>> yeah, that are not the good citizens we saw today who put the country and their state ahead of their own personal views. all republicans, by the way. >> so, according to "the washington post," more than 100 republican primary winners are election deniers. >> thank you, all. the most unforgettable moment from today's testimony. tom freeman will be here with his reaction. and we'll look at where things stand in the justice department's investigation. that and more as we continue in le mons, lemons. look how nice they are. the moment you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels. so you can go and see all those, lovely, lemony, lemons. ♪ and never wonder if you got a good deal. because you did. ♪ what's on the horizon?

the answers lie beyond the roads we know. we recognize that energy demand is growing, and the world needs lower carbon solutions to keep up. at chevron, we're working to find new ways forward, through investments and partnerships in innovative solutions. like renewable natural gas from cow waste, hydrogen-fueled transportation, and carbon capture. we may not know just what lies ahead, but it's only human... to search for it. a monster was attacking but the team remained calm. because with miro, they could problem solve together, and find the answer that was right under their nose. or... his nose. ♪ making friends again, billy? i like to keep my enemies close. guys, excuse me. i didn't quite get that. i'm hard of hearing. ♪ oh hey, don't forget about the tense music too.

would you say tense? i'd say suspenseful. aren't they the same thing? can we move on guys, please? alexa, turn on the subtitles. and dim the lights. ok, dimming the lights. the day of the heart attack, i was scared. i didn't know what to do. seeing my daughter have a heart attack, it shook me. aspirin helps reduce the chance of another heart attack by 31%. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.

it has been a riveting consequential day in washington. top republican official who for the first time in these hearings offered testimony that the former president was involved in the election scheme. officials spoke out against the leader of their own party, explaining how the former president and his legal team were told there was no legal basis to dessert if i the election results, nor to install those fake electors, but they pressed on anyway. there was also testimony that linked two republican members of congress, wisconsin senator ron johnson and arizona congressman andy biggs to both of those efforts to overturn the election. ron johnson denies any involvement.

and we also heard from witnesses whose election duties would otherwise not make them household names finally getting to testify to the intimidation and threats of violence they have faced to make sure the 2020 election was an honest one. take a look. >> the same people who were attempting to pressure vice president mike pence to reject votes illegally were also working to reverse the outcome of the 2020 election at the state level. >> took a hard look at this ourselves and based on our review of it, including the interviews of the key witnesses, the fulton county allegations were -- had no merit. >> there is nowhere i feel safe. now nowhere. do you know how it feels to have the president of the united states target you? >> it's turned my life upside down.

i no longer give out my business card. i don't transfer calls. i don't want anyone knowing my name. >> after the election, the email, my cell phone was doxxed, so, i was getting texting from all over the country. and then my wife started getting t texts. started going after her, i think, just to probably put pressure on me, why don't you just quit, walk away? >> i told him that the stuff that his people were shoveling out to the public were bullshit. >> and mr. secretary, why didn't you just quit and walk away? >> because i knew we had followed the law, we had followed the constitution. and i think sometimes moments require you to stand up and just take the shots when you're doing your job.

and that's all we did. >> it is a tenet of my faith that the constitution is divinely inspired, of my most basic foundational beliefs. and so, for me to do that because somebody just asked me to? is foreign to my very being. i will not do it. >> i'm joined now by a democratic member of the january 6th select house committee, congressman pete aguilar of k california. congressman, thank you for joining us. "the new york times" has new reporting about ivanka trump and what she told a film crew, according to maggie haberman who wrote the story. ivanka said to that film crew that her father should continue to fight until every legal remedy is exhausted, because a lot of americans were questioning the sanctity of the elections. this obviously seems to

contradict what she told the committee about how she took attorney general bill barr's announcement that there was no significant voter fraud. can you confirm this is true? and will we see any of this video from this documentary filmmaker at thursday's hearing? >> well, i'm not going to talk about specific evidence that the committee has in its possession, but i will tell you, the investigative piece of this puzzle continues to be evolving. we've said that from the beginning, that as we learn nor infor new information and take in more evidence that we're going to continue to adapt to that. what i can tell you, though, is when people are deposed, they take an oath. it's our understanding and it's our hope, like any american, someone would be truthful when they are being deposed, but if there is new information within this, then, you know, we will adapt and we will analyze and carry forward from there.

>> this documentary filmmaker apparently had extensive access to the trump white house in the final weeks of the 2020 campaign and has given over his footage to your committee. he acknowledged that on twitter today. what else should we expect to see or hear from the footage you received? i know you can't or won't be specific, but can you at least give us some ideas if there is important -- if there are important moments in that footage we're going to see? >> there's new information that we gather, you know, each and every time. for example, when the chairman went on tv and he gave the tip line so individuals can reach out to the january 6th committee, we received lots of responses back from that. so it's a very positive step when we can go on national tv, we can give the tip line and we can receive information. this is new information that's being reported. the committee is going through it just like we would any other group of information we received.

if it is meaningful and substantive to our investigation and can be used in a hearing and we feel it rises to the level of sharing with the american public, we'll do so at the appropriate time. but there are more hearings planned after the hearing on thursday. we look forward to getting through this and piecing this puzzle together and sharing with the american public just how close we came to democracy ending on the sixth. >> i know that the committee, as of now, is taking a position where it's up to the justice department whether or not they want to prosecute or take any legal steps. but just as a legal matter, are there any laws being violated if somebody submits fraudulent slates of electors to the congress or to the national archives? is that illegal? >> i can tell you what the justice department has charged people with already. i can't speak to anything they're working on, but clearly they have charged individuals

with obstructing our official activities on january 6th. they've charged individuals with sedition and conspiracy. so, you know, there are very substantive charges that they have leveled. our job is to pull together all of the information to share with the american public exactly what happened on january 6th and what the causes and circumstances that led up to it are. that's our mission and our mandate and our charge. from an accountability perspective that's on the department of justice, but we're not going to be shy about showing and displaying this information in our final report, when we release it. >> congresswoman liz cheney ended the hearing today saying the committee wants to hear from former white house counsel pit sip loney. let's run a little bit of that. >> the american people in our hearings have heard from bill barr, jeff rosen, richard donahue and many others who stood up and did what is right. and they will hear more of that

testimony soon. bull the american people have not yet heard from mr. trump's former white house counsel, pat sip loney. our committee is certain that donald trump does not want mr. cipollone to testify here. indeed, our evidence shows that he and his office tried to do what was right. they tried to stop a number of president trump's plans for january 6th. >> where -- what's the status with the committee vis-a-vis cipollone? have you extended a formal invitation to pat cipollone to testify? has he officially rejected that information? has he given any response? >> i'm not going to talk about the specifics of a witness we could hear from, but what i can tell you, and you've heard this time and time again, jake, a thousand interviews that we've conducted as part of our process. so, we've gathered information, we're piecing this together. we look forward to sharing the information that we can with the

american public. but i think it's fair to say that we've talked to, you know, dozens of individuals in and around the white house at the time in the hearing that i led last week, we heard specifically testimony from individuals saying that pat cipollone told them that he knew the vice president did the right thing on january 6th by certifying the election. so, clearly, there is more here that we would like to dig into. obviously it would take a willing witness. and, you know, we look forward, at the appropriate time, to having more conversations about that. >> congressman, thank you so much, appreciate it. joined now by "new york times" foreign affairs columnist tom freeman, author of numerous books. tom, thank you for joining us. you reported from a lot of countries where political leaders exacted scorched earth revenge on their political enemies. did you ever think you would see

a version of that in the united st states? and coming in the testimony today? >> no, anderson, i didn't. i find it all shocking. we have to seriously wonder if the united states of america will continue to be a functioning, constitutional democracy in the next five years. i think we seriously have to worry whether we will see significant political violence in the next five years. what strikes me so much about today's testimony overriding is the number of principal republicans who stood up and put the constitution before donald trump. they actually saved the country in this election, and my hat is off to them. now they have a bigger mission. a group of them have to get together, i would love it to be liz cheney and adam kin zinger from the committee, or whoever, liz cheney and mitt romney, they have to run a different republican party in the next election to ensure that donald

trump never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever sits in the oval office again. they have to take that one for the country. at the same time, democrats have an obligation to not hew so far left that republicans feel that a choice between living with donald trump and having a democratic government, they can't afford to have a democratic government. that is the two tasks before our two parties today to save our democracy. it is on the line. >> you think the threat is really that great in the next five years? >> i have absolutely no doubt about it. look, anderson, we saw, first of all, what trump tried to do with ukraine, to try to leverage a foreign power and leader in order to win the election. he was impeached for that. but it failed to deter him, basically. he got away with it. then he tried it again. we know one thing about donald

trump, he's a quick learner. you can bet, if youhe were to e talk the white house again, do you think he would surround himself with anything other than clowns, principled clowns like rudy giuliani and john eastman. he would never let a true republican, the ones who saved us in this election, come into the white house. >> i think you said a while ago, when we talked once, and you were in lebanon and watched the country descend into civil war, about how politicians there, they all played this game, they all chipped away at the institutions, they all chipped away at the state thinking, oh, when i get in power, i'll fix things and it will be fine, but i've got to do this to get into power. it doesn't work that way. you see that happening here. >> yeah, i mean, anderson, think about vice president pence. donald trump, we now know, when people were chanting, hang

pence, we all know trump basically said, maybe he's getting what he deserves in those chants. i don't know about you, anderson, but if somebody i worked with closely said it would be okay if i was hanged, i kind of wouldn't be out there still defending that person or still keeping my lips sealed, i would be running a national campaign against that person. and the idea that these people who trump has so embarrassed and shamed and defiled even to the point of saying it would be okay if they got hanged, still, out of some crazy hope of keeping alive their prospects for being president, still won't speak up and out and actually take action against this trump-led cult party. that's crazy to me. and what it is doing, what it is doing is leading us to a place where we will no longer be able to legitimately and peacefully transfer power. that's the core of our democracy, and that's what i saw

in lebanon. leaders hacked away at the system, they cheated, they lied, they thieved. they all said, ah, i can do that, but when i take over, it will be okay. and then one day, it broke. when it broke, it was gone. and when it was gone, it was gone forever. >> what i don't understand about those who continue to, you know, circle the wagons around trump, hang out in mar-a-lago sucking up to him, playing his game, is that they must know that in the end, he will turn on them just as he has everybody else when it's in his interest. i mean, kevin mccarthy can't honestly believe that he is so firmly entrenched with the former president that the former president wouldn't drop him and deny him something he wants more than anything in the world, which is to become speaker of the house. you look at the people who voted

for the president -- i don't know anything about mr. bowers' politics, he's very conservative, but he's clearly a very principled person and an honorable person, whether you agree with his politics or not. but the president today was lying about him completely before his testimony to try to discredit him. i don't have a question. >> i'm in awe of them, i'm in awe of liz cheney. i would just say of kevin mccarthy, think about it. he -- on the night of january 6th, met with republicans in the house and said, this guy is going to be -- trump is going to be impeached and i'm going to go over to the white house and tell him he's got to leave office. and then when he reported that in "the new york times" -- >> unfortunately we're having some technical problems, obviously. we appreciate tom friedman being

with us. jake? >> i'm joined by senior justice correspondent evan perez. evan, although the committee cannot bring legal charges to merrick garland at the justice department, he's been under pressure to pursue a criminal case against former president trump. what can you tell us about merrick garland's next move? >> these are some of the areas that we're seeing some of the progress that some of the critics have been eager to see. and look, there's a lot, as you know, from the attorney general, there's not a lot he's willing to say, but one of the things we do know from the subpoenas that witnesses have received in recent weeks, we know that there's a lot of activity by the fbi, by prosecutors, looking specifically at the people who were involved in this alternate electors scheme. and these are people who had communications with people in the trump circle. so, what they're being asked, some of these electors and some

of these other witnesses, they're being asked for communications with people like rudy giuliani, with people like john eastman, you know, some of these people who were key to try to set up this entire scheme. and it appears, from what we can tell from what they've requested in these subpoenas, is that they're trying to work from the bottom up, which is the way the strategy that the justice department pursues in these types of investigations. obviously, we saw an opposite strategy from the committee today. one of the things they were doing was going from the top down. they were looking specifically at the teem who were in touch with donald trump and trying to make the case that he is at the crux of this. he is at the heart of it. we'll see whether the justice department gets to that point, but at a minimum, we know that they are circling around, they are focused on the people who were around the former pre president. and that's the way they're approaching this case, jake. >> evil >> evan perez, thank you so much.

our panel back with us. ab abby, let me start with you. we just experienced the 50th anniversary of the watergate break-in and the big question there from senator howard baker is, what did the president know and when he did know it? president knew everything. in this case. this isn't some low-level break-in that nixon found out about later. this is -- everything was because donald trump wanted it. he might not have known every single detail, but he was the impetus for all of it. >> and he was aware of the fake electors, he was aware that the legal argument itself was not true, he had been told repeatedly that all the crazy theories about what happened to the ballots were also not true. so, he was aware of all of that. it strikes me that the problem for the department of justice is not actually a factual problem. i think we know what trump knew, we know what he was involved with, it's really a political question. it's how far do they want to go?

how much do they want to be involved in the turmoil the country is going to be in one way or another? and that is not a question that has easy answers. there are people who would -- who would tell you, yeah, you must prosecute to prevent this from happening again, but if you prosecute and you don't get a conviction, what happens then? and i think that's one of the biggest problems facing doj right now is, we've had two impeachments of this former president, neither of them were successful, so, the bar is actually quite high for a criminal prosecution of a former president, which would be unprecedented. >> and i think that there's a very real risk -- there's risks on either side. if you do it, you risk tearing the country apart. if you don't, you risk the future of the country, if you let it stand. i think there's also a fear -- there are plenty of democrats who want to see merrick garland doing a lot more than he's doing, but i think there are others that fear that prosecuting the former president just makes him politically

stronger, gives him more ammunition to work with. and i think that that's going to be a real key test, you know, if we end up in that kind of a universe of what the committee has been able to do throughout this process. have they been able to convince a wide enough swath of the americans who quite frankly are sick of a lot of what's going on in our politics. i don't want to say both sides, that's not what i mean. there are people that are turned off by the tone of what's happening, they've tuned out, they've stopped watching the news, they've gotten frustrated with the violence, they don't want to do it anymore, but those are the kinds of people that the committee needs to reach as voters if, in fact, we find ourselves in this kind of a situation. >> i would just raise one other thing. we have not seen all the evidence yet. although, today, we certainly saw he was on phone call after phone call, we know about the public tweets, what he did to mike pence. i think that my understanding from sources on the committee is

we have had a lot of new information come in over the -- during the course of these hearings. congressman aguilar said the tip line -- now we have this documentary film producer, but i'm told, there is a lot more to come in. so, there's the political side, but there's also -- what is the evidence going to be? and if there is enough evidence, do you not indict and let someone be above the law? >> another thing, john, that's interesting, is this idea of the people who should be watching these hearings are not watching it. david urban said it earlier, he's completely right. people that need to see the evidence, people who need to see conservative republican officials who have gone through this and have had their lives torn upside down, are not aware of it. but at a certain point, i have to say -- just to play devil's

advocate here, so what? like -- i'm sorry that millions of americans were lied to and believe this lie. that doesn't mean that the law enforcement apparatus in this country should walk on egg shells around the fact that obviously this is not legal. i mean, i don't know who gets charged with a crime and for what, but beyond just the -- the qanon shaman, i mean, there are a lot of laws that have been broken here. >> critical legal questions and critical political cultural questions. justice is supposed to be blind. that blindness is supposed to mean, whoever committed the crime, whether it's the president of the united states or a janitor somewhere or whatever the political climate is, you can't be affected by that. however, you also have to face the reality. one theory you hear from a lot of former federal prosecutors, do you indict the people around trump and have an unindicted

co-conspirator who clearly is trump and try to disqualify him that way and then you don't v violate the tradition that we do political prosecutions. is that fair? that would be outrageous for some democrats watching. >> ford pardoned nixon, right? why? why did ford pardon nixon? because he was going to be charged with crimes. >> yes. >> he was probably going to go to jail. >> he thought it was bad for the country. >> right, i'm just saying, it was out there. that's why he was pardoned, because it was possible that president nixon was going to be charged with crimes. >> but to your other question -- >> his attorney general went to prison. >> he did. so, do you send other people to prison and try to send a signal that way? merrick garland, i understand democrats want him to be more aggressive, he's in a very difficult position, given how difficult it would be to prove these crimes, that if trump was charged again and got off, might it help him politically. you raise what i think is

actually the key question of this moment. what's more important to republicans? the next two or four years, where they can have power or the next 25 years? look your children and grandchildren in the eyes. listen to what you have heard. forget sham committee, it doesn't matter who was leading the committee. listen to what these people have said. the people around donald trump the last three weeks and listen to what you're going to hear in the next two weeks. what's more important, to be speaker of the house or senate majority leader next year or for your grandchildren to live in a country where if you lose, you say damn it, you organize and win the next one. >> right. still more to come tonight. we're going to discuss the testimony we heard from multiple individuals about the threats and intimidation they faced similarly for doing their jobs. and also after they were publicly called out by donald trump. someone who has faced and previously testified about this, this cycle of threats, will join us. and later, what to expect

two days from now in the next hearings, as our special coverage of the january 6th coverage of the january 6th hearings continues. >> tech: ...we can replace your windshield and recalibrate your advanced safety system. >> dad: looks great. thanks. >> tech: stay safe with safelite. schedule now. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ so this is the meta portal plus. a smart video calling device that makes working from home work. a 12-megapixel lens makes sure your presentation is crystal clear. and smart camera auto pans and zooms to keep you perfectly in frame. oh, and it syncs with your calendar. plus, with zoom, microsoft teams, and webex, you'll never miss a meeting. and neither will she. now that's a productive day. meta portal: make working from home work for you.

♪ baby got back by sir mix-a-lot ♪ unlimited cashback match... only from discover. at bath fitter, every quality bath starts with quality people. our consultants help you choose from hundreds of bath options so we fit your style. our installers complete your work in as little as a day so we fit your schedule. our manufacturing team custom crafts your bath so we fit your standards, and it's guaranteed for life. when you can trust the people who create your new bath, it just fits. bath fitter. visit bathfitter.com to book your free consultation. ♪ limu emu ♪ and doug. ♪ harp plays ♪ only two things are forever: love and liberty mutual customizing your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need.

(emu squawks) if anyone objects to this marriage, speak now or forever hold your peace. (emu squawks) (the crowd gasps) no, kevin, no! not today. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ what can i du with less asthma? with dupixent, i can du more... crazy commutes... crowd control- have a nice day alex (thanks ms. ellen) ...taking the stairs. that's how you du more with dupixent, which helps prevent asthma attacks. 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 allergic reactions that can be severe. get help right away if you have rash, chest pain,

worsening shortness of breath, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor about new or worsening joint aches and pain, or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop asthma medicines, including steroids, without talking to your doctor. are you ready to du more with less asthma? just ask your asthma specialist about dupixent. lemons. lemons, lemons, lemons. look how nice they are. the moment you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels. so you can go and see all those, lovely, lemony, lemons. ♪ and never wonder if you got a good deal. because you did. ♪

much of the testimony we heard today was about how donald trump used his position as a bully pulpit in the worst sense of the word bully. there was repeated testimony about how donald trump would publicly call out the witness for not helping to overturn the election and then how those witnesses faced threats and harassment from trump's followers. that included arizona's house speaker republican rusty bowers. >> there was one gentleman that had the three bars on his chest, and he had a pistol and was threatening my neighbor not with the pistol, but just vocally.ith when i saw the gun, i knew i had to get close.

and at the same time, on some of these, we had a daughter who was gravely ill, who was upset by what was happening outside. >> rusty bowers mentioned his daughter who was gravely ill at the time all this madness was happening. casey bowers died in january 2021, just weeks after the january 6th riot. i'm joined by another republican who faced the same hideous anger and intimidation tactics and threats against his family and children. al schmidt, former city commissioner of philadelphia, he testified before the january 6th committee last week. commissioner, thank you for joining us. to hear other republican officials recount threats and pressure from donald trump to overturn votes and overturn electors, submit false electors, what did you make of that, as someone who has testified before the committee and also received similar threats yourself?

>> well, i think it's important for people to realize how widespread this was, especially for republican election officials across the country, than the former president intentionally targeted them, targeted them by name and just unleashed his deceived sort of followers and all of the ugliness in their direction. >> let's recall, because you and i talked about this before. there were -- in philadelphia, a lot of the counting was being done in the civic center, in the convention center, rather, downtown. there were lunatics arrested heading there with guns. >> and i think that's a very important point, and that example really ties a lot of this together. they headed to the pennsylvania convention center, where we were tabulating the votes up from virginia with guns and ammunition and all sorts of

other materials to sort of straighten things out, or whatever they said they were going to do, in philadelphia. they were arrested right outside our facility with guns, handguns and an ar-15 in their vehicle. and then later, those same two men were arrested because of their activity on january 6th on capitol hill. again and again the same people believing the same lies and being motivated into acting out a physical manifestation of all of these lies and doing so while armed. >> the former president continues to paint his enemies who are in the republican party as rinos, republican in name only. he's gone after you by name saying you're being used by, quote, the fake news media. to be clear, you and i have talked about this before. you're a republican, you're a chairman for the john mccain campaign, you were elected on a platform of battling voter fraud in philadelphia. what is it like when you hear donald trump tell these lies

about you? >> well, it's a little bit surreal and also to see people like speaker bowers and secretary raffensperger and others, and they are deeply conservative republicans. and to hear them referred to as rinos or many others just because of telling the truth about the 2020 election and all the grief that sort of went their way, it's really surreal and has nothing to do with being a republican at all. it has to do with whether you're willing to lie for the former president or not. >> former philadelphia commissioner al schmidt, good to see you again. thank you so much. >> likewise. once more, david urban, former campaign strategist for the 45th president. we also welcome elliott williams, former deputy assistant attorney general to the conversation and gloria and alyssa are back with us, as well. elliott, we haven't heard from you an your thoughts about what stood out today. >> well, it's a miracle of stagecraft they are putting on.

having had to present to congress before, preparing senators, but also as a prosecutor, you have to know your audience. they are doing this masterfully. it is hard to do. number two, i think the moment of the day was the name check of pat cipollone, the white house counsel. it is clear they're trying to get in donald trump's head and find out how specifically and how explicitly he was told that what he was doing was unlawful and the one person they want to hear from is the white house counsel. that's a name we'll keep hearing over the next couple of days. they're building a lot of evidence and a strong case. >> david urban, did it make sense to you what liz cheney was saying at the end of this, making clearly some sort of message to pat cipollone? >> i can guarantee one thing, you will not hear from pat cipollone. of the few people that have the privilege, the white house counsel has the privilege -- >> well -- >> i think it would be litigated long past this january 6th commission. >> sure.

>> and pat cipollone would have to voluntarily come before the committee, which he's not going to do. liz cheney can talk about pat cipollone and all these great things he may or may not do and kind of hang it out there, but he's not going to show up. he's not going to testify. >> it's not like pat cipollone is a huge fan of the president at this point. we know he defended him in impeachment, but we also know that he has been complaining about the president, even, remember jared kushner said he thought he was just whining at one point? and cipollone was in these meetings with these top justice department officials where he said, you know, we'll quit. we're going to leave. we're not going to stand for this. it would be important to hear from him. they know privately what he would say publicly, they do -- >> mirror the attorney general, i would guess. >> pat cipollone wouldn't want to come. >> the term rino now, we just heard it in this campaign

comm comm commercial. is this now -- i mean, is anybody a rino who is not willing to support the lies of the former president? i mean, i guess that is what it now -- >> that's how it's been redefined. you're not going to find someone more conservative than myself. republican now is linked to maga, being in favor of trump and the election lies he spread. so, rino gets thrown around left and right, like the previous guest with jake. but one thing i want to mention, because i think all of this bears on 2024 and the former president's chances if he is to run, i would say this, this is a moment for the american people where it's not a binary choice between trump and biden. if merrick garland doesn't indict, if there aren't legal charges, it is a moment that the american people can say, well, it might be time for a different republican leader and that may end up being the biggest takeaway. >> and maybe trump is not the republican. did you ever think of that? trump is not conservative.

he is not as conservative as perhaps you or liz cheney -- >> mike pence. >> or bowers or whoever. but it is a cult. and it is a trump cult and at some point, the republican party has to figure out what it is and someone has to stand up to donald trump and say, you know what, you're not -- >> right now, let's just make it clear, right now, donald trump still is the guy, right? i mean, amongst the majority of republican primary voters across america, we see this time and time again -- >> yep. >> that trump candidates, trumpism, maga, coms the party. >> but this gets to what john king brought up with jake earlier, which is the question that john said is facing republicans about what's more important, continuing these lies to win the next election cycle or looking your grandkids in the eye and say you did the right thing. you were saying it's not so easy? >> if it were that easy, you'd have people standing up and doing that. i think politicians are responsive to their electorate, right? so, whether it's in pennsylvania

or indiana or florida, people are going to their town hall meetings, their fire halls, going to their fairs, hearing from their constituents and people are saying, we don't believe this. we don't think it really happened. whatever the conspiracy theory may be, whatever their reasoning may be, they believe it, okay? and until you convince those people that it really happened and it was a really bad thing, donald trump will remain king. >> but david, i will say, you're probably like me hearing from republican potential candidates who have been watching the last few weeks and are thinking, this might be my moment. this might be what weakens trump enough for me to run in 2024. >> may be hopeful. >> but look at congressman rice. he voted for impeachment and he just lost. >> he lost -- he got hammered. >> he was a really conservative member of congress. >> to john king's point, you can have your profile in courage moment, but you won't be a senator, you won't be secretary of state -- >> okay. >> you'll be gone. >> and so, can you effect wait

change if you're not sitting in the chair? >> that gets to the point of the hearings, i think everybody is fixating on my stuff, is it a crime or not? and there's a few difference purposes of it. you're making the case to the american people and the electorate it's a political body. and number three, maybe they will come out with criminal charges to refer to the justice department or not, you know, the justice department can actually still be investigating or choosing not to investigate or prosecute the president right now. ahead, the next chapter of these hearings with former justice department officials and what they could reveal on the former president's use of disinformation to try to overturn the election. that's next. ♪ and party every day. ♪ ♪ i want to rock and roll all night ♪ applebee's late night. because half off is just more fun. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

she is fearless heart's on the line depend silhouette keeping leaks off her mind. comfortable in shapeware fabric she moves with ease. confident on nights like these. depend silhouette. the only thing stronger than us, is you. your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire before discovering nexium 24hr to treat her frequent heartburn... claire could only imagine enjoying chocolate cake. now, she can have her cake and eat it too. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day,

all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn?

tonight, members of the house committee tell cnn that the hearing schedule is in flux because of that newly obtained documentary footage, but we do know the next public hearing is still set for thursday, at least as of now. that's when three trump justice department officials, including the acting attorney general who replaced bill barr is set to testify. jeff rosen has already spoken with the committee in private. he has shown a willingness to pursue the fraud claims other justice officials wouldn't. this is what barr told the select committee about allegations in georgia in video revealed today. >> we took a hard look at this ourselves, and based on our

review of it, including the interviews of the key witnesses, the fulton county allegations were -- had no merit. >> abby phillip, jamie gangel ca casey kasie hunt and john king are all back with us. jamie, that's significant, because what people don't understand, the trump supporters don't understand, is bill barr, jeffrey rosen, all these folks, the u.s. attorney b.j. pak, they would have loved to find fraud to make their boss happy. they wanted to please him. but there wasn't any fraud. >> as i frequently say about all the testimony coming out now is better late than never, but where were they at the time? i'm told the thursday hearing is going to be even more compelling and effective than what we heard today. i'm told that jeffrey rosen, richard donahue, that they are blunt and they're going to lay

out exactly what was going on at the time. i also just want to go back to cipollone and liz cheney, her calling him out today. david urban, we heard him say with anderson that there's no way cipollone's coming in toch the. that may be true, but expect a lot of pressure from the committee to try to get him there. >> because, of course, there is no reason for cipollone to not testify except for self-preservation in this particular case, and there is a strong -- if you are a republican and you want to continue to have a law firm where you have clients in republican spaces, you want to continue to operate in your social circles and go to the country club, it's hard to testify against trump and still do all of those things, so a lot of the witnesses we are not seeing are facing that dilemma. but i will say about thursday, it will be interesting to see

what the lawyers have to say about these insane, quote, unquote, legal theories. and also the machinations that were happening in doj. i think you don't have to be a lawyer to know that all of these ideas were probably illegal, that they didn't make any sense. but i think that the lawyers who are lawyers will be pretty blunt in breaking down why none of this really made any sense and we'll learn some things, probably, about how close we got to some really unethical people getting installed in the justice department at a really critical moment. >> one of the things, abby, to go back to your point about cipollone, and it ties in with what john was saying during our last conversation, there actually is a big difference between what happens here in washington in those social circles and those country clubs and what we've seen play out in the states, right? the difference between brad raffensperger and some of the

others we saw today was he was actually able to say back to the georgia voters and get reelected. he received from his party -- his governor brian kemp was also reelected at the objection of donald trump. people like cipollone are esconced here in washington, d.c. and the decision has been made, if i don't join this tribe, i'm going to get thrown out of it and that's not tenable for me politically. that's the difference between courage and a lack of it. i am interested to see, because we're going to bring the conversation on thursday back here to washington, what we learned about who was willing to stand up inside the department of justice. we've had obviously some reporting about it, but i think that's really going to be the question. who are the profiles in courage that we don't fully understand? >> i think it's critical to jamie's point, can you be compelling? that's a high bar because today was compelling. so much of the testimony has been compelling. the committee is trying to disprove what you hear from trump and the people around him. the president thought he was being -- then he was told repeatedly, in the two months between then and january 6th, sir, we went to

court. sir, we had a recount. sir, that's illegal. sir, you cannot do that. it was not just trump venting. you continued to have trump looking for additional actors. when you get the testimony from mr. rosen and mr. donahue and others from the justice department saying, this is crazy. then what did donald trump want to do? he wanted to fire them all and put an environmental lawyer in the justice department because they wouldn't do his bidding. brad raffensperger wouldn't do his bidding, michigan officials wouldn't do his bidding, the speaker of the house wouldn't do his bidding. he couldn't get the people in michigan to do his bidding. this is not a president who was venting, this is a president who knew he lost and kept looking for people to help him cheat. >> one of the other things that i wonder about, if pat cipollone is actually making this decision that we're talking about, i don't want to be on the outs completely with republicans, et cetera. liz cheney said this today, we know that he was internal at the white house trying to push back on a lot of this stuff.

donald trump has already got him on his enemies list. i mean, that's done. that ship has sailed. donald trump said something negative about ivanka trump the other day when the testimony came out that she believed bill barr. >> doesn't take much. >> checked out. >> she was checked out. it's not the kind of thing i would say about my daughter. >> you can say the same thing about mike pence. >> right, exactly. >> or don mcgahn before that. >> it would be an understatement to say that trump threw pence under the bus. he called him the p word in a phone call in the last days of the administration. but you talk to pence, he gave an interview to "the wall street journal" over the weekend where he didn't really have anything negative to say about trump. pence is the epitome of someone walking that line. you're really not on trump's side, but you can't be overtly anti-trump. >> that's what i think somebody called this, the brian kemp, the governor of georgia, his method,

which is, trump might be mad at me, i'm not mad at him. that's what pence is trying to do. cipollone doesn't have to do that. he's not depending on votes. he's just depending on business, right? >> people are voting with their pocketbooks. in this town, i mean, i'm going to be honest, in this town, people need to remain employed and that matters. >> thanks to all of you. we're going to be right back with some final thoughts in this extraordinary day in the search for answers by the select committee. one name that really stood out and how it reminded us of a disturbing chapter in u.s. history nearly 70 years ago. that's next. ♪ ♪ introducing the all-new infiniti qx60.

take on your wild world in style. ♪ announcer: type 2 diabetes? discover the power of 3 in the ozempic® tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. announcer: ozempic® provides powerful a1c reduction. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes.

taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. join the millions already taking ozempic®. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone. announcer: you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription. ♪ ♪ ♪ (sha bop sha bop) ♪ ♪ are the stars out tonight? (sha bop sha bop) ♪ ♪ ♪ alexa, play our favorite song again. ok. ♪ i only have eyes for you ♪

when it comes to cybersecurity, the biggest threats don't always strike the biggest targets. so help safeguard your small business with comcast business securityedge™ it's advanced security that continuously scans for threats and helps protect every connected device. the choice is clear. get unbeatable business solutions from the most innovative company. so you can be ready for what's next. get started with a great deal on internet and voice for just $49.99 a month for 24 months with a 2 -year price guarantee. call today.

former georgia elections w worker shaye moss testified before congress today about what it was like to be on the receiving end of a donald trump smear campaign. >> yes, a lot of threats. wishing death upon me, telling me that, you know, i'll be in jail with my mother and saying things like, be glad it's 2020 and not 1920.

>> were a lot of these threats and vile comments racist in nature? >> a lot of them were racist. a lot of them were just hateful. >> her testimony recalled a different hearing on capitol hill. with a different woman with >> what i'm talking right now about annie lee moss. dragged before joe mccarthy's committee in march 1954. we sold the notion that there was a spy in the code room of the pentagon. any lee moss was not a soviet spy anymore than shea moss was

an election thief. annie lee moss was a loyal government employee who had no idea what joe mccarthy was talking about. i'm afraid i'm going to have to accuse myself on this. >> it was a complete farce. highlighted a few days later by edward r murrow the smear campaign backfired. drew pearson wrote that wisconsin folks saw her as a nice old lady who wasn't harming anyone. there were other d