the former president has no role in this. that will still be a sticky part of the situation. wolf, what this will likely lead to is a negotiating posture between cipollone and the committee. he's had informal conversations with them. we'll see if this compels him to come forward and cooperate. >> much more on the breaking news. "erin burnett outfront" starts right now. this is cnn breaking news. >> thanks to wolf. good evening. i'm erin burnett. "outfront" tonight, the breaking news, a major move by the january 6th select committee, the committee having a subpoena for trump's former top attorney. this is an important and significant move because cipillone was there, with the president in the white house, the days leading up to and on

january 6th. an omnipresent person there. he was involved or present during many of the moments that cassidy hutchison described in her testimony, including this moment. >> i saw mr. cipollone right before i walked out that morning, and he said something to the effect of, please make sure we don't go up to the capitol, cassidy. keep in touch with me. we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> manu raju is "outfront" live on capitol hill. you heard her recount her conversation with pat cipollone. so this subpoena, obviously significant. what are you learning about it? >> reporter: this subpoena sent today, demanding that he appear before this committee, saying that they have spoken to him in an informal basis, acknowledging

that it did happen on april 13th, but now wanting his testimony, especially in light of all the new information that's come out. one of the big things that has come out through the course of these hearings and the investigation is that cipollone was a key individual resisting the efforts to lean on different levels of the federal government, as donald trump and allies tried to do to overturn the electoral results, and as you noted, played a big role in cassidy hutchison's testimony, saying that he made very clear that if donald trump were to come to the capitol on january 6th, they could be in some serious legal trouble, saying that every crime imaginable, they could be charged with if donald trump got his way and came to the capitol as rioters were breaching the capitol. also, hutchison revealing that cipollone wanted donald trump to do more on january 6th. went to mark meadows, the chief of staff at the time and said to him, i want to talk to the

president. meadows responded, he doesn't want to do anything. so cipollone could provide corroborating evidence if that, in fact, happened. especially since he had firsthand, direct conversations with the president. but erin, it's still an open question about how he will respond, whether he will fight this at all, despite him standing up to the president, he's not been willing to testify yet to the committee. he has believed that informal interview that happened in april was sufficient. so whether or not this is enough, this subpoena to compel him to testify, remains to be seen. and what will the committee do if he does not do it, do they try to hold him -- refer him to the justice department to be held in contempt? because as we know, erin, time is running out on this committee. we have until the midterm elections. if republicans take control this election, this investigation is essentially over. so this could draw out for some time if he does not agree to come to this committee. but a big move in forcing the

white house counsel to come before them. >> manu, thank you very much. as you find out more, please let us know. pat cipollone is a private person, and that informal appearance with the committee, but has staedeadfastly refused do more. "outfront" now, our political correspondent dana bash, and david urban, an adviser to trump's 2020 campaign. look, so lucky to have all of you. i know, david urban, that you know pat cipollone. you worked with him in the trump world. norm, you also know him, and have had a lot of respect for him over the years. what do you think happens from here? pat cipollone has said he has attorney/client privilege, these are the rules and restrictions of the office and hasn't wanted to come forward.

is he going to stick with that? or does this change anything, norm? >> erin, thanks for having me back. this ratchets up the pressure considerably. we know he did informal cooperation, so the privilege issues can be addressed. the biden white house owns those privilege issues, that's been litigated. pat can't hide behind privilege. is he going to want to go the way of steve bannon and peter navaro, who are being prosecuted for criminal contevempt? pat's a working lawyer. he has a legal obligation to show up. he can attempt to dodge, assert privileges or answer questions however he may think is right. but he can't refuse to show up. or he faces what bannon and navaro are confronting, criminal prosecution. so he's got some tough decisions to make.

>> as you point out, he is a working lawyer. there's a lot at stake. david, i want to remind everyone, i played a sound bite of cassidy hutchison describing the conversations she had that day, saying don't let trump go to the capitol, because they're going to throw every charge at us if he goes ahead with that. she also was there when he sort of -- her account sort of came charging in, full of stress to talk to meadows, and here is what she says cipollone said. >> mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and their blood is going to be on your "f"-ing hands. this is getting out of control. >> david, you also know pat cipollone. she said that and that is significant. him saying it under oath will carry additional weight, because he was there with the president. he can talk about his conversations with the president.

will the subpoena change his view? >> so erin, look, only pat knows that, and his lawyer know it. at this point, norm, as you know, they can litigate this for quite some time, until this committee has run out of steam. pat has cooperated. the committee has had the opportunity to ask him plenty of questions and to dig into this. i think what happened maybe was yesterday after the bombshell that cassidy dropped about president trump grabbing the steering wheel of the car and being this altercation, and then, you know, later we find out it was an egg, you know, the secret service pushed back and said they'll testify under oath, when members of the committee were asked on this network, why didn't they ask about that incident, they both -- adam schiff and mr. raskin didn't have an answer for that question. why didn't they dig deeper? so maybe they're trying to cover their bases a little better. the committee should have done all this stuff prior to this

point in time. pat has done the right thing, he's cooperated, given them testimony. he's done everything correctly up to this point. they had plenty of opportunity. so now i think maybe they're up against it, and the committee had a big egg yesterday with this secret service piece. so maybe they're trying to -- >> obviously, we know that she is standing by what she had to say about that incident with the suv, and that -- >> erin -- >> again, i hear you -- >> let's see if they call him in to depose him. if the committee is so strong about it -- >> no one should have any issue with that. but obviously, that was one of several things she said. >> but it was a big thing. >> it got a lot of attention. i would hope you would agree, obviously, the more significant thing she actually said was that the president of the united states knew that people were armed and said take away the mags and march on the capitol

any way, rouxight? >> they can ask tony about that, too. >> right. as i said, they should. but dana, let me ask you about pat cipollone, because he would be privy to so much of this. what is the committee thinking in doing this now? now cassidy hutchison has relayed these conversations. what is their strategy? they know full well he can fight this subpoena and run out the clock. >> they've been inching towards this moment. they have been talking to pat cipollone in private about going beyond the informal discussion and really coming out and testifying publicly. that didn't work. so you remember last week, liz cheney publicly implored pat cipollone to come testify. that didn't work. now they're at the point where they're sending the subpoena. the question i have, and maybe norm can talk about the kind of -- the delicate dance that is

done in situations like this, is whether or not pat cipollone said because he is a working lawyer and a loyal republican, if you want me, you're going to have to subpoena me at this point, to compel me to go and do it. that is a possibility. >> i'm glad you said that, because you are pressient here, dana. maggie haberman, a contributor here at the network and of "the new york times," norm, just tweeted that a lawyer familiar with this said of course a subpoena was necessary before the former white house counsel could consider transcribed testimony before the committee. he's previously provided an informal interview with the request. now that a subpoena has been issued, the matter also be evaluated. what do you hear when you hear that? it seems to me that is sort of what dana is suggesting.

>> yeah, i hear the game show that we all grew up with, erin, "let's make a deal." you know, there's pat and his counsel are now going to attempt to establish the parameters. they'll make decisions do they want to preemptively rush to court like mark meadows did. do they want to roll the dice, do they want to assert prifvilee the committee, or does pat want to do his duty? he is a working lawyer, he has sworn an oath to defend the constitution. we have seen the most serious attack on our government in generations. never before from the oval office. he has critical information about that. he has a duty to his country, to the rule of law, to the constitution, as a human being and as a american.

pat, if you're watching, do the right thing, buddy. >> david urban -- >> can i just say -- >> dana, go ahead. >> one thing, because we're understandably very focused on this incredible testimony that we saw yesterday from cassidy hutchison, where she got talked about and invoked pat cipollone for several different reasons. but we have to remember last week's testimony with the three top officials at doj who testified in public, under oath, about that -- about the unbelievable meeting they had in the oval uoffice, and pat cipollone was there, the meeting where the president said he wanted the doj to send a letter to georgia saying they were going to overturn their slate of electors and he did not want that to happen. if it was only that start pre-january 6th, that would be a

bombshell. >> so david, the context here too, you know, when we hear that pat cipollone said to cassidy hutchison, he said, just -- you cannot let him go to the capitol. they will throw every charge at us in the books. this cannot happen. and in that context, that conversation, she said that she had with pat, i'm thinking about what ty cobb, a former trump attorney said today. he told her, if this isn't an insurrection, i don't know what is. and he's saying that based on what he took away from cassidy hutchison's testimony. you know, warts and all, to your point, warts and all. his takeaway from her, if this isn't an insurrection, i don't know what one is. do you think that anything is changing for some republicans here, david? >> no, again, i don't think that the people who are tuning into these hearings are base republican voters. >> fair.

>> i don't think that's the case. i think they're tuned out. most americans, i think, are either on holiday already going on ol day, focused on the economy. people will look back on this and may remember this in 2024, they may remember parts of this. but i don't think it's really sticking. and if we just go back to pat cipollone for a second. let's not lose focus. we're talking about a transcribed deposition, not appearing before the committee. >> that is what you referred to, yes. >> so nobody -- i wouldn't expect to see pat with his hand raised before the committee testifying before liz cheney. this will be -- and it may not be videotaped, maybe just transcribed. pat is a great american, he's done the right thing so far. so i suspect he will do that moving forward. >> dana, one of the questions is what charges do you think they were going to throw? what charges would have been appropriate, right?

and that's where we are now, where you have one republican congressman, a senior house republican, i'm not -- we're not naming. a senior house republican who did not back impeachment, told cnn today that hutchison "this testimony will lead to indictments." dana, the question, is would indictments mean anything to voters, two thus far to david's point have not shifted opinion in response to these hearings as of yet. >> i mean, in a -- in a normal political world, how could they not? i mean, what if he's indicted, and what if he's convicted? i mean, then what? it has to change some voters' minds. i know david is saying when it comes to the base, they haven't changed their mind. of course. but this isn't about the trump base. they're never going to change their mind. this is about other republican

voters, republican primary voters, who might be looking beyond maybe to the governor of the state you live in now, david, of florida, or maybe the governor of south dakota or other options in the republican field. >> so norm, how does this play out from here regarding pat cipollone and the subpoena? he's responded quickly, but there is a clock ticking. how does it play out? >> i think we'll see just the issues that david and i are talking about, the mechanics of it. those are the things that are negotiated. will it be on video, won't it be on video? if i were, as i once was a lawyer, up there on the hill, i would really press to get this on video so you can show it to the american people at a future hearing. how long will it be? what questions are on limits? what questions are off limits? but i agree with david. i think the likelihood is, he has the subpoena, he's not going

to defy the subpoena. even if he litigates, he could be held in contempt and prosecuted for failing to show. i think pat is going to be walking up those steps to talk to this committee. >> all right. thank you all very much. i appreciate it as we kov they are breaking development. next, the capitol police officer harry dunn, you remember him working at the capitol, saving people from the mob. tonight, he has a question for cassidy hutchison. the washington examiner slamming the former president, calling him a disgrace. and r. kelly sentenced to 30 years in prison. the details ahead.

♪ baby got back by sir mix-a-lot ♪ unlimited cashback match... only from discover.

you know liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need? like how i customized this scarf? check out this backpack i made for marco. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪

breaking news. cnn just learning that the january 6th select committee has subpoenaed former trump white house counsel pat cipollone, as one of the hero officers from that day calls out trump allies who did not do more to stop him from inciting the riots. hours after aide cassidy hutchison testified before the committee, u.s. capitol police officer harry dunn tweeting, i'm always conflicted when i see these courageous men and women coming forward their testimony. like sure, i appreciate it tremendously, but there wasn't anything you could have done before we got our asses beat? and then saying, i'm not blaming

her or any other witness we have heard from that happened that day, the blame belongs with the former president and the people who attacked us, period. officer harry dunn is "outfront." he confronted rioters that day, many who subjected him to racial slurs, screamed in his face. and you are speaking to me in your personal capacity. so the development here about pat cipollone getting a subpoena to appear. so as you know, officer, cassidy hutchison testified that pat cipollone directly, in a conversation with her, said, you know, you can't let the president go to the capitol. you can't let that happen. because there will be serious legal consequences, all sorts of charges could happen. and then she testified, as the riot unfolded, cipollone tolds mark meadows people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your "f"-ing hands. how much do you think you could learn from hearing pat cipollone

testifying? >> thanks for having me on. i don't think there's any -- well, i say that reluctantly. i don't know how much more we can really learn versus how much more we can corroborate about what happened. you know, like i said, i don't know how much we can learn, but it's important for these people, especially the deniers and the liars about saying what didn't happen. myself and all the other witnesses, the other officers, ms. hutchison, everybody that's appeared before the committee, that's appeared under oath, these individuals are just appearing on twitter with their opinions. so it's a lot more credible when you are under oath, and under penalty of perjury. so, you know, i take all that noise with a grain of salt. if you have something to say, and you dispute what is true, then come under oath and say what is true. >> yep. so now, i read your tweets. i thought it was just very powerful when you said i'm always conflicted when i see

these "courageous" men and women coming forward with their testimony. i appreciate it tremendously, but there isn't anything you could have done before? does cassidy hutchison deserve credit for testifying publicly when so many other trump allies have frankly not cooperating behind closed doors with the committee. >> i think it's a very difficult question, but i do give her the utmost credit for doing what she was supposed to do. i'm not criticizing her at all. but i ask that question not in a rhetorical sense. it would be fair to get an answer, was there anything that could have been done before to stop that? sure, everybody has all these opinions, but really could have been done? and i appreciate her coming forward and every other witness. and i especially want to point out how the individuals who have come forward have been few and far. so maybe it is -- we do need to

give a little more credit to people who have come forward. whether it's intimidation, fear, whatever it is, people aren't coming forward without being legally compelled to do so. but i do think it's important to acknowledge that she did the right thing. i'm thankful for that. i ask that question, was there anything that could have been done? that's a fair question to individuals, over 150 officers who got hurt, and to officer brian sicknick's family, is there anything that could have been done to prevent that from happening? >> the more we find out, one of the most troubling parts, people knew that, you know, that this was -- there's going to be blood on your hands. there was a lot more where that comment came from. during the hearing yesterday, you know, we played things that cassidy hutchison said. and she talked about a conversation that her boss, mark meadows, had with the deputy chief of staff. and the conversation was about

how heavily armed the trump supporters were on january 6th. they knew they were armed. here's what she said. >> i remember tony mentioning knives, guns, in the form of pistols and rifles, bear spray, body armor, spears and flagpoles. tony had relayed to me something to the effect of, and these "f"-ing people are fastening spears onto the ends of flagpoles. >> incredible detail that they knew what that -- that mob had. and she says it's not just that, you know, the deputy chief of staff knew about this. the former president knew about all of these details, as well. here's that part. >> is it your understanding that mr. ornado told the president about the weapons at the raly the morning of january 6th? >> that's what he relayed to me. >> i mean, officer, there you

have it. they were armed, in great detail. the president of the united states knew it, and his response was, take the mags away and let them go to the capitol, where you were, doing your job, and those weapons were used to assault police officers. people died. how does it feel to hear this? >> i said yesterday that betrayal is one of the toughest emotions that you ever have to deal with. whether you like somebody's politics or policies, everybody has a job to do. somebody cannot like me as an individual, but when they see me as a police officer, they expect me to do my job and to protect, no matter what. that's what i expected from the president. and whether i agree with his policies or not, he failed at his job. not only did he fail at his job, he incited -- he sent those people armed towards us. so that's very -- it's a disappointing feeling. like, i don't have -- i didn't

have high expectations any way, but that totally just, like, what is lower than no expectations at all? it's just disappointing. >> betrayal is a powerful word. you have been in that room for every hearing of the january 6th select committee has had. any hearing that was public, you were there. you've been a source of comfort and support repeatedly. we've seen that. we're showing you on the screen. witnesses like officer caroline edwards, the former georgia election worker, the family of brian sicknick, you were there with them. you've been moved to tears watching and hearing and seeing some of what we've had in these hearings. yet officer, you go, because i know it's important for you to bear witness to it. how hard is it for you to keep reliving that day over and over and to be a source of strength for so many at those hearings? >> thank you for pointing that

out, but i know your last segment, you mentioned with dana about how this isn't influencing voters. i don't care if anybody's mind is changed. i'm going because i'm seeking accountability and justice. whether that influences votes or not, i don't care. i care about the justice department examining all the facts and getting to the bottom and holding the individuals that committed these crimes responsible no matter at the presidential level or some aide level. it doesn't matter. anybody who had anything to do with the failures of that day needs to be held accountable. it's very important for me to show the committee my face every day, to show that i'm holding them accountable to do their job. me and my co-workers, we did our job that day. and i expect them to do theirs also. so my face and presence is a friendly reminder that hey, we're still involved in this. so do your job, respectfully.

>> thank you very much. i appreciate your time. everyone appreciates you and your actions. thank you. >> thank you for having me on. >> all right. next, the governor of arkansas will be "outfront." he signed one of the strictest abortion bans in the country before the supreme court overturned roe v. wade. no exceptions in arkansas for rape or incest. but he's going the take our questions and he's my guest, next. new police audio of the moment police arrived in the worst catastrophe in the united states that left 53 migrants dead. investments) in this market, you'll find fisher investments is different than other money managers. (other money manager) different how? aren't we all just looking for the hottest stocks? (fisher investments) nope. we use diversified strategieses to position our clclient's portfolios for their long-term goals. (other money manager) but you still sell investments that generate high commissions for you, right? (fisher investments) no, we don't sell commission products. we're a fiduciary, obligated to act in our client's best interest. (other money manager) so when do you make more money, only when your clients make more money?

(fisher investments) yep. we do better when our clients do better. at fisher investments, we're clearly different.

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. ♪

toonb tonight, a conservati outlet saying that cassidy hutchison's testimony should be the death nell of donald trump's career, saying trump is a disgrace, no one should think otherwise, much less support him ever again that's just one line, it's a powerful indict from the

conservative washington examiner. "outfront" now, republican governor of arkansas, asa hutchison. governor, i appreciate your time. you hear that context, and the january 6th moments ago subpoenaed the former trump white house council pat cipollone. he was present throughout all of this, he was with the president throughout all of this. he was depicted in cassidy hutchison's testimony as a warning that trump would face criminal liability and saying blood on your hands to anyone who -- as this day continued. how important is it to hear from pat cipollone, governor? >> well, he's a key person in all of the discussions, and cassidy hutchison yesterday certainly indicated that he was right in the middle of it. he understood what was going on. he cast warnings as to what

would happen if the president encouraged people to go to the capitol. but i'm a lawyer. i've been a federal prosecutor. i've been in congress during impeachment trial, and i know how important that attorney/client privilege is, particularly when you're dealing with the chief executive of the united states of america. i would expect pat cipollone, who is highly respected, to respond to the subpoena. i would expect that he would want to have a court tell him that the privilege does not apply here or the public interest outweighs the claiming oh of the privilege. and so it's a very sensitive area that's important for all lawyers. it's important for me as governor and someone who is president to have confidence in that inner circle and the privileges that you can have those conversations. but this is obviously of great national interest. the committee has certainly made a case that the president acted irresponsibly during this time.

irrationally during this time. the question is whether he acted criminally during this time. the committee is trying to make the case. i don't think they're there yet. >> you don't think they are there yet, which is interesting. i want to remind everyone, you've come on this show self-times. all the way back in february of 2021, we spoke and you said trump bears a great deal of responsibility, key responsibility for what happened at our nation's capitol on january 6th. that's what you told me. i know you're saying now you don't think they're there on the criminal level. but where do -- how close are they? a former trump aide told cnn that hutchison's testimony was a bombshell and a senior republican lawmaker predicts -- who voted against impeachment, said this will lead to indictments. do you agree? >> well, it could. but let me stress that this is a public hearing that is clearly designed for the greatest public

drama, and it's not designed for the usual fairness and cross-examination that you have in the courtroom. they really need to work at showcasing more fairness. for example, the personal eyewitness testimony of cassidy hutchison yesterday was very powerful. the rest was, as well. but you can see the hearsay part now is being undermined and questioned. and so that's what they're presenting, so they've got to be able to call other witnesses. they're not subject to cross-examination. they're admitting hearsay. you're not hearing the other point of view. so the public is watching this with some skepticism. and i know the justice department will, as well. they understand how difficult a criminal case is, and so they're going to have to be looking at much harder than this committee is right now. >> and your view is still that trump bears the key responsibility for what happened, you just don't think they have proven the criminal level? >> at this point, that's

correct. i mean, he -- former president trump brought the people there. he obviously encouraged them to go to the capitol. that's problematic in and of itself whenever it results in the kind of violence that we saw. >> i want to turn to another major story tonight, governor, that is abortion in what is now a post roe america. after the supreme court ruling on friday, your state had a trigger law that if roe is overturned, another law goes into effect. and the law in your state that went into effect is a law that pan bans abortions in all cases except to save the life in a medical emergency. you signed that law in 2019. i know that you say you would have preferred that your state ban was not as restrictive as it is. how come? >> well, because whenever you look at rape and incest, the result of criminal conduct,

those are incredibly tragic circumstances. a public policy in arkansas is to protect the unborn child. they adopted that with one exception, which is the life of the mother. that was overwhelmingly supported, and that's the policy in arkansas. i expressed at the time that i would prefer those other exceptions to be in there, but my veto can be overrid witden wa simp ma simple majority. sit what the law is now in this state, so we have to make sure that we are providing the services that we need to the expected moms that we make sure that we improve our adoption services capability, our counseling during this time. that's a process that we're going through now. >> right. and i'll say the children's defense fund, they rank your state 47th in child poverty.

so there's significant work to be done there for children who are born in arkansas. but on this issue of rape, governor -- >> it's just important. you're citing those statistics. you really -- obviously, a southern state has challenges with our health outcomes. we work very hard to improve those. that's why we're investing more in maternal health care. but you have to separate that some from simply saying that that is a reason then not to have a pro-life position or not to protect the life of the unborn. and so we want to work on both of those together can. we want to improve those statistics. but that's not a reason to say the unborn child should not have some level of protection. >> so on this issue of rape specifically, and i know that you -- you've made it clear that you would have allowed those exceptions. so i want to make that clear on

the record. according to the fbi crime data, the latest that they have, which is from the year 2020, arkansas ranked second in the united states for the most instances of rape per 100,000 people. that's got to be painful to hear, governor. i know you yourself would have allowed that exception. but you say the will of the people, you know, spoke. but it didn't actually happen, because you had roe. so i guess i'm curious, what are you going to do about it? are you going to try to do something to change that part of it? or are you simply at this point going to focus on children born out of rape or incest in arkansas, having better lives? >> it's a good question, and first of all, any rapist, anybody who commits a criminal act, assault against a woman, they need to be prosecuted. we need to make sure that we investigate, go after that person, hold them responsible.

secondly, whenever you're looking at the exceptions, you're right. the trigger law was passed at a time when roe v. wade was still in place. now that it's reversed, now that the real authority goes back to the state, experience is going to be instructive. how are we going to handle this? are we going to see real life examples that are going to change people's thinking on that, and the will of the people? we're going to learn from that experience, and i think it could be a time that has to be readdressed. but now, the will of the people is very clear on that point. and time and experience will dictate as to whether that will be changed in the future. >> governor hutchison, i appreciate your time and i appreciate the conversation. thank you. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> you too, sir. as you hear the governor speaking, governors are on the frontlines in the fight over abortion rights in america. jeff zeleny is "outfront" in michigan.

>> i don't think many knew that michigan would snap back 91 years to a law that would render this pro-choice state one of the most extreme in the country. >> reporter: governor whiter in is on the frontlines of the new abortion fight . she sounded the alarm about the supreme court overturning roe v. wade. as fallout, ripples across the country, from courts, to campaigns. it's suddenly a central issue in battleground governor races in michigan, wisconsin, and pennsylvania, where democrats say they are the last line of defense from republican challengers, and gop controlled legislatures, pressing for more

restrictions. >> the most important economic decision a woman makes in her lifetime is when and whether to have a child. and this court decision threatens to rip that away from every woman in the country. it's going to be up to governors. that's why this fight is so important. >> does this issue overtake other issues, other challenges, head winds that your party was facing? >> inflation has taken a toll, the cost of gas and groceries, it's tough. but i also know that you take away someone's ability to make their health care decision, that only compounds the pain that families are going to feel. >> michigan mom on a mission. >> reporter: tutor dixon is the leading candidate for governor, opposed to abortion rights. >> you have the pro life people that feel like this was a win, and you have the pro choice people who want something different. >> reporter: abortion right supporters are collecting signatures to put the issue on

the november ballot, catching new fire in the wake of the court's ruling. >> friday, all hell broke loose. you know, people saying, what can i do to help? we are getting a lot of people who aren't necessarily democrats coming to sign, because they just think it's wrong. >> reporter: john murray, a small business owner of a baby and children's store, said he will sign the petition, because it's an issue for men, as well. >> if you have a daughter, if you're married, if you have a sister, if you have a mother, if you don't feel like -- my wife feels like i'm less of a human than you are, she's like, you have more rights than i do. >> reporter: a proposed constitutional amendment in michigan is seen as a test run in other states. >> this will serve as a model for other similarly situated states. it really sort of be a beacon in the midst of a really difficult

time for reproductive right supporters. >> reporter: that is why opponents of abortion rights vow to fight the ballot initiative to stop it in michigan. >> we'll either have a ban on abortion that protects human life, or we will have this anything goes abortion amendment. this is a little bit of a test to see what they can do in other states. >> reporter: and now there are just a few more days to gather enough signatures to put that question on the november ballot. and erin, people on both sides of the debate expect them to reach the required 425,000 some-odd signatures. this does not guarantee a specific outcome in november, but it makes one thing clear, this is going to be a motivating factor for both sides until november. erin? >> jeff zeleny, thank you very much for that report from michigan tonight. next, the new details about the alleged driver of the truck where 53 migrants were found dead inside. a mexican official says he tried

to pass himself off as a victim to escape. and singer r. kelly convicted to 30 years after being convivicte of sex trafficking. when moderate to severe ulcerative colitis persists... put it in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when uc got unpredicble,... i got rapid symptom relief with rinvoq. check. when uc held me back... i got lasting, steroid-free remission with rinvoq. check. and when uc got the upper hand... rinvoq helped visibly repair the colon lining. check. rapid symptom relief. lasting, steroid-free remission. and a chance to visibly repair the colon lining.

check. check. and check. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older... with at least 1 heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq... as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. put uc in check and keep it there, with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq. and learn how abbvie could help you save.

just in, new information on the deadliest human smuggling attempt in american history. we're now learning the name of the driver of the truck and the charges against him. the death toll today going up

again. more people dead from that. 53. a mexican official says the driver of the truck pretended to be a victim before he was ultimately arrested. u.s. officials have not confirmed that specific detail. but rosa flores is "out front" is san antonio tonight. rosa, what are you learning about the charges and this drive. >> the driver is a 45-year-old man with residence in both brownsville, texas, and pasadena, texas. and the charges according to the western district of texas is one count of alien smuggling resulting in death. if swconvicted, he could face le in prison or death. we are learning a little more on what happened based on this press release just released by the u.s. attorney's office. them driving that bodies were found inside the tractor-trailer, outside, and also in the brush, and that the driver was hiding in the brush when he was detained.

erin, i should add, there are four people total who have been charged so far. we've discussed the two others on your show before. the individuals were facing weapons charges. but we learned today just now that an individual by the name of christian martinez is also charged with one count of conspiracy of human smuggling causing death. now, according to these documents, they linked the two because of cell phone records. >> so, rosa, also we are finding out, as this number have climbed, people who had been fighting for their lives when they made it to the hospital have also succumbed. we are at 53 dead. among them are children. what more do you know about that? and who are the survivors? >> reporter: you know, i just talked to the san antonio police chief, and he was reluctant to really describe the scene, erin, because he said it was so

gruesome. but he found words to describe the indekriebable. take a listen. >> the floor of the -- of the trailer, it was -- it was -- it was completely covered in bodies, completely covered in bodies. and there were -- there were at least ten-plus bodies outside the trailer because when -- when we arrived, when ems arrived, we were trying to find people who were still alive. >> reporter: now, 11 individuals are still hospitalized. my colleague, nicole chavez, was able to talk to the archbishop of san antonio, erin. he's been able to visit some of these individuals, and he described them as in a condition not conducive to speaking.

a lot of them were unconscious. a lot of them still have tubes. and so it's very difficult to get the human side of this story when a lot of victims are either dead or in the hospital, unable to speak. >> you say that number has gone up to 53 and the 11 unable to respond are survivors. rosa, thank you very much. next, grammy award winning singer r. kelly sentenced to 30 years in prisoson for sex with underagege women and boys. announcer: type 2 diabetes? discover the power of 3 in the ozempic® tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, 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.

this is john. he hasn't worked this hard to only get this far with his cholesterol. taken with a statin, leqvio can lower bad cholesterol and keep it low with two doses a year. side effects were injection site reaction, joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath. with leqvio, lowering cholesterol becomes

just one more thing life throws your way. ask your doctor about leqvio. lower. longer. leqvio. r. kelly tonight facing 30 years in federal prison for the sexual abuse of minors. the disgraced r&b star was sentenced today after being convicted of nine counts of sex trafficking and racketeering. prosecutors say he used his fame to insnare victims he then sexually and physically abused, an abuse that took place over the span of decades. survivors have been waiting for this day for many, many years speaking out. >> i started this journey 30 years ago. i was 14 years old when i encountered robert sylvester kelly. there wasn't a day in my life up until this moment that i actually believed the judicial

system would come through for black and brown girls. 30 years did he do this and 30 years is what he got. >> kelly says he intends to appeal. thanks for joining us. you can always watch "out front" anywhere you want, any time on cnn go. cnn go. "ac 360" begins now. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com good evening. there's breaking news tonight. the house january 6th committee a short time ago issuing a subpoena to pat cipollone. we'll be joined by zoe lofgren. cipollone, as you know, was a prominent part of cassidy hutchinson's testimony yesterday. he has so far refused to testify. so of course as former white house chief of staff mark meadows despite having already been subpoenaed and cited for contempt of congress for refusing to appear. and he's a former congressman himself. meadows was one of the former president's closest advisers in the run-up to th