somehow wrong to try to figure out who played a role in an event that put our elected officials in grave danger, well, that is also a big self-serving lie. congress is inherently political. obviously, it is. but it is also expected to codify our principles into law. instead, members of congress who refuse to recognize the legitimacy of their own branch, well, they risk codifying what is antithetical to democracy, that those who make the laws are somehow above it. former fbi director, deputy director, andrew mccabe is here. the committee investigating the insurrection wants to talk to gop congressman jim jordan, a

key trump ally. so how long until he says no, too? too? we'll talk about that next.? i spend a lot of time in my truck. it's my livelihood. ♪ rock music ♪ >> man: so i'm not taking any chances when something happens to it. so when my windshield cracked... my friend recommended safelite autoglass. they came right to me, with expert service where i needed it. ♪ rock music ♪ >> man: that's service i can trust... no matter what i'm hauling. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

it's our holiday savings event on the sleep number 360 smart bed. what if i sleep hot? ...or cold? no problem, the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing so you both sleep just right. and it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable.

so, you can really promise better sleep? yes! you'll know exactly how well you slept, night after night. we take care of the science. all you have to do is sleep. and now, save up to $500 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, 0% interest for 48 months. only for a limited time. to learn more, go to sleepnumber.com ho ho ho! not again. oh no. for the gifts you won't forget. the mercedes-benz winter event.

. the january 6th committee seeking a voluntary interview with republican congressman jim jordan, a key trump ally, saying in a letter it wants to learn more about jordan's communications with trump on january 6th as well as his discussion with white house aides in trump's own legal team. let's discuss now with cnn's

senior law enforcement analyst, andrew mccabe, the former fbi deputy director. andrew, good to see you tonight. i hope you're doing well. look, jim jordan is now the second congressman the committee has requested to speak with, and we can't forget, by the way, what jordan said when he was asked when he spoke to trump on january 6th. remember this? >> on january 6th did he speak with him before, during or after the capitol was attacked? >> i'd have to go -- i spoke with him that day after. i think after. i don't know if i spoke with him in the morning or not. i just don't know. i'd have to go back and -- i mean i don't -- i don't know when those conversations happened, but -- but what i know i spoke with him all the time. >> really the stammer heard all around the world at that moment in time. we already know jordan texted mark meadows on january 5th about blocking certification on

election results. what do you think the committee wants to know about communications with trump? it's obvious there is something he could tell them, right? >> there's a lot he could tell them, laura. so a couple things come to mind. first, any confusion the congressman might have about how many times he called him on that day or when he called him on that day could be easily rectified with a subpoena to his phone company which would provide records of all the incoming and outgoing calls on his phone. we could clear that up pretty easily. the second thing that jumps out at me here is let's remember what the committee is doing. they are trying to determine what led to the attack on the capitol on january 6th. so imagine if you were doing that and you as part of that inquiry you're trying to determine what the president was doing while the capitol was being attacked, and here you have a witness who says, yeah, i think i was on the phone with him. i might have been on the phone with him during that time. wouldn't you want to ask that

witness a few questions what were they talking about, who else was there? it's a very legitimate inquiry and one i think he's going to have a hard time ignoring, you know, cleanly as it were. >> those records are going to help jog that memory. and i do wonder the committee asked the questions they might already know the answers to through corroboration. i want you to confirm or explain away something. jordan was asked tonight whether he'd comply with the committee and he deflected saying he just got the letter today. congressman scott perry has already refused voluntarily to speak with that committee. so should jordan follow should they be subpoenaed, andrew? >> i think they absolutely should. there's no reason on earth first of all why members of congress should be treated differently than any other citizens in this country. you know from your experience, i know from mine any time i got a request to answer questions when

i was in the fbi i had to go up and answer questions. and if i didn't, i would be subpoenaed to do so. especially in this case where mr. jordan has already told the media some of the information he has to offer, that he spoke to the president on that day and maybe in the morning, maybe the afternoon. we don't know. hopefully we'll find out. these are items he's already referred to. we know this is knowledge he has. he should share it with the committee. >> and one step further not only should he be subpoenaed but comply with that subpoena. being treated like anyone else who fails to comply with a duly issued subpoena, that's got to be the bare minimum and floor for all these things. january 6th organizers are now suing committee to block a subpoena over the phone records the same day michael flynn lost his legal challenge to block a possible subpoena for his own phone records. he just filed suit yesterday. does this sort of quick response mean something significant, that the committee is not facing an

uphill battle after all? >> well, i think it does. it certainly telegraphs at least in the flint case there's not much to that objection to the subpoena. and as we know the standard for a subpoena is essentially simple relevance. the subpoena needs only to be geared to collect evidence that's relevant to the inquiry that's under way. so i find it hard to believe that any of these suits will ultimately prevail. but what they will do in the meantime is delay. they'll drag these subpoenas out and that's a problem as the clock is ticking over these folks work. >> and so our clock has come to an end as well. andrew mccabe, nice to see you tonight. >> thanks, laura. you too. >> thank you. and thank you all for watching. our coverage continues. that we might lose them all. our engineers and operations team worked with cisco

to do whatever's necessary and bring whatever tools we have to bring to tell the best story. between what's news and what's now, there's a bridge. cisco. the bridge to possible.

superpowers from a spider bite? i could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance. ow! i'm ok! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ only in theaters december 17th.

switching wireless carriers is easy with xfinity.

just lean on our helpful switch squad to help you save with xfinity mobile. they can help break up with your current carrier for you and transfer your info to your new phone. giving you a fast and easy experience that can save you hundreds a year on your wireless bill. visit your nearest xfinity store and see how the switch squad can help you switch and save. get $200 off a new eligible 5g phone when you switch to xfinity mobile. talk with our helpful switch squad at your local xfinity store today.

hello and welcome to our viewers joining us here in the united states and all around the world live from cnn headquarters in atlanta, i'm rosemary church. and this is "cnn newsroom." just ahead, biden on the defensive. what he says about the national covid test shortage. and why donald trump inspires him to run in 2024. a major city in china under strict lockdown this