california big tech. >> is it possible for you to win the nomination without trumps the backing? >> absolutely, the people in the state realize that the president hasn't always made the right decisions. he made a bad one in this particular case. i will put on my big boy pants and get our message out. >> the rest of the field are a part of arizona's past. >> we talked a lot about bringing new blood and vision to the senate, tell me about that. >> average age in the senate? 64 1/2, i think we need to get new fight and energy. we will have a young dynamic america first caucus. >> cnn, phoenix, arizona. >> and the race goes on the news continues in cnn tonight. i am casey hunt and this is

cnn tonight, there is so much news on the multiple ongoing investigations into donald trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. he will spend the whole hour unpacking it all this evening. we have not one but two former trump white house insiders who are going to help us do it tonight. in a moment you will hear from former trump acting chief of staff nick mulvaney. his message for some of his fellow republicans, pay attention. to the january 6 hearings. and big developments tonight on that front. we will also hear from former trump white house press secretary stephanie grisham she like mulvaney resigned on the day that our capital came under attack. stay tuned for both of them. the select committee meanwhile apparently just finalized plans for what could be its most critical testimony yet. our sources say the committee struck a deal for a closed door recorded interview with former white house counsel, set to happen on friday. he met with members in april for an informal interview but

since his name came up numerous times during last week's explosive testimony from former white house aide cassidy hutchinson the committee subpoenaed him for formal testimony under oath. >> white house cancel counsel pat cipollone. >> barreling down the hallway towards her office. >> he said this is a murder suicide pact. >> call pat cipollone. >> mr. trump's former white house counsel, pat cipollone. >> there you go. they will of course have limitations. attorney-client privilege but it still is a very big deal. this is someone who spent a significant amount of time with the ex-president while he was in office. before, during and after january 6. he is a witness who can potentially help fill in lots of critical links. remember he testified that cipollone testified about the

legality of some of donald trump's actions. >> mr. cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the capital , keep in touch with me. you're going to get chargers, every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> so, will we see some of cipollone's upcoming testimony at the seventh public hearing is set for tuesday? tbd. meanwhile another former close trump aid has gone from defending in the white house days to now, defending what we have been hearing in those house committee. investigating trumps actions on january 6. >> thank you so much for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> you previously predicted that the committee was going to work on getting pat cipollone's

testimony in that ultimately he was going to show up and now that is happening. what do you think he is going to offer to the committee? >> the truth. i know pat i work very closely with pat for 15 months, more than that when i was in the white house in the west wing and pat will tell the truth there is no question about it will he corroborate with casey hutchinson with what she said. will he counter what she said i don't know? but he is an honorable guy and once he puts his hand on the bible he will be telling the whole truth and nothing but the truce. >> you guys did overlap what has changed if anything that gives you a higher estimation of mr. cipollone now? >> nothing, that has not changed. i have held him at high esteem based on his integrity. i didn't think he was a dishonorable or disreputable kind of person you have those kinds of discussions in every white house it's not always everybody sitting around singing

and when you're having discussions at the very highest level things can get pretty tense. but my opinion of him as a person has not changed and again absolutely i believe the man will tell the truth i just don't know what he will say. >> if cassidy hutchinson's testimony conflicts with pat cipollone's testimony and again they are both under oath who would you believe? >> it is a good question and it depends on how it conflicts and is it directly opposed for example if pat says he never heard a story about the president grabbing the wheel does not undermine cassidy when when she testified was she heard that story from tony, they're not exactly court of contrasting statements but if he said i was never worried about getting charged with all crimes imaginable then that will create sort of this head to head in differentiation between the testimony and it will be up to folks to decide who is telling the truth but pat is a very compelling and credible guy. i will be paying close

attention to this next week. >> you left the white house in march 2020 which was before the election and the events of january 6 but in the time that you were there that you are behind the scenes in the white house did you ever witness pat cipollone warning the president or his other top advisers that they might be about to commit a crime and advised him against taking action? >> no, he never asked about doing anything immoral, i won't go into specific conversations between the president and pat cipollone that is his lawyer after all. but again i didn't see this. i didn't see the story that cassidy told about the president last week about someone who throws plates and pulls table cloths off the tables i did not see that or anybody who grabs a wheel or a cost a secret service agent. things may have been different after the election in 2020 than they were when i was there for example the chief of staff, my previous role, mark meadows

seemed to be completely detached. from the testimony and not engaged in the process that would've been a big change so i didn't see what everyone saw in january what i was there, up until march 2020. >> so can you help us understand a little bit about why you are more vocal now than you were in the immediate aftermath of january 6 and of course the committee has been doing its work we have gotten a couple new outspoken things from you, there was the tweet after cassidy hutchinson's testimony where you called it two stunning hours we know that he assaulted his security team that there may be links to the proud boys etc. he also recently wrote an op-ed in a nearby paper to you in the charlotte observer arguing that republicans, americans out there should be paying attention to the january 6 hearings.

why did you decide that you needed to start being more vocal now? >> i am not being more vocal but more people are paying attention because i'm coming out with things that are against the president in fairness for a year i have been defending him saying while i resigned because i didn't think he lived up to the expectations that i had for my president also didn't take some of the advice i tried to give him in the run-up to the transition of power. i was defending him saying he didn't do anything that i that was a legal or impeachable and no one really cared about that but since i have been watching the hearings and do what chiefs of staff do, our job is to tell the president things he doesn't want to hear. that's all i have been doing and the evidence that has been presented some of it at least by the commission is very compelling and i don't think that anybody should be afraid to watch these hearings and make up their own minds as to what is happening i don't believe anything that liz cheney says about the situation. i don't believe anything that benny thompson says. they are hopelessly biased but i do believe republicans when they put their hand on the bible and say look this happened and this might constitute as a crime. >> you don't believe anything that liz cheney says? you don't think that she is taking a noble role in the

republican party? >> i can make my own decisions based on me watching the evidence i know i am seeing political bs from people in showboating and what i am seeing the impact of hiring of the abc television producer to put on the show, i think most people can figure that out i have been moved by the testimony which is what is supposed to move us. it shouldn't be the statements of politicians on the outset who clearly have something against trump, it is compelling and i wish more folks in my party were watching. >> there is more. a lot more. watch what mulvaney says about his successor in the job, mark meadows when it comes to january 6, you will not want to miss it, part two of her interview with the former trap trump chief of staff when cnn returns.

it's time for our lowest prices of the season on the sleep number 360 smart bed. why choose proven quality sleep from sleep number? because every green thumb, 5k, and all-day dance party starts the night before. the sleep number 360 smart bed senses your movements and automatically adjusts to help keep you both comfortable all night and help you get almost 30 minutes more restful sleep per night. sleep number takes care of the science. all you have to do is sleep. and now, the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is only $899. only for a limited time. to learn more, go to sleepnumber.com.

so what's going on? i'm a talking dog. the other issue. oh... i'm scratching like crazy. you've got some allergic itch with skin inflammation. apoquel can work on that itch in as little as 4 hours, whether it's a new or chronic problem. and apoquel's treated over 11 million dogs. nice. and...the talking dog thing? is it bothering you? no... itching like a dog is bothering me. until dogs can speak for themselves, you have to. when allergic itch is a problem, ask for apoquel. apoquel is for the control of itch associated with allergic dermatitis and the control of atopic dermatitis in dogs. do not use apoquel in dogs less than 12 months old or those with serious infections. apoquel may increase the chances of developing serious infections and may cause existing parasitic skin infestations or pre-existing cancers to worsen. new neoplasias were observed in clinical studies and post-approval. most common side effects are vomiting and diarrhea. feeling better? i'm speechless. thanks for the apoquel. ahh, that's what friends are for. ask your veterinarian for apoquel. next to you, apoquel is a dog's best friend.

(vo) red lobster's seafood summerfest is fire! turn up for our new! bbq bacon grilled shrimp with your choice of soup or salad and an individual starter all three courses for $18.99! hurry into red lobster. it's lit! mission control, we are go for launch. ♪ um, she's eating the rocket. ♪ lunchables! built to be eaten. ♪ [ marcia ] my dental health was not good. i had periodontal disease, and i just didn't feel well. but then i found clearchoice. [ forde ] replacing marcia's teeth with dental implants at clearchoice was going to afford her

that permanent solution. [ marcia ] clearchoice dental implants gave me the ability to take on the world. i feel so much better, and i think that that is the key. [ indistinct conversations ] ♪ hey, class. this is lily. ♪ when you see things differently, you can be the difference. welcome. capella university looks at education differently. our flexpath learning format helps you control the pace and cost of your master's degree. make your difference with capella university. more for my conversation

this evening with former one- time right-hand demand, make mulvaney he talks about the impact of these january 6 hearings you should believe and how the republican party should view trump and 2024. >> when you say you wish more folks were watching what is your assessment you of course are a politician and were for a long time, what is your assessment of whether republicans are willing to be moved especially in some of these key swing states like georgia and perhaps wisconsin or those hearings might getting more coverage? >> is not determined but somebody came out with a pole in the last 12 hours that asked folks to rate the most important issues to them and it didn't prompt them to give an answer and no one said january 6 and no one said that commissions things the economy are still driving ordinary americans and what they care about that being said, and by the way i don't think the hearings are moving that needle

one way or the other, inside washington and the political world so outside of washington in politics it is moving the needle and what you're seeing is folks especially in my party are looking at donald trump as damaged. something that might way down the party going into the midterms and into 2024 which is why i think you are starting to hear rumblings now about mike pence running. mike pompeo. those were discussions that i don't think you would've had six or eight weeks ago before we commissioned and they were started. >> would you vote for donald trump and republican primary? >> no. i have a lot of friends who are running. there are a lot of folks that i think would be a better president than donald trump in the republican party. >> that was going to be my question to you already have someone that you have in mind? >> i served in the state legislature with tim scott and rob do stances. in the, mike pence go back 12

years. i think it would be healthy for the party and to have really good candidates run against trump in 2024. >> let's go back to the hearings briefly we talked about cipollone who is scheduled to testify the person that we are still waiting on is mark meadows who is of course your former colleague in the house of representatives the freedom caucus of course a place where you two interacted regularly. do you trust mark meadows to tell the truth? >> mark meadows if he put his hand on the bible and said he would tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i would be inclined to believe that. i don't think he is the most credible out of all the witnesses. you asked me a fair question moments ago. i would want to look at it closely and it would be a close call if cipollone and mark meadows says why, i am absolutely believing cipollone.

i think a lot of folks are. mark seems to have gone through very dark period and was apparently according to cassidy detached from the job i don't know if he was having some sort of event where he could not engage. but i think mark is in a really strange place and my guess is if he testifies and he may be compelled to testify because he is under, he is not under criminal indictment yet but has been referred, i think he will take the fifth amendment more often than not. >> you think mark meadows betrayed the country with what we know now about his actions around january 6? >> that case is being made but let's step back for second and recognize the hearings are not over, no one has had a chance to counter cassidy hutchinson's testimony, there may be five or six or eight witnesses saying look she was lying under oath and i will be giving her the benefit of the doubt that have up to this time so it is too early to draw the conclusions

this process is not over. we need to see it through to the end. that being said as a former chief of staff i picked up on things and cassidy's testimony that really frightened me and it was the way the west wing was running in it wasn't running. it was a clown show with folks like rudy giuliani and in the oval office and the reasonable people in the smart people seeming to be sort of disengaged. and it was up to the chief of staff and me and mark meadows and john kelly to make sure that the west wing functions properly because there are protections in place to make sure things like january 6 don't happen and that system fell apart under mark's watch and while the president ultimately responsible, there is a great deal of responsibility when it comes to running that office. >> finally before i let you go, do you have any regrets about your time in the west wing i mean you did right at one point that you thought that the former president would gracefully accept defeat in the end? >> i am not big into regrets by the way that peace i've taken a lot of criticism for that

piece, you started this segment saying that my prognostic was a winner. that's good for me. i've gotten some bad predictions in my past but that was me with my chief of staff head on and advising the president. speaking to an audience of one. i hope that it was true, i really did and there was evidence as i set for in that piece it was true but i was trying to speak to the president as his former chief of staff in a way that i knew he communicated which was through the washington and editorial pages so that he didn't take the advice that i gave him. which is one of the reasons i quit the day. >> he certainly did not. mulvaney, thanks a lot for this conversation this evening. we appreciate your time sir. >> so much to discuss there, the key question will be who donald trump met with leading up to january 6. and that will include some of those who spent time inside the white house residence away from the cameras and the attention of the west wing. the one person not named trump who may know better than anyone joins me next.

when you're tired of looking at your tired old bath, we fit your style, with hundreds of design options. bath fitter. it just fits. visit bathfitter.com to book your free consultation. ugh-stipated... feeling weighed down by a backedup gut" miralax is different. it works naturally with the water in your body to unblock your gut. ...free your gut. and your mood will follow.

there's a reason comcast business powers more businesses than any other provider. actually, there's a few... comcast business offers the fastest, reliable network... the protection of securityedge™ and the most reliable 5g network. want me to keep going? i can... whether your small business is starting or growing, you need comcast business. technology solutions that put you ahead. get a great offer on internet and security, now with more speed and more bandwidth. plus find out how to get up to a $650 prepaid card with a qualifying bundle.

a clown show, you heard how former presidents one time chief of staff described the administration under mark meadows. my next guest was in the trump administration from the very day the trump was ignored or rated all the way up to january 6 she worked directly with both

the former president donald trump and first lady, thank you so much for being here with us tonight. >> thank you for having me. >> so let's start there what you make of the dysfunction that mick mulvaney described under mark meadows? >> i left for that very reason because of mark meadows so what he had to say was correct and it does seem that towards the end there perhaps mark was more disengaged than usual and allowed some pretty bad at is to surround the president. >> do you agree with mick mulvaney's assessment of who is to be believed in the context of these hearings he suggested he would believe pat cipollone over mark meadows if there testimony conflicts, do you agree? i think. >> i think he was more charitable, i would believe my dog over mark meadows so i do want to say i agree with pat completely or with mick

completely about pat, he is a man of integrity, i didn't always agree with pat also i think it was the normal lawyers versus the pr person kind of butting heads about what to do but he is a man of integrity and i saw him myself constantly shutting down bad ideas and telling the president that things should not go certain ways, another thing that i saw quite a bit was the president wasn't great to pat. the president would tell him he was weak and he needed better lawyers. and pat stood firm and did what was best for the country so i believe that's what he will do now. >> can i ask you also in the event that there are conflicts between pat cipollone's testimony and what we heard from cassidy hutchinson and both we expect pat cipollone to testify under oath, she was under oath how would you evaluate discrepancies between those things? >> that will be hard, it will depend on so many things. a lot of what cassidy had to say, what she said up front was what another person told her. now, obviously if it was a

conversation between cassidy and pat, and believes it differently i think it will depend on nuances if he says i absolutely did not say that and that will be one thing but if it is just a discrepancy in a word or two or perhaps cassidy thought he was saying it in a way that pat was not quite saying it it just depends and in that white house there is so many things going on. at so many, in one moment and there are so many conversations happening. i think we'll just have to watch and see i think that cassidy was very believable. i did not work with her and don't know her. but i think we will have to wait and see. >> did you ever personally witness instances where the then white house counsel, pat cipollone informed the president or others around him they couldn't do something because it was illegal? >> no, i never saw that, pat to his credit was great at having i think those kinds of conversations with the president privately.

he often had conversations that it would frustrate me as the press secretary because i needed to be in there to then hopefully tell the press what was going on. but i never saw him say no in terms of you, this will be illegal but i did see him push back often and i did see him say you know during the first impeachment hearings that is a great example, jenna alice wanted to come on board as legal counsel and the president was okay with that and pat said no, i don't want her on the team and we will step back so i have seen those conversations take lace. >> remarkable, it underscores what you said really underscores why pat cipollone's testimony is critical here. let's turn to what you are witnessing in the white house behind the scenes around the time of january 6 and the days before, you were in your book, you wrote in your book meetings that would happen in the white house residence after hours. have you spoken to the committee about those meetings and what can you tell us about

who was in them and how they unfolded? >> yes, i have spoken to the committee extensively about anything that i know about the days leading up to january 6. but as just practice, mrs. trump always wanted to know if people were going to be in her home at night in the president often times didn't tell her. so i as chief of staff needed to be notified so i was always told by the usher who was going to be in the residence that evening and i do know that leading up to january 6 there were a lot of the lawyers i like to do that, up there, speaking that mark meadows would usher them into the residence. >> can you enumerate who those lawyers are, i think our view years may know. >> jenna ellis. rudy giuliani. those are the three i can think of at the top of my head. >> of course some of them were present there right before january 6 that has become a significant interest to the

committee in your experience and based on your knowledge, of this time, do you know or do you think president trump knew who was meeting at the willard hotel and why? >> yes. and the reason i say that is because nobody did anything without president trump's blessing period. end of story. i as press secretary, any chief of staff i worked with which was literally all four of them, you didn't make a move without first getting his sign off. people didn't go behind his back and make major decisions. and talk strategy without him knowing so i think that he was well aware but that is just me knowing just from my own experience and just a guess. >> you're saying that based on extrapolation on previous behavior not necessarily because you knew based on experience and what about mark meadows do you know if mark meadows knew what was going on at the willard hotel and you have any insights into the claims that we have heard from the committee that he was

interested in attending that meeting? >> i don't know personally. again, when mark meadows took over as chief of staff i left the west wing probably three weeks later so i was gone and very much removed. but again knowing the way the president works and the west wing worked and this is just mark meadows as chief of staff with me to know about all of those things that were going on for so many reasons so knowing how things worked i can't imagine that he wouldn't have been aware and i can't imagine that the president wouldn't have told him to go there. >> do you recall vinyl question do you recall ever hearing any conversations or discussions around connections to some of the extremist groups, the proud boys the oath keepers that we will see those links explored in the next hearing does that ring true to you at all do you know anything about it? >> i don't know anything about it. regard to january 6, it does ring true to me only that and i'm not going to get into this

which is terrible i know for your show but there were people on the trump campaign that had connections that i spoke to the january 6 committee about. so it rings true to me, i don't know any factual connections that may be meadows had or anybody in the west wing had. >> interestingly, potential connections to the proud boys in the oath keepers. we will see that comes out in subsequent committee hearings. stephanie grisham, thank you for your time tonight. we will take what we just heard tonight from grisham and mulvaney and bounce it off another insider, along with two formal federal prosecutors with what they think this upcoming january 6 hearing might lead to. that is next. fryin', flyin', savorin', favorin'. over rotini. inside a panini. egging, maining, siding, plain-ing. debunk the inglorious. one shape's victorious. kraft singles. square it.

♪ my name is austin james. as a musician living with diabetes, fingersticks can be a real challenge. that's why i use the freestyle libre 2 system. with a painless, one-second scan i know my glucose numbers without fingersticks. now i'm managing my diabetes better and i've lowered my a1c from 8.2 to 6.7. take the mystery out of managing your diabetes and lower your a1c. now you know. try it for free at freestylelibre.us

so, you just heard donald trump's former chief of staff speaking out and his former communications director who told us who was secretly meeting with trump in the days before the mob attacked the capital. we have so much to break down with our panel we have doug jones former u.s. senator and foreman u.s. at trinity. and miles taylor the former chief of staff to the secretary during the trump administration.

miles, you had a pretty strong reaction when we were listening to the mulvaney interview here together where he said that he and i am paraphrasing so nothing illegal or immoral in his time in the west wing. yes or no, true or not? >> let me say a couple things, one i do think it is important that mick and people like mick are speaking up and that is cassidy hutchinson and making people scared, it is good that he is out there however i would add that there is no one , no one that was in mick's job who did not see him do things that were immoral, unethical, or tried to do things that were illegal or unconstitutional. i sat in rooms when the president wanted to do things that were illegal, did he do them, no, but this was his daily. for instance mick was there for meetings where the president wanted to illegally and unconstitutionally seal the entire border. even though the law said you

have to allow asylum-seekers to come in. in fact he would prorate people for that and stephanie was really right in her interview when he said pat was often the one who got paraded by the president because he was the lawyer that had to say no. this happened in mick's presence and john kelly's mother's presence and mark meadows. this was a daily occurrence. i think what was interesting about what you saw as we are now entering the stage of this investigation where there is a lot of names coming forward. mick versus mark and cassidy and pat cipollone, the finger- pointing that is happening now shows you people are getting scared and now people are starting to come forward. >> i say this as a former prosecutor we fixate so much in thinking about what is a crime and what isn't, what you can charge as a crime and what you can't and much of the conduct in the world that people shouldn't do can't be charged as crimes and that is okay. a lot of this was disgraceful, immoral conduct for people who were blessed to be able to serve the american public and failed. and failed the country and that itself is immoral and indecent

and wrong. now some of it may not be criminal but i think it was really important that he drew that distinction noting that this was a moral conduct and shameful for anyone to be engaging in the white house. >> what struck me about mulvaney and others. i agree with you and i'm glad that they are coming forth. but i sat through the impeachment hearing and i saw people coming forward than and people like mulvaney and others just enabled the president. separate those people and to continue to do things. again i am glad they are coming forward now and i am happy they are doing it but every one of those that has enabled donald trump and when you enable someone like trump for that long you will end up with a january 6 type situation and that's what bothers me for the future but to call everybody, again, i can't say it enough i am glad they are coming forward, we see it all the time and investigations like this but if they had come forward and did the things that they needed to do back in the day, we might not have gotten to january 6. >> what do you think the

motivation is. he prosecuted cases, you know how this works with one witness saying something, why does mick mulvaney switch now? >> i think it is a combination, i think cassidy hutchinson emboldened people, people that spoke out against donald trump, trump was going to get slaughtered in the social media and they were going to get bullied and i think people are seeing this now that they can actually speak out and tell the truth and there are people with character, i think other people are also thinking that i do something wrong i better talk to somebody. because i see all of this now so there is a combination of things we see it all the time, and federal investigations where the media comes out and people get emboldened or frightened, this is a very similar pattern. >> this is happening on a public scale in a way that investigations don't because congress is congress it is a public body, they have political interest to but they get to be out there in the way

the prosecutors wouldn't so necessarily they see what is going on and see that it is, the sky does not fall and you do the right thing when you come forward. >> i am cynical about a lot of this stuff, i watch bill barr, i watch mick mulvaney and questioned them both in hearings especially, mick mulvaney and others and i think there is a lot of you know, it is a new tour, kind of a self- righteous tour that all of these people are going on to try to rebuild an image that got tarnished incredibly tarnished. with the things. >> i have to add to that, you can't serve in the administration without coming out with a phd in cowardice analytics, i can tell you i witnessed it at every single stage and in 2020 when i was trying to recruit every single senior official to oppose his reelection the first motivation in saying no was fear, a lot of them were afraid to be intimidated but another motivation was they didn't want to lose out on moneymaking prospects in trump world

especially if he came back one day one of the things we are seeing now is a different type of fear, fear they will be prosecuted and people are starting to change their tune and i hate to say it and i said this to you during the break, perversely some of them saw cassidy hutchinson become a hero and a lot of them left the trump administration being hellenized. and now they say i can become a hero and get famous on tv. redo my image. >> is it just politically wise now? that may be folks are seeing it. >> is it changing significantly? >> i still haven't seen that much changing in the congress of the united states and the senate, everybody is still talking behind closed doors, we have seen seven hearings, more coming up and we have nothing but crickets coming out of the house of representatives the republican leadership and the senate leadership. >> i take your point on congress but the point that mulvaney was making about how this might actually break the dam on 2024 because it is clear

in house and senate races trump is still especially in primaries kind of the be all and end all but there is this group of republicans that are just itching they all want to be president, right? and does this, do you think this creates, senator and then miles, do you? >> not a single one of them. i think if they are going to have any credibility. because they were all enablers, everyone that mick names were enablers during the time, not a single one is talking about this hearing if to say it is a witchhunt, and we need to move on. they would love to get donald trump in the review mirror as we talked about. >> mike pence was one of the biggest stars of the first hearing, of his testimony and he was very careful in measured in the tones when speaking about the former president. >> they want to break. let's get a break and i think

the country needs it. i think the republican party needs that break. >> i am not anymore either. i left it a little too late. i will say to your question though i talked to three different people today who served at high levels of the trump administration and have not come out publicly to ask the question, what will it take, some people are being moved by cassidy hutchinson's testimony but a number people said to me today in these conversations that it will be the primary process in 2024 that hopefully is trumps political death nail it will be ambition, countering ambition and their view it is all the people working that will ultimately be able to sink him, i wish they would come out anyway but if that's what it takes is the primary process for the to get in the fight, by all means, try to take him out in the primaries. it sounds like the former president is angling. >> not a single one will be protecting democracy if they do. >> if, nobody will be

protecting the democracy as we know it which needs to be protected, that is one of the most critical things that this country is facing right now and those folks that are not coming out and not speaking out, they are doing serious damage. >> if the underlying causes that led to january 6 and it is cutting that stuff out and attacking that stuff it has not gone away and is not going anywhere regardless what happens with donald trump. >> the way the laws are being changed and meddled with is important in the context of this conversation. stick around, because we have another investigation on efforts to overturn the election that is also heating up tonight the prosecutor that just subpoenaed senator lindsey graham would not rule out a subpoena for donald trump. buying a car from vroom is so easy, all you need is a phone and a finger.

just go to vroom.com, scroll through thousands of cars. then, tap to buy. that's it. no sales speak, no wasted time. go to vroom.com and pick your favorite.

good former president trump be subpoenaed, as part of a grand jury investigation into whether he criminally interfered in the 2020 election in georgia, willis the district attorney in fulton county, georgia says yes. take a look. >> might we see a subpoena of the former president himself? >> anything is possible. >> it is possible, we are not

ruling it out? >> absolutely. anything is possible. >> they subpoenaed a hand full of allies including his attorney rudy giuliani. so, there's a lot to talk about here, let's talk nuts and bolts here what happens if the fulton da does subpoena donald trump? >> you have a lot on your hands. i think it would move to quash the subpoena saying it is either political or not based in fact or something. two he is an expert at dragging out the subpoena. he has a phd in dragging out the legal process. if he is subpoenaed it would have gone to a court or a judge anyway. but you have a legal fight on your hands. >> it's not normal to subpoena a target of an investigation. you run a real risk of

potentially having a grand jury tainted if you put some, a target. >> if they know that they are going to take the fifth, which i know that people would think that donald trump is incapable of doing that but even a court appointed -- lawyers of any stripe will tell him, do not testify. take the fifth. it is protecting you. there can be serious ramifications for a case in which somebody puts a target in front of a grand jury, knowing they will take the -- >> you have the right to remain silent. you watch "dragnet" and that's what people think about. if they bring you with a subpoena, they are asking you to testify. if they charge you with a crime -- >> he's clinically incapable of remaining silent. any prosecutor is going to know that. that's the trail that donald trump createded, frankly, puts

him in the most vulnerable position. one of the reason the trump world is panics, they feel besieged, not just by the january 6th select committee, but by this investigation and any number of investigations, because at some point, the shoe is going to drop. the penny is going to drop and something will stick. something will stick at some point. it's one of the reasons why the former president is itching to announce the candidacy of 2024. the people around him are worried they will get hit. if he's a candidate for public office, he is a they, they're trying to end the candidacy. that's the talking point he is trying to rush into existence. >> we're talking about in the break, the risk of trying to prognosticate when charges are coming. it's never a good idea. prosecutors know this. however, if the president is to be charged, the former president is to be charged, it's probably in georgia.

quicker than the federal government. it's straight-up election law. >> the evidence is clear. >> it's not the constitutional stuff. >> everybody is talking about how clear that is. let me tell you something. i did a little defense work, too. and a good defense lawyer is going to rip that tape to shreds. >> why? >> because, you can say, if you're in the heat of something, and you've lost a close election for governor, for president, whatever, and you can say, my god, i need to find 11,000 votes. that can be an innocent conversation. if you're asking someone to redo the count, do it again. >> it is open to interpretation. but i take your point. >> remember, it's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. if there's a different hypothesis that's consistent with innocence -- >> he asked for exactly the right amount of votes to win. it muddies the water. >> senator, let me ask you from

a political perspective. i think all of the things are layered together. perhaps less so in georgia. definitely in the case of the department of justice, merrick garland making decisions about what to do. is there, in your view, as someone that understands how the legal system works and in politics, a risk to charging donald trump that will elevate him in the context of a 2024 run? >> of course there is. >> how significant is it? >> i think it's significant. i mean, you only go back to my old nemesis, judge roy moore. roy moore got elevated because he was sued by the aclu. and he rode that horse as far as he could. not his regular horse, but the legal horse, as far as he could. sorry. there is a risk. i will say that. that is not the kind of ris thack will be determining for the president of the united states. they will lock at the pros and

cons. they will look at the strength of evidence. look at the policy behind it. they will understand when you're trying to indict a former president that's never been done in the history of this country, you have to raise the bar. it is going to -- there's long-term ramifications for doing that. that's what it cease going to be. it's not the political risk. i don't think it will be the political risk at all. >> it occurs to me and i want to circle back. we haven't talked about what stephanie grisham said at the end of the interview with us. she testified to the january 6th committee about potential lenlinks with the proud boys and to the company. what do you know about that? will that be the center of what the department of justice does? >> someone said to me, when they would go on advance trips with the president, and you get drivers that drive staff in the cars. there would be qanoners and proud boys types. they were worried about it then

and that was years before january 6th. one thing was clear before i left the department of homeland security. is the white house didn't want to talk about the domestic terrorism. the people that the law enforcement community considered domestic terrorists, were the people the white house considered supporters. they considered them active supporters. they didn't want to launch cases about these people. the red flags were being aired then. you can draw a line of what happened on january 6th, way back in the administration. there's a crucial point here. for many years -- >> final word. we're about to wrap up. >> we hoped that investigations would save us from donald trump. impeachments would save us from donald trump. donald trump may make it into the primary process. and that's what the constitution says. the people have the final word here. and we may have to be prepared to have the people vote to keep this man from being in public office. >> hope the people have some final word and not a partisan election official. >> that's what liz cheney is going for. when she spokes to the camera,

that's what i think in my mind. go online. we'll be right back. my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... the tightness, stinging... the pain. emerge tremfyant®. with tremfya®, most people saw 90% clearer skin at 16 weeks. the majority of people saw 90% clearer skin even at 5 years. serious allergic reactions may occur.

tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. emerge tremfyant®. with tremfya®... ask your doctor about tremfya® today.

thank you all for watching with us tonight. i will be back tomorrow. "don lemon tonight" with lora coates starts right now. >> good evening. i'm laura coates in for don lemon. the witness the january 6th committee wanted to talk to few n mo months. i'm talking about pat cipollone. he is making a deal for a transcribed interview. it's behind closed doors, but it's happening this friday and it will be on video. the interview will be limited to specific topics to avoid privilege issues. he was the w