thank you for hang out with me. i'll be back tomorrow night. don lemon tonight starts right now. >> who'd want to hang out with sara snider? >> i know. >> thanks, sara. have a good night. this is big. the january 6 committee

subpoenas pat cipolline. the witness talked about him. every one has been talking about that. pat cipollone is the former president's white house counsel, a key witness to what was going on inside the white house the days before, the time during and after the attack on the united states capitol. we have been trying to get him to answer -- they have been trying i should say to get him to answer more questions after previously sitting behind closed doors in april. the committee has been saying it's trying to obtain evidence that cipollone is, quote, uniquely positioned to testify but he has declined to cooperate further leaving the panel no choice but to issue the subpoena. and we have heard some of what the evidence was for ourselves. pat cipollone's name coming up again and again and again as i said in testimony before the committee. watch. >> mr. cipollone 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. >> he's still sitting on his phone and i remember pat saying to him something to the effect of the rioters have gotten to the capitol, mark, we need to go down and see the president flow. and mark looked up and said he doesn't want to do anything, pat. and pat said something to the effect of and very clearly said this to mark, something to the effect of, mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood's going to be on your f-ing hands, this is getting out of control, i'm going down there. >> pat cipollone weighed in at one point i remember saying that letter this guy wants to send, that letter is a murder suicide pact. it's going to damage everyone who touches it, and we should have nothing to do with that letter. >> pat cipollone intervened when

he was meeting without his knowledge which was strictly against white house policy. mr. cipollone told mr. clark to stand down and he didn't. >> so a lawyer familiar with cipollone's thinking telling cnn that he'll probably agree to a transcribed interview but limited to specific topics to avoid privilege issues. okay, what does that exactly mean? we're going to answer that because i'm not sure what that means. i'm not sure elie honing who i'll have here in a minute knows what that means but we're going to ask him. this is just moments ago. this is liz cheney. she's speaking at the reagan library. watch. >> we have to choose because republicans cannot both be loyal to donald trump and loyal to the constitution. >> okay, so she said it out loud. and now a republican party

that's knuckled under the former president even 18 months after he left washington in disgrace is quietly acknowledging what we have all seen and heard for ourselves, what we heard yesterday from cassidy hutchinson, her bombshell testimony. it's damning. one senior house republican i should say who didn't back impeachment telling cnn, quote, this testimony will lead to indictments, pointing to mark meadows and possibly even trump himself. so let's get straight now to a former advisor to the january 6th committee and a former u.s. congressman. also cnn's senior legal analyst elli hoeneg, thank you both. a source telling cnn's dana bash he might agree to a limited transcribed interview. complain how that could go, and

something about discussing direct conversation with the president and that it would avoid specific topics of privilege issues. when i was saying that you were like what does that mean? >> you could read my body language there. let me try to translate this. they're trying to reach a negotiated resolution where they ask pat cipollone some questions but not others. but if they're going to say you don't have to answer anything that might involve executive privilege that means they're not going to ask him about what conversations did you, donald trump, have with pat cipollone. and by the way let's remember yesterday cassidy hutchinson said pat cipollone said to me we're committing every crime in the book here, fraud, obstruction. the biggest single question is did you, pat cipollone, say that to donald trump? because if he did that's a big deal. >> so the conversations he had

with cipollone and others even cassidy hutchinson or meadows are they privileged as well in. >> no. they're not going to be privileged. if you have white house counsel talking with other that's probably not going to be privileged. >> i'm sure they want to ask him about conversations he may have had to with hutchinson, right, to cooperate what she said against what he said. >> and the thinking may be let's get something. it's better than nothing. it's still important for us to hear about cipollone's conversations with mark meadows, with cassidy hutchinson, with others. but, again, the cost for them doing that may be them giving up his conversations. >> i haven't forgotten about you, but let me just ask you what is the difference -- i'm talking to elie now, a transcribed interview limited, what does that mean? >> that means he's not going to testify in public. >> all right. okay, got it.

denver you served on the january 6th committee until recently and you helped to sift through all the communication coming into this committee. how important could this testimony be? >> i think it would be very, very important and i do not have the brilliant legal mind of elie honing or the expertise. looking at the data i've looked at i'm very curious to see what cipollone has to say about the conversations going on with meadows. and the fact is cassidy's testimony was so strong i want to see what cipollone has to say about it. and i said this earlier, don, she really was the adult in the room. and the things she was saying i think really struck a cord with the american people. i would say out of all the hearings this was the most effective because it showed

behind had scenes but also the mind-set of donald trump. i think a lot of us have known it for a while but finally seeing it in the hearing was important. >> she was asked what mark meadows was doing starting around the 2:00 p.m. hour on january 6th and hutchinson described mark meadows as not really caring what was going on, scrolling on his phone. cnn has some of the texts he was getting at the time from marjorie taylor greene, donald trump jr., a whole cast of characters right there urging him to do something. the committee has gathered all this information. how does it all fit together? >> oh, my goodness, i'm omgoing to talk about the publicly released text, but i think there's 50 between 2:00 p.m. and 4:30 on january 6th. just publicly released that's all i'll talk about, don. but when you look at the beginnings on that phone you had the antifa flag and growing through jason miller and marjory

taylor green and people from fox news and other organizations begging them to stop the violence. that's a very important time. so as he's scrolling on the couch, you know, with this couch gate, if he's scrolling on the couch i want to know what's going on there. and looking at it publicly what cnn has is pretty damning. i think again that's why it's so important to know the state of the mind of those individuals if they didn't care or were rehalaxing in their ivory tower while people are getting killed or beat -- just the judgment and the complete dereliction of their oath i think what was so compelling about cassidy's testimony. again, there's over 50 texts between that time and the time they could have been sitting on the couch. you have the some credible conspiracy theories in there, you have a look into madness, and i think that's what the american people need to look at and go take a look at this.

>> well, listen, the most i think intriguing part was the h historyonics of the catch up and grabbing of the wheel. but really the most important part was he seemed to be okay with the violence. he seemed to be okay with people who maybe had weapons coming into the capitol, coming into the area. that is the really important part. the rest is just oh, my gosh, can't believe this. i'm sure some of it is true about the catch-up or whatever, but the other thing we don't know, but still those aren't the important parts here. >> no, to those that's an interesting color but i'm not going to say that in a bad way. i just don't care about it as a data guy. i want to look at the time line of president trump when he talked about disabling the mags and removing them, who had somebody brief him there's weapons in the crowd and didn't care, and said those are my people and wouldn't hurt me anyway. i want to know those time lines.

we have data but pat cipollone could shed light. those are things important to me. the other is color, but for me i want to know the time line when he was actually talking about those type of things when it came to the crowd, them being protected, getting rid of the mags and understanding people were actually armed. >> i have a question for you unless you want to weigh in on this first. >> the committee teased they had evidence of witness tampering. liz cheney says they were taking it seriously and will consider next steps. again, that's a quote. is she hinting at a criminal referral here? >> well, the next steps should be take to take that evidence, send it with a courier right up to the u.s. justice department. that's not even a close call. that snippets that is obstruction of justice. that's not a question of well it depends what was meant. that is how they teach it in law school.

and if they can figure out who made those threats to the witnesses that person or those people need to be charged immediately. and this gets to the integrity of not just the entire committee investigation but also any potential criminal investigation. >> what about what denver and i were just talking about now, the first-hand account about trump knowing his supporters were armed and he sent them to the capitol. is merrick garland listening to that you think he might have? >> he better be. it's the first direct link we had from donald trump to knowledge that crowd was armed and dangerous before he sent them down to the capitol. >> we know is committee is getting additional evidence. they're getting calls on their tip lines. do you think we'll hear from more people inside the west wing who also saw what was going on? >> i hope so. i hope people saw the example cassidy hutchinson and want to be like her than the many cowards hiding the truth and refusing to cooperate and fighting subpoenas.

and one way investigations can naturally evolve cassidy hutchinson testifies yesterday, the subpoena for pat cipollone comes today. one thing leads to another. particular mid-level and junior level staffers who look at cassidy hutchinson and say i want to go down in history like her. >> the final two hearings are meant to focus on trump summoning the mob and trump failing to take immediate action to stop the violence. i mean one question that's still out there, a direct line between the oath keepers and the proud boys to the white house. what are your thoughts on that? >> i think that's what's going to be interesting about those hearings. you know, don, i've had this discussion i'm not going to talk about that too much, but i will tell you the committee has a tremendous amount of data and information about those right wing extreme groups and the investigative teams are incredibly good. it's going to be a red team day. the red team is going to be leading a lot of that, and those guys are absolutely professional, incredibly thorough, and that's the fear i

think that people in trump world are going to have. when that comes out, when you start talking about the right-wing extremist groups and talk about what happened that day we haven't gotten into the organization and operational issues of what happened on january 6th. that is still coming. and so, don, it's a great question. i can't answer that, but i think the committee needs to present the evidence, and they need to let the american people take a look at that. >> you said to an earlier question you were only going to focus on what was public in those text messages. so there were more where that came from? >> you know, you never know. you never know. >> so you can't talk about it, that's what you're telling me? >> listen, my goodness, you know, if i could run around america with those things showing them off i would, but i can't. it's the committee's not mine. i think it's public data. i know they're going to release them at some point or they said they might but let them do their investigation.

>> thank you, i appreciate it. >> next the man who was at the other end of pennsylvania avenue on january 6th when the violence was on the way. what congressman jason crow thinks is important about testimony from pat cipollone. there he is. we'll talk to him after the break. vending machines and buying a car 100 percent online now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car whether it's a year old, or a few years old we want to buy your car so go to carvana enter your license plate answer a few questions and our techno wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds when you're ready we'll come to you pay you on the spot and pick up your car that's it so ditch the old way of selling your car and say hello to the new way at carvana

if you don't stain your deck, it's like the previous owner is still hanging around. previous owner: "laughs" so today let's stain, with behr, the #1 rated stain. get behr exterior stains at an everyday low price. exclusively at the home depot.

it's still shocking to think about it. then-president trump knew there were people on the crowd on january 6th who were armedch he knew violence could come to the capitol. knew and did nothing to stop it. i want to bring in congressman jason crow who was there that day. hutchinson made it clear trump knew rioters had weapons like ar-15s in that crowd and he didn't care. i want to play some of that and we'll discuss. >> was he told again in that conversation that people couldn't come through with mags because they had weapons? >> correct. >> and that people -- and his response was to say they can march to the capitol from -- is it from the ellipse? >> something to the effect of, take the f-ing mags away. they're not here to hurt me.

they can march from the ellipse. take the f-ing mags away, then they can march the capitol. >> cnn counted a toment of 15 warnings of violence that were cited in the hearing. what was your reaction to hearing that after the danger it put you and your colleagues in, sir? >> like, don, so much of the other that has come out this wasn't something that just happened on its own. this was deliberate. it was intentional. they knew about it. the president knew about it. his closest advisers knew about it. they knew there were armed and dangerous people intending to go and do violence and to prevent the american people's vote from being certified in the capitol and to conduct an insurrection. this was intentional. they knew it was going to happen. there are police officers who are dead now today. there are dozens of police

officers who who have been wounded for life. there are people that have been traumatized, and they knew about it. they knew it was going to happen. >> congressman, the committee has now subpoenaed former white house counselor pat cipollone. how important is that testimony after what we learned on tuesday? >> well, it's really important. i mean, think about the testimony of ms. hutchinson who was in the room where the conversations were happening. but in pat cipollone you have one of the president's trusted advisers, one of his most trusted advisers, so much so the president entrusted in pat cipollone the defense of his first impeachment trial. and i know that because i actually debated and went head to head with pat cipollone in the first impeachment trial when i was prosecuting that case. this is somebody who has had very, very deep conversations with the president who was in that inner circle and people know what was going on and if anyone knows what was going on

it was pat cipollone. >> hutchinson describes scenes of him scrolling on his screen as the capitol was being overrun. do you think that was a dereliction of his duty? >> yeah, absolutely. the lack of caring, the lack of regard it shows the depravity. they didn't care about the vote, the damage to our democracy, didn't care about the wealth and well-being of those police officers dead and wounded now. they didn't care about any of it, just their own power. and that's really what this is about. right, and this is about making sure we restore that and we make that wrong right. and that's why this process is so important. that's why we have to see it through to its conclusion and why they're going to have package those findings up at the end and deliver them to the department of justice so people are held accountable. >> i'm wondering you know what everyone was thinking who was part of this insurrection, meaning who were threatened by the ninsurrectionists on the

outside, the lawmakers and staff and police officers when you heard trump wanting desperately to go to the capitol with the crowd. what do you think he would have done when he got there? >> i don't know. i've never -- i've never pretended to get into the mind of donald trump. in fact, i don't want to go there. i don't want to try to go into the mind of donald trump. what i think is it probably wouldn't be positive, wouldn't be good because it's not a healthy and good place to be. but i think we have to, you know, broaden out here and look at kind of the larger story of this committee process. one of the things that's really shocking to me is the number of people that have really important information that's important to our country, to our democracy, to our national security, to our public safety who have withheld or sat on that information until they've been compelled to testify and provide it. how many more people are there? dozens, hundreds that have important information? my message to them tonight is your country needs you to come forward. we need to hear about this.

the american people need to hear the information you have about the level of disregard, the criminal conduct within this administration because we need to be able to make it right. there's no way we can fix this until we know what happened. >> congressman, after the supreme court struck down roe v. wade this week many americans are looking to democrats to do something to safeguard reproductive rights. people are not satisfied just being told to vote this fall when democrats currently hold the power. actually, it was last week i should have said. so what are democrats going to do? >> well, we have to make sure we're protecting women's data. right now there's a lot of information that's in the commercial space in the public domain for women that are in very dangerous states in places right now. so we're looking at how we protect that data. as a member of the armed services committee i'm looking how we protect our female service members who have been assigned to posts in states where they've not been treated as equal citizens, where they

don't have equal access to health care, that's not okay. so how can we protect those female service men and women. but we need to win at the ballot box. i'll push back on the notion that don't say this is not a political problem. this is a political problem. we have to win seats. we have to maintain majorities, and that matters. because if we lose and people elect republicans into those seats, guess what they're going to go for a federal abortion ban, and that's going to harm millions of women. so, yes, the ballot box and what's going to happen between now and november does matter. >> do you think your party was slow to act? 50 years to codify roe and it never happened. >> yeah, it never happened. we've passed the womens health protection act now several times through the house where it goes to die in the senate. that's why i've been a firm believer in removing the filibuster because right now the filibuster has way-out lived any

purpose it may have served at one point. i think it has a very fraught history. >> but congressman, those are all things you're saying you were going to do, but what about over the last 50 years because there are even democrats now and supporters of abortion rights who are saying the democrats have done nothing. what do they do? they are part of the blame for allowing this to happen, democrats are. >> yeah, should roe been codified in the past, absolutely. should we have done more to prevent what's happening? yeah, i don't know how you can say we shouldn't have. but we are in the position we are in now. we have to win elections. we've got to many tain a majority, got to expand the majority in the senate, and we have save millions of people. that's what's at take between now and november. we have to focus on what we need to do to protect these folks. >> do you think this is going to encourage democrats, or i should say people who support abortion, do you think that's going to

encourage them to go to the polls by november? i mean perhaps they may have forgotten about it, i don't know. we have short memories here in this time. do you think it's going to encourage people, or do you think it's going to diskurmg people who are going to say, you know, democrats didn't protect our rights, why should we trust them to do it now? >> well, i'll put it this way. there are a lot of things on the ballot this november. the future of our democracy, rule of law, the climate crisis, gun violence prevention, abortion rights and the equality of women. all those things are on the ballot, and i will absolutely reject the notion every single day of the week that there's no difference between republicans and democrats. it does matter. it does matter who gets elected and who's in those seats because one party wants to protect women and abortion rights, one party wants to stop it and harm millions of american women. that is the bottom line. do i always agree with the democratic party? no. i'm a proud democratic force and

i'll disagree with my party when it's necessary in my state, in my district. but it does matter who's in these seats. it does matter who's committed to truth. it does matter who's committed to democracy and who gets elected in these seats this november. so people need to let their voices be heard. i'm not going to tell people how to vote, but vote your values, vote your conscience, actually look at the candidates on your ballot and get involved. >> congressman, thank you. i appreciate your kanldcandor a your time. >> it has been bombshell after bombshell in the january 6th investigation and now cipollone has been subpoenaed. will all this change how the gop looks at trump? that's next. only from discover. the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes,

replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know where to go.

only two things are forever: love and liberty mutual customizing your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. if anyone objects to this marriage... (emu squawks) kevin, no! not today. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ these folks don't have time to go to the post office they use stamps.com all the services of the post office only cheaper get a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. 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. ♪

the january 6th committee issuing a subpoena to trump white house counsel pat cipollone. cnn learning that he may agree to a limited transcribed interview with the committee. still up in the air is whether

the testimony would be taped or live. this comes after repeated requests for the committee for him to appear willingly. they've been trying to get him to answer more questions after he sat for a closed door interview in april. let's discuss now. jonathan martin and alex burns who are are authors of "this will not pass." they join me now. love having you two on so let's get to it. good evening. jonathan, cipollone may agree to this limited interview when so many others in trump's inner circle have stone wall. what is the possibility he may potentially do this even if it's limited? >> it gets in the room if you will of trump's white house in the days leading up to january 6th itself, and that could spell trouble for the former president if more of his advisers, more people who were with him in those crucial days in american

history are speaking and they're speaking under oath, which is important to note. so i think this could be potentially valuable. we have not heard cipollone on videotape to date. and i think if he does participate he's going to be able to corroborate or not. >> we know cipollone was involved in these critical moments. what do you think is the most important thing he could tell the committee. >> look, i think as jonathan just alluded to if pat cipollone were to testify and corroborate the elements of cassidy hutchinson's testimony where she was describing the legal warnings from the white house counsel that the president had in the run up to january 6th and the messages from the white house counsel to senior white house staff about the very real

legal jeopardy they'd be in if they took this path or that path, that strikes me as hugely, hugely important to a possible criminal case against the former president. but, don, on the politics of this and in terms of way the committee is shaping larger public opinion about what was going on in those days, there's virtually nothing that the former white house council could not be valuable in discussing. we have reporting in our book about him talking to at least one republican senator while the insurrection was in progress about the possibility of the 25th amendment being invoked. and one of the recordings we released there's allusions to the white house council talking to republican members of congress in the days after the insurrection and urging them not to talk to donald trump for their own legal security. so if he really does play ball even in a limited way, i think it's just a massive break through for the investigation. >> interesting. jonathan, go on. >> don, real fast to put a finer

point on that. in fact, on the afternoon of january 6th senator lindsey graham, one of the closest allies in the senate called cipollone and using a direct language urged pat cipollone to tell trump to urge the rioters to go home, and as we report in our book he said if trump doesn't do that, pat, we're going to call for the 25th amendment. that's lindsey graham on the phone to cipollone the afternoon of january 6th. that is but one slice of pat cipollone's day on january 6th. there's a lot more he knows beyond that one call. i think that one call does offer some insight as to just how deep cipollone was into this moment. >> another example, though, lindsey graham who says one thing in private and then publicly says something else. jonathan, the january 6th -- excuse me, alex. the january 6th committee vice chair is speaking tonight at the

reagan library. some of what she said and then we'll talk. >> the january 6th committee it has become clear that the efforts donald trump oversaw and engaged in were even more chilling and more threatening than we could have imagined. as we have shown, donald trump attempted to overturn the presidential election. he attempted to stay in office and to prevent the peaceful transfer of presidential power. he summoned a mob to washington. he knew they were armed on january 6th. he knew they were angry, and he directed the violent mob to march on the capitol in order to delay or prevent completely the counting of electoral votes. he attempted to go there with them. and when the violence was under way he refused to take action to tell the rioters to leave. instead he incited further violence by tweeting hat the

vice president mike pence was a cowered. he said, quote, mike deserves it. and he didn't want to do anything in response to the hang mike pence chants. it's undeniable. >> it is undeniable, she is saying. alex, she's not mincing words here. she's all in on making sure everyone knows how close that we were to losing our democracy. >> that's right. you know, it's interesting that she used the word undeniable because of course some elements of that narrative she just laid out have been denied, but liz cheney, of course, and other members of the committee have access to information we don't have talking here tonight. and so the burdenen on them in the coming weeks is to lay out all the ways in which they truly can corroborate the elements of this in dispute no matter how narrow, no matter how persuasive they feel the question is.

listen to liz cheney give that kind of speech, it's very, very clear that her long war against donald trump is just getting started here, that whatever the outcome of the 1/6 committee's investigation and whatever the outcome of her own republican primary battle this summer in wyoming, she is making no bones about her intention to continue the fight against him and drive him out of the party or at least drive him out of american public life if it's at all within her power to do so. >> jonathan, is she preaching to the choir there speaking at the reagan library? are those the folks that need to hear her? >> yeah, i think there's a mixed bag out there, don. i think the audience sort of pre-trump gop stalwarts who don't like the former president, there's going to be also people there who are more friendly with the former president who i think probably voted for him twice. i think she's trying to sort of convert some souls, don, if you will, in that charge.

but this is as alex mentioned going to be her tax in the months and years ago. it's clear she views her admission now, don, in american politics as stopping donald trump from re-claiming the presidency. that's obviously what she's using this commission for. and whether or not there's a legal indictment that comes out of this, it's plain to see that she is trying to summon a political indictment from this commission when it concludes its work this summer, one that, yes, will preclude former president trump from being president again and perhaps even preclude it from being his party's nominee again. >> jonathan, alex, thanks, hope to see you soon. it is being called the deadliest human smuggling event in u.s. history. now the justice department is taking action.

more protection, more sun, more joy. neutrogena® beach defense® the suncare brand used most by dermatologists

and their families, neutrogena® for people with skin.

the death toll rising to 53 in texas in what's being called the deadliest human smuggling case in u.s. history. on monday a packed truck was found on a remote stretch of road known as the mouth of the wolf for how dark it gets. tonight the 45-year-old driver of that truck has been arrested on charges related to alleged involvement in human smuggling resulting in death. he could be facing life in prison. police say he was found hiding in the brush while trying to get away. so far four people have been charged in connection to the tragedy. a worker heard cries from the truck and alerted authorities. the san antonio police chief telling cnn when he arrived the floor of the tractor-trailer was, quote, completely covered in bodies. and tonight we have new audio of police as they arrived on the

scene and identified one of the suspects. >> the truck driver is running southbound on the railroad tracks. >> i have so many bodies here. >> all we have right now is a hispanic male that may be wearing a brown shirt. >> the railroad tracks or towards a mechanic shop nearby. >> we've got another body on the floor of the trailer. >> 16 survivors including four nrp underage were rushed to hospitals suffering from heatstroke and exhaustion. officials say they were too weak to move and too hot to the touch. 11 of those people are still in local hospitals. texas governor greg abbott denouncing the tragedy today and announcing a new checkpoint plan to check vehicles like the one used in this incident. we'll keep you updated. los angeles attempting to right a historic wrong.

primed beachfront real estate returned to its rightful owners nearly 100 years after a black couple were harassed and their property was taken away. [lazer beam and sizzling sounds] ♪ if you've been living with heart disease, reducing cholesterol can be hard, even when you're taking a statin and being active. but you can do hard. you lived through the blizzard of ninety-six... twelve unappreciative bosses... seventeen fad diets... five kids, three grandkids... one heart attack... and eighteen passwords that seem to change daily. and with leqvio, you can lower your cholesterol, too. when taken with a statin, leqvio is proven to lower bad cholesterol by over 50% and keep it there with two doses a year.

common side effects of leqvio 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 if leqvio is right for you. lower. longer. leqvio. if you have type 2 diabetes or high blood pressure you're a target for chronic kidney disease. you can already have it and not know it.

if you have chronic kidney disease your kidney health could depend on what you do today. ♪far-xi-ga♪ farxiga is a pill that works in the kidneys to help slow the progression of chronic kidney disease. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men, and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may lead to death. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. and don't take it if you are on dialysis. take aim at chronic kidney disease by talking to your doctor and asking about farxiga. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪far-xi-ga♪

these folks don't have time to go to the post office they use stamps.com all the services of the post office only cheaper get a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. bogey's on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter.

only pay for what you need. ♪liberty, liberty, liberty. liberty.♪ a wrong finally being made right in southern california after nearly 100 years. los angeles county returning a piece of beach front property to the rightful owners of descendants of a black couple whose land was taken in 1924 by the city of manhattan beach, smack in the middle of the jim crow era. tonight the saga of bruce's beach from cnn's stephanie elam. >> reporter: for decades this beautiful california beach held shameful secrets of racism and wrongdoing stretched out as a physical reminder how charles and willa bruce were harassed of their property nearly 100 years ago when the city of manhattan

beach seized bruce's beach. >> all we knew we were going to speak out and make sure people never forgot this wrong. >> reporter: a wrong the county of los angeles began working to fix last year, cull mumating w with the board of supervisors unanimously voting this week. >> motion carries 5-0. >> reporter: to return the land to the bruce's great great grandchildren marking the first time in the county's history the descendants have had their family's land returned. >> we aren't giving property to anyone today. we are returning property. >> reporter: in 1912 the bruce's bought the land for more than $1,200. eventually they owned two parcels and started a business, offering a place for black people in southern california to enjoy the scenic vistas with friends and family. >> the bruce's establishment from day one was very successful. they started with just a pop up tent where people could change their clothes, and they were

selling refreshments. then they later built a two story building that included a cafe, area to dance. by 1922 some white folks were up in arms that the black folks had become -- had such a successful operation here. >> reporter: then in 1924 the city of manhattan beach snatched the property under imminent domain to create a park. eventually the county took control of the estimated 7,000 square feet of land, which is currently home to a park and lifeguard training facility. the county says it has a two-year agreement to lease the land from the bruce family for $413,000 a year. now surrounded by million dollar homes this is the property that is getting returned to the bruce family now estimated to be worth tens of millions of dollars as it truly is oceanfront property. >> initially it cost the bruce family their entire fortune, they originally asked for $125,000 for the two pieces of property and they didn't get that. they only got $14,250, the loss

of the generational wealth that would have been accumulated over the course of 98 years now. >> i feel some sense of peace. i feel joy. >> reporter: she started the push to return bruce's beach to its rightful owners in 2020 after the murder of george floyd. >> i know it was the catalyst for me, for me to illuminate what had happened to the bruces and move forward and take action and see how i can legally and legislatively get their land back for them. >> reporter: while the county's owning up to what happened to bruce's beach both ward and the families say that the city of manhattan beach has yet to acknowledge its role in the property's history. something they say they're going to continue to fight for. don? >> stephanie elam, thank you very much for that. former trump white house counsel pat cipollone told mark meadows that blood is going to be on your f-ing hands if people died on january 6th. now we're learning he might have agreed to a limited interview with the committee.

♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪ you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on your discover card.

a major development in the january 6th investigation. the select committee issuing a subpoena for former trump white house counsel pat cipollone. he is a key witness to what was going on inside the white house in the days before, during, and after the attack on the united states capitol. i want to bring in now cnn congressional correspondent ryan nobles and former nixon white house counsel john dean. gents, good evening. thank you so much. ryan, i'm going to start with you on the reporting here. what are you learning about the subpoena for pat cipollone? >> well, i think it got to the point, don, where the committee just felt they exhausted every option they could to try and get pat cipollone come in voluntarily. they had informal conversations with cipollone himself,

conversations with public counsel. where in multiple hearings they called him out and asked him to come voluntarily, and he just refused. so i think they felt they had to take this legal recourse and compel him to do so in a way that it would make it much more difficult for him to wiggle of it. now, at this stage of the game our dana bash is reporting that an attorney familiar with his thinking believes that cipollone is open to the idea of a deposition where he sits in front of the committee and they record his deposition through written testimony but that is not videotaped or audiotaped, which could then be used in a hearing. so we'll have to see if it ever leads to him actually testifying in a public setting, which you think is the committee's ultimate desire because they've shown that in person public testimony is so powerful. but at this point, don, it's a negotiation, and i think the committee will do whatever they can to get that testimony out of cipollone. >> john, you've been saying on this program and to anyone who will listen that you think it's critical cipollone testifies publicly like you did.