of the most wild and isolated places on earth? "patagonia: life on the edge of the world" premieres sunday at 9:00 on cnn. >> wow. i want to go there. the news continues. let's hand it over to kasie hunt let's hand it over to kasie hunt and "cnn tonight". -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com >> so do i anderson. this is "cnn tonight." on the eve of what could be the biggest day yet for the january 6th committee, arguably the most significant witness yet set to appear before congressional investigators. we're going to have much more in just a second. first, we want to show you video just obtained by cnn in another january 6th probe, the federal criminal investigation. we now have body cam video of several agents raiding the home of former trump doj official

jeffrey clark. he, you may remember, is the environmental lawyer that the ex-president allegedly wanted to install as attorney general because, of course, he seemed willing to help trump overturn then-president-elect biden's victory. the footage shows authorities arriving at clark's doorstep two weeks ago and executing a search warrant on his virginia home. as you can see here, he answered the door in boxers and a dress shirt and was asked to wait outside while officers searched the house. the raid was part of the justice department's probe in the effort to overturn the 2020 election. it is not clear whether clark himself is the subject of a criminal investigation. clark, though, did plead the fifth more than 100 times before the january 6th committee. so, there's that. speaking of the january 6th committee, that brings us back to someone else about to sit down with the panel. former white house counsel pat cipollone allegedly threatened to resign in an oval office

meeting that took place on january 3, 2021, when donald trump threatened to replace his then-attorney general jeffrey rosen with clark. cipollone's name has surfaced over and over and over again in these hearings. he was a critical member of trump's inner circle. he was present for the most private of conversations. allegedly, many of those conversations disturbed him so much in the weeks leading up to january 6 that he almost walked out numerous times. that's something that trump's son-in-law and former senior adviser jared kushner did not deny when he was asked about it by the committee. but you may recall, he did dismiss cipollone. >> i know that, you know, he was always -- him and the team were always saying, oh, we're going to resign, we're not going to be here if this happens, if that happens. so, i took it up to just be whining to just be honest with you. >> whining.

okay. and tomorrow that former white house counsel will be under oath testifying formally for the first time about donald trump in the days before, during, and after january 6th. unlike cassidy hutchinson, the former mark meadows aide who testified last week, we are not going to hear this testimony in real time. but it will be recorded and transcribed. that means there's a good chance that the american public will get a look at at least some of his words at some point. maybe, who knows, even in next week's hearings. of course it could be a very different pat cipollone than the one that we've seen in public before. you might remember him. he took center stage on capitol hill less than a year before the insurrection when he defended donald trump during his first impeachment trial. >> they're not here to steal one election. they're here to steal two elections. >> they're here to perpetrate the most massive interference in an election in american history, and we can't allow that to

happen. >> it's very interesting to listen back to that now, although now we know what ultimately did happen on trump's behalf regarding attempted election interference. quite a lot has changed since then. so, how valuable will cipollone's testimony be tomorrow? i think we have a sense of that. how credible of a witness will he be? here's what former trump acting chief of staff mick mulvaney told us last night. >> i know pat. i worked very closely with pat for 15 months, actually 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 what cassidy hutchinson had said? will he counter what she said? i don't know. but i do know that pat cipollone is an honorable guy and he will be telling the truth so help him god. >> i am joined tonight by a man who knows what it will be like

for pat cipollone, john dean. also with us, jim schultz, who worked in the white house counsel's office under then-president trump. thank you for being with us tonight. john, i have to start with you. how does this pat cipollone moment compare to what you went through in 1973? >> well, i think it's very different. i was very inclined to testify. i was actually trying to end a cover-up that was ongoing. it was more than just a bungled burglary that had happened at the watergate but rather a whole sequence of elicit activity that needed to be explained so you could understand watergate. so, i was a willing witness. i had been involved in misconduct on my own, and i wanted to end all that and explain what had happened. so, pat cipollone is coming from a very different place, and i hope he's not coming from the same place you showed in the clip back in october of 2019 when he, i think, was not

representing the office of the president but rather representing the president. and i think if he goes in front of the committee and tells what he knows, he can be a very important witness. >> john, let me stick with you for one second. one thing that happened in 1973 was that nixon waived executive privilege. how did that impact your testimony -- or i should say based on what you know how that impacted your testimony at a time, how do you think lack of such a waiver is going to affect what we hear in this case from pat cipollone? >> well, the landing of the representation is much different today. it's clear. it was unclear who my client was at that time, and i had also told the people at the white house that they'd have to go to court to shut me up. otherwise, i was coming forward on both attorney/client and executive privilege because i thought criminal activity would not be shielded by either

privilege. so, my background in that is a little different than where we are today, where i think there is executive privilege is owned by the incumbent president, joe biden. and there is some lingering relationship between the form erin er incumbent and his aides, but the issue of executive privilege belongs to this president, the sitting president. and i think the courts have pretty well clarified that. and a lot of decisions have already been made about the trump effort to shield some of his activity through executive privilege. of course they're saying it's not there. that privilege belongs to mr. biden, and he has waived it. so, i don't think this is going to be a big issue, nor do i think attorney/client is going to apply here because that was pretty well knocked down back in the clinton administration when ken star went after that privilege. >> so, on that point, jim

schultz, on the attorney/client privilege idea here, i mean, you obviously were inside the white house counsel's office in the west wing during the trump administration. and of course, as many of us lay people who are not lawyers understand it, attorney/client privilege does not apply when criminal acts are being undertaken. we've heard a lot of testimony that suggests that mr. cipollone repeatedly was advising the president not to do things he wanted to do or said that he wanted to do because he would be committing a crime if he did them. what did you witness when you were in that office along these lines? and how are you thinking about pat cipollone's upcoming testimony? >> so, here's what i think about that. i think pat cipollone's going to give honest testimony. he's an american hero. he protected democracy by standing up against some of the things that were going on there at that time, standing up against the likes of a jeffrey clark getting into office. i know pat cipollone is going to

tell the truth. i think this is something that was negotiated with the committee. he was served with a subpoena. it was negotiated with the committee. the scope was negotiated with the committee. and he's going to testify truthfully when asked. >> jim, what's the number one question you want to see him answer tomorrow? >> look, i think the key questions that are going to be asked tomorrow are ones surrounding, one, jeffrey clark. two, the questions surrounding the effort to go down to the -- the president's alleged effort to go down to the capitol that day by cassidy hutchinson. i would want to verify that if i were on that committee. and i think that's something they're going to ask. and i think anything surrounding the episodes leading up, the planning going up to january 6 and anything he knows about that. look, john's right. criminal activity is not protected under attorney/client privilege, which is why i believe pat cipollone is coming forward and talking about these issues. and look, let's not forget. he did spend five hours with the

committee giving interviews. and really what this is is getting it on the record at this point. >> john dean, what do you want to hear from pat cipollone? what's your top question for him? >> well, he's been in a cat-bird seat for a long time. and if he's going to protect the office of the president, he should testify about what trump has done in his political activities that may have damaged that office and get that out on the table for this committee to understand in the context of the insurrection, where that activity culminated. >> john, what is your sense of any knowledge, very briefly, that pat cipollone might have in terms of connections to the proud boys or oath keepers groups? that seems to be where this committee is also going. that's where we hear they're going to get into next week. >> yes, the tuesday hearing is purportedly going to focus on that. and i think pat cipollone's a

smart guy. and i think he's stayed away from people like roger stone and general flynn, who were boasting these links to the proud boys and other extremist groups. but he may know something, and he may have some knowledge because there were also pardons requested by some of these people. and he may have taken a look into it there. i don't -- there's no privilege in his review of pardon material that i know of. >> very good point. >> and i had the same function once. >> indeed you did. john dean, jim schultz, thank you both very much for bringing your knowledge and expertise to bear tonight. there is news tonight about the scheme to install fake gop electors in key swing states to overturn election 2020. some republican operatives are now prepared to work with criminal investigators. how and what it could mean when "cnn tonight" returns.

what if i sleep hot? ...or cold? no problem. the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing, so you both stay comfortable and can help you g almost 30 minutes more restfulsleep. and now, the queen sleep nuer 360 c2 smart bed is only $899. only for a limited time. 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. to a child, this is what conflict looks like. children in ukraine are caught in the crossfire of war,

forced to flee their homes. a steady stream of refugees has been coming across all day. it's basically cold. lacking clean water and sanitation. exposed to injury, hunger. exhausted and shell shocked from what they've been through. every dollar you give can help bring a meal, a blanket, or simply hope to a child living in conflict. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today with your gift of $10 a month, that's just $0.33 a day. we cannot forget the children in places like syria, born in refugee camps, playing in refugee camps, thinking of the camps as home. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, your gift can help children like ara in afghanistan, where nearly 20 years of conflict

have forced the people into extreme poverty weakened and unable to hold herself up, ara was brought to a save the children's center, where she was diagnosed and treated for severe malnutrition. every dollar helps. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, just $0.33 a day. and thanks to special government grants that are available now, every dollar you give can multiply up to ten times the impact. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special save the children tote bag to show you won't forget the children who are living their lives in conflict. every war is a war against children. please give now. alright, limu, give me a socket wrench, pliers, and a phone open to libertymutual.com they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need... and a blowtorch. only pay for what you need.

♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ power e*trade's easy-to-use tools like dynamic charting and risk-reward analysis help make trading feel effortless and its customizable scans with social sentiment help you find and unlock opportunities in the market with powerful, easy-to-use tools power e*trade makes complex trading easier react to fast-moving markets with dynamic charting and a futures ladder that lets you place, flatten, or reverse orders so you won't miss an opportunity mission control, we are go for launch. ♪ um, she's eating the rocket. ♪ lunchables! built to be eaten. ♪

new signs tonight that the justice department's criminal investigation into january 6th is ramping up. as soon as tomorrow, republican operatives connected to the fake elector push in battleground states are set to hand over documents to the doj. the operatives who received subpoenas for the documents include two republican state senators in arizona, as well as election officials in georgia, michigan, and pennsylvania. federal investigators have also recently targeted two key players in this alleged plot. the fbi seized a phone from the masterminds of trump attorney john eastman last month. and as i mentioned earlier, federal agents did raid the home of former doj official jeffrey clark. this is the video newly obtained by cnn showing that moment from a police body cam asking him to step outside and refusing his request to get dressed until investigators cleared the house. here to discuss is former montana governor steve bullock

who also served as state attorney general. governor, let me start with you here if you want to put your legal hat on for a second. what are these moves about by the justice department tell you about where they are in their investigation? >> i think it's significant. first, let's step back. 800 folks have been charged through january 6 already. 300 have pled. and i think what the department is doing, taking a real methodical approach along the way, following the evidence where it comes. and this is another significant step because it's now clearly more than just what happened on january 6 in the capitol. they're looking into the larger pieces of what could be a significant conspiracy. >> they're very clearly putting pieces of a puzzle together. obviously january 6 is a key culmination. but the hearings have built up to that. miles taylor, i know you still talk to some people who worked for donald trump despite having left the party, and telling us how you really feel.

what's the sense in those kinds of quarters about what's happening, doj? are people starting to get scared? >> they're starting to get scared, and they're also seeing this thing, kasie, is like an endless onion or a blooming onion. it has more and more layers. look how this proceeded. first it was the fake votes that the president was trying to find to win the election. when he couldn't find the fake sloets, it was let's find fake electors. then it was let's find fake authorities for the vice president of the united states to use to nullify the election. it was this triple fake that's created a whole range of investigative avenues that's making almost everyone that was in the trump white house or the administration at the time have the hairs on the backs of their necks stand up. they're worried at some point one of the pieces of investigation is going to come their direction. and i think what we've seen in the past couple of weeks with the select committee is that if this was a play, we're entering the third act. we're entering the point that

it's becoming very dramatic. and you showed footage of the body cams at jeffrey clark's house. we're at the place where we're going to see the body cams that were in the oval office. people like pat cipollone, who i know we'll talk about, those were the body cameras. and if there was, this might all be over now because we would see. but the metaphor cal body cams are getting ready to be introduced in these hearings and i think that's significant. >> i think the department of justice is running this down. if you were involved in trying to literally create fake electors to replace the dually elected electors -- these people are part of our united states constitutional system. this is how it works. and if you're trying to subvert that, you deserve to get a visit from the department of justice and i hope these people cooperate and fess up to it. it's wrong. it shouldn't be. >> scott, let me ask you from a political perspective. recent polling shows a little bit -- this was before cassidy hutchinson testified, we should note. but it does suggest some of what we've been hearing anecdotally,

which is that republican voters are forced to make a decision about who to nominate for president in 2024 aren't paying attention. 10% say they're watching the hearings a lot, 30% say a little. half that they are watching these hearings not at all. my question for you, i guess, is what is your sense about whether it moves the needle not necessarily among voters but among -- you know, when i talked to mick mulvaney last night, he said, look, it's moving the needle among people like mike pence and nikki haley and mike pompeo, people that are thinking about challenging him. someone would have to step up and challenge him to prevent him from winning the nomination again. what's your thinking about that? >> i do think these people who are thinking of challenging him are ultimately going to have to make the argument centers around what we're hearing right now. we all supported donald trump. we all voted for him twice. we are glad for his successes. but we can't relitigate 2020 and the 2024 election. mike pence has laid down that marker. but these other candidates are going to have to do the same

thing. this whole process that's going on right now gives them the ammunition to do. that i'm not surprised a lot of republicans aren't watching this. you can't put adam schiff and jamie raskin on a tv show and expect them to watch it. >> push back on that. >> more than that. look, i could walk down to montana. no one's going to talk to me about these hearings. they're going to talk to me about gas prices, about things that impact their daily lives. we know if there was a seven-part hearing on gas prices, not only would a lot more people watch it, but every cable television network would actually cover the thing. >> i think -- might contradict you. >> so, there's a piece to you that, though, that it doesn't impact people's everyday lives outside this place we gather called washington, d.c. i hope, to scott's point, that's ultimately, even if voters aren't following this on a daily basis, i hope it's kind of that awakening to what the republican party used to be and more and

more folks standing up and saying, look, we can do a lot better than this. >> your state has voted for democrats in the past. it's trended red recently. i'm sure you talk regularly with people who vote with those who are not in your democratic party, do you think they are open when you listen to people? do you want someone that's not donald trump as the nominee? >> i think one of the problems or challenges of all of this is we can't even agree what the table looks like right now anymore. meaning that we can talk about the investigations, we can talk about the hearings, but if people don't even believe the commonalities of, boy, it was more than a riot. remember ted cruz saying it was a terrorist act until he got his collar pulled. >> and kevin mccarthy. >> so, i do think at the end of the day, some folks will pay attention. but we can't count on these hearings -- and these hearings are playing a critical point for both accountability, for helping build cases for the department

of justice. but that's not what's going to move the motors. and for history. >> we've got a lot more to chat about tonight. we're going to have you back later this hour. americans, though, woke up this morning to boris johnson resigning as the british prime minister. this is what it looks like when conservatives in england decided that they are over it. but what would it take for more conservatives in this country to rethink their loyalty to donald trump? the author of the new book "why we did it," tim miller, joins me to discuss coming up next.

we're carvana we created a brand new way for you to sell your car go to carvana answer a few questions and our techno wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds we'll come to you pay you on the spot then pick up your car that's it at carvana

my blood pressure is borderline. garlique healthy blood pressure formula helps maintain healthy blood pressure with a custom blend of ingredients. i'm taking charge, with garlique.

boris johnson did survive many scandals. he survived being caught telling lies. he survived a vote of no confidence. and that was just last month. but it all piled up. and in the end, the uk prime minister just couldn't survive without the support of his own party. after more than 50 aides and government officials resigned basically on mass, johnson says he is stepping down. and he blames, quote, the herd. >> as we've seen westminster, the herd instinct is powerful. when the herd moves, it moves. and my friends, in politics, no one is remotely indispensable. >> sure did move. it's amazing what pressure from one's own party can do to any politician. so, obviously it begs the

question, what about the conservati conservative herd here in the united states? will the republican party ever say enough is enough with former president trump? i want to bring in the perfect person to discuss this, tim miller. he is a former republican political operative and author of the new book, "why we did it: a travel log from the republican road to hell." thank you for being here. i want to show a tweet you put up early. a conservative political party that holds their own government accountable for bad deeds. fascinating. something to look into gop, what is behind conservatives abandoning boris johnson but not trump. what's behind it? >> well, i think two things. one is the british system of government is different and has, i think, provided more opportunities for getting rid of a party leader. boris isn't the first party leader to get thrown over by his own government. it's the nature of parliamentary

system. probably something worth reflecting on in america. that's about our institutions that is. but that's not an excuse for the republicans here because there are mechanisms in the u.s. for republicans to do exactly what happened in britain. >> i was going to say, tim, because there actually was an opportunity. you're absolutely right. in this case it's a group of elites, of elected officials, of leaders who make the decisions, where in the united states the people make the decisions for president. however, we did have a united states senate, including a republican leader at that time who seemed to very much be on the fence and potentially willing to vote to convict donald trump. they could have, together as a group of elites, voted to impeach him and prevented him in the wake of the riot that ransacked their building, that would have prevented him from becoming president ever again and yet they didn't do it. >> this is absolutely right. and the 25th amendment was also an option before that. january 6th, trump's own cabinet, in the same way that

boris' did could have gotten rid of him. it would have made mike pence the head of state. he had shown he acted responsibly that day. it was a no brainer. then the conviction coming in the senate, it would have only taken ten republican senators, some of whom were retiring, who didn't have political skin in the game. i think that's the difference here. the politicians here for a variety of reasons i get into in the book are so addicted to the access, so addicted to being close to power that they could not summon the courage to do what needed to be done. this was not a political thing. people say, oh, well the politics wouldn't let it be so. that's not true. republicans could have moved on to ron desantis or mike pence and gotten all the policies they say they claim to care about and gotten rid of donald trump and his corrupt actions. they wanted access to power because they were cowardly, and because the herd, as boris put it, in america didn't work

together in the way that they did in england to make sure that, you know, non-corrupt officials were at the head of the party. >> i had an interesting conversation last night with mick mulvaney last night, the former acting chief of staff to the white house. he's arguing to republican voters, listen to the republicans who are testifying at the january 6th committee. and he's arguing that it is potentially moving the needle for some of those rivals that you mentioned, the mike pences of the world. take a look at what mulvaney had to say. >> inside washington, inside the political world, so outside of washington in politics, it is moving the needle. and what you're seeing, i think, is folks, especially in my party, are looking at donald trump as damaged and something that might weigh down the party going into the midterms and into 2024, which is why i think you're starting to hear rumblings about mike pence running against donald trump, mike pompeo, ron desantis, tim scott, nikki haley. those are conversations i don't

think you would have had six or eight weeks ago before the hearings started. >> interesting. tim, do you buy it? >> on the one level, i kind of buy it. we do focus groups with trump voters, and it is true in the last month or so you've heard from republican voters who like thinking, maybe the drama is too much. it's time to move on. the problem is we've all been through this before. in order to kill the monster, you have to go at him and put a stake through his heart. and none of the republicans are willing to do it. i feel like i'm going through the same thing i went through in 2016 when we tried to stop trump with a conservatives against trump path. look at pence. he won't testify to this committee. mike pence is the one who could reveal just how derelict trump was that day. ron desantis says he wants to challenge trump, but all he ever does is talk about how great donald trump is when asked. i'm skeptical that the people in the game -- mick mulvaney is out of the game now so he can speak

freely. but the people who need voters for power are going to do what it takes to defeat the monster. none of them are willing to do it. you saw scott jennings talking about because republican voters aren't watching this. this is because republican elites aren't giving this committee the power that it needs to have. it's not being covered in conservative media fairly, despite the fact that liz cheney, who's a deep conservative, is the lead prosecutor for it. i'm not seeing a lot of evidence that the elites are changing their views, even though we are seeing a little bit of movement among voters, which is encouraging. >> the liz cheney point is interesting because mulvaney also in our interview trashed liz cheney, quite frankly. >> right, right. >> said don't listen to her, but do listen to all of the republicans who are coming forward, people like cassidy hutchinson. so, i guess time will tell. tim miller, thanks very much for your time tonight. i appreciate having you. back to the january 6th hearings. how will the select committee

try to tie domestic extremism and extremists to donald trump's efforts to overturn the election when their hearing happens on tuesday. predictions around the table when "cnn tonight" returns. with a jitterbug? or returned from warar, dreaming of the possibilities ahead. ♪ where your dad waited for his dad to come home from the factory. is this where they gathered on their front steps, with fats domino on the breeze... ancestry can guide you to family discoveries in the 1950 census. see what you can uncover at ancestry.

(man) [whispering] what's going on? (burke) it's a farmers policy perk. get farmers and you could save money by doing nothing. just be claim-free on your home insurance for three years. (man) that's really something. (burke) get a whole lot of something with farmers policy perks. (dad) bravo!

(mom) that's our son! (burke) we should. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ 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. when a truck hit my car, the insurance company wasn't fair. i didid't t kn whahatmy c caswa, so i called the barnes firm. i'm rich barnes. it's hard for people to k how much their accident case is worth.h barnes. t ouour juryry aorneneys hehelpou

the insurance company getenwasn't fair.ity y cablele. i didn't know what my case was worth, so i called the barnes firm. llll theararnes rmrm now the best result possible. ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪ we saw the people who were part of the mob on january 6th, many of them affiliated with various far right groups, including the proud boys, the

oath keepers, and the three percenters. was there any coordination between these extremists and the trump white house? that is the question at the center of next tuesday's hears. remember cassidy hutchinson testified that donald trump instructed mark meadows to meet with rudy giuliani and two of his other key allies, roger stone and michael flynn, on the night before the attack. both stone and flynn are known to have ties with these groups. >> mr. meadows had a conversation with me where he wanted me to work with secret service on a movement from the white house to the willard hotel so he could attend the meeting or meetings with mr. giuliani and his associates in the war room. i had made it clear to mr. meadows that i didn't believe it was a smart idea for him to go to the willard hotel that night. throughout the afternoon, he mentioned a few more times going up to the willard hotel that evening and then eventually dropped the subject the night of

the 5th and said that he would dial in instead. >> steve bullock, scott jennings, miles taylor are back with me now. the committee has been extraordinarily careful to delineate what the proud boys, the oath keepers, these organized extremist groups were doing. they've been separating them out from trump supporters who were there who did not plan in advance to do the things these groups tried to do. if this connection is made directly or as a matter of perception, what does that mean for republican leadership? what does mitch mcconnell need to be saying and doing about this right now? >> if they can prove this link, it's incredibly damaging to the whole idea. there's this pervasive idea on the right that these people were invited in. the police let them in. it was just wandering tourists. >> i was there. they were not invited in. >> you see these people with

paramilitary equipment, zip ties. they were there for a reason. the core question is, who told them to be there? who helped them plan it? do any of those people exist in trump's inner circle. every republican should condemn links to these groups and pay very close attention to this. i'm interested to see what evidence they have. but it's apparent that some of these people were not there for spontaneous reasons, that they actually had thought about it in advance. >> miles taylor, you were inside the department of homeland security for much of the trump administration. they often dealt with these routes or did not depending on the proclivity, what's your of how this could play out? >> anyone who thinks this was a fluke is a fool for believing that. there is a threat that goes all the way back to the beginning of the trump administration that shows this problem with domestic extremism was not a political situation. it was a real public safety threat. and at the beginning of the administration trump largely gave a pass to these groups. he viewed a lot of these types

of organizations as his supporters. we asked him to develop a domestic terrorism strategy. the answer we got back, we'll do that later. they saw these people as political supporters, not extremists. that went from giving a pass to them to being supporting, with stand back and stand by. all to potentially partnering with them on january 6th. there is a whole line here. today in all 50 states there are domestic terrorism investigations in this country. most of them are far right extremist groups. that was not the case when donald trump came into office. every single state in this country. this isn't just a political issue. in 2000, bush's supporters didn't try to violently overthrow the government. that's what we're dealing with now. it's a serious public safety west. >> out west it's particularly a problem. >> to miles' point, not only stand back and stand by, go back

to million maga march in december when stone and flynn were there. the proud boys were there. we've already seen links. when a federal judge looking at a case that has both the trump -- president trump, his family, and the proud boys and oath keepers, there's enough evidence to at least let this flame go forward. you had chairman thompson saying we will provide evidence or discussion of the trump orbit and these groups. so, i think that there is a lot more there. i think this will be an interesting piece. and i hope that scott's right that, that will be a wakeup call for a lot of folks saying, you know, we've been on this train for quite a while. but now at least we'll get off. >> scott jennings, do you think -- it seems like doj has to charge if they prove links here. >> look, as steve pointed out, the governor pointed out a minute ago, hundreds of people have already been charged. there's obviously a willingness to move on these folks. if you broke the law, you deserve to be charged. >> i'm talking about charging trump.

if they can link the white house to these extremist groups. >> this question is interesting because obviously joe biden who beat donald trump sits at the top of this administration, which ultimately runs the department of justice. it's a tricky question. i hear you. it is a tricky question about whether the administration just beat the guy, should charge the guy with a crime if he intends to run for re-election. i know it's unprecedented, but there's a school of thought here where this takes us down a weird road. >> let me reverse this for you a little bit. i get all the republicans want to say this is the biden justice department, they can't charge trump, a republican president. but as someone who has worked for -- i'm going to ask you to put your mcconnell hat on right now because he is a republican leader who has publicly, you know, not insulted trump but privately we all know where he stands, can't stand him, wants him out of the party, lost him two senate seats. for mitch mcconnell, what's the best they can do here? if they charge trump, does that keep him in the spotlight?

if you're a republican trying to get trump off the stage, what is the best case? >> i think if he were sitting here right now, he would say the department of justice should follow the law. >> obviously. >> as a political matter, there is a debate within republican circles whether he gets charged, it actually martyrs him. it makes it worse in some way. it turns him into, you know, a persecuted martyr. and it sounds crazy to say, but does it rebound -- >> and that's my question. >> -- and make it worse. no one quite knows what the political impact of that would be. i think the culmination of these investigations and hearings is that even for some of the people who love voting for donald trump, they realize relitigating this and going through this again in 2024 gives the party the least best chance to win back the white house. >> sure does. >> even in public they might say donald trump's great, but in their heart they know there's got to be a better way here. >> governor, briefly from the democratic side, what's the flip side of this? you're someone who ran as a relatively moderate democrat and you understand what it takes to

run in a state or an environment that's perhaps not terribly progressive or it's tough. is charging trump good for the democratic party? >> i think that first of all, the department of justice -- and we've already seen seditious conspiracy charges against the proud boys and the oath keepers. that's definitely the right path to be going down. any prosecutor would turn around and say do i have the evidence, the proof, to charge the crime? and also do i want to exercise my discretion? it is different than a prosecutor in georgia to the attorney general of the united states doing this. so, yes, i do think we still have to continue to see what more comes out. but you don't make that decision lightly for both legal reasons and for political reasons. >> it's a very, very tricky -- >> if donald trump were running for president and biden were running for re-election and his administration was prosecuting the former president and possible future opponent, i wonder what the political -- >> explosive situation. >> absolutely. >> it absolutely is. steve bullock, steve jennings,

miles taylor, great conversation. come back any time. the national divide is not all about white nationalists in camouflage looking for trouble. sometimes the battles are a lot more subtle and they can come down to a simple word, woke. w. kamau bell looks into it in "united shades of america.a." ahe's here with a preview next. looking at your full financial picture. this is what it's like to have a comprehensive wealth plan with tax-smart investing strategies designed to help you keep more of what you earn. and set aside more for things like healthcare, or whatever comes down the road. this is "the planning effect" from fidelity. the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but e 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. this is john. he never gives up—no matter what life throws his way. high cholesterol. heart disease. 17 fad diets... 5 kids...

3 grandkids... 1 heart attack. and 18 passwords that seem to change daily. with leqvio, john can lower his cholesterol— and so can you. when taken with a statin, leqvio is proven to lower bad cholesterol by over 50% and keep it low 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.

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. ♪

it means you're a loser, everything woke. everything woke, it is true. everything woke turns. >> donald trump made a platform of being anti-woke. what does that mean exactly? 12 election battleground state of arizona to ask that question. >> reporter: what is woke? >> i don't know what that means so i can't answer you. >> i feel old just like hearing that word because honestly i know, yes. i'm only 16 yet i don't really

understand like some of the slang terms nowadays. >> it's not a word you are using. i would be shocked if it was but it's not a word that you all are using. >> it's a word used against us. i'm sorry i'm not woke enough to know what non-binary means. or if any of that means to use your pronouns i identify as a helicopter. i use it pronouns. >> is from the first episode of the new season of united states of america premiering sunday night right here on cnn. and we are joined now, thank you so much for being here, i want to put the same question to you that you put to those kids. what does woke mean and how have the culture warriors on the right changed the term? >> i think donald trump when he said things turn was projecting there. i will say that right now, woke is a sling that black people invented as, it means be

educated and aware and it's ways that black folks tell each other to pay attention to the world and pay attention to america because america is a dangerous place for us, that's what it means full stop. but like the best black slang it is taken by mainstream america and often twisted into something we don't recognize but this time it's been twisted into something that is harmful and specifically in targeting us and saying that woke is anti- american which we are always being told this and the most damaging thing they are targeting the schools as a way to stop schools from teaching accurate age-appropriate versions of the history of this country. >> i was going to say this war really has this version of the culture war really has gone into schools when people talk about critical race theory and some of these other issues how do you think people who oppose that framing largely democrats and progressives however you want to label them what tools do they have two push back?

>> i think we need to push back earlier a lot of times those of us on the left go that is nonsense and i will not stand. what we learn is that the longer we let it fester even like the war on christmas. we have to start dealing with those as if it is ackley where the argument lies and i think that's what has happened with woke and with critical race theory. it has nothing to do with what your kid learns in elementary school if your kid is learning critical race theory congratulations your kid is a genius because that is for law schools and graduate-level schools but we don't take that stuff seriously because we do anything frame it as a culture war and that's where a lot of the wars in this country happen is in the culture. >> i will say i do talk to some democrats on capitol hill i have who probably would describe themselves as more moderate members of the party. who think that some of the language goes too far. what do you argue to those people, to people who policy wires are on the side of many

people who would call themselves woke who think it is potentially alienating what you say to them and how should they be approaching it? >> congratulations you sound old. the culture shifts, language changes and those, i am in that old category have to understand as the language changes it is your turn to go this is new i should learn about it or you go know that's not the way it was when i was coming up so i have to stay in my place so for me i sit here wearing a shirt that says trans people belong. i did not grow up around trans people but i've been educated by people around me who explained to me that trans people belong and that's where and why i wear shirts like this. can you accept new ideas and process them and take those new ideas and share them with the world? >> you describe the way you initially described woke with something that was adopted by black americans but it has come to be something that many other communities have identified with. >> let's be clear, black people often in the american language are the culture engine of the

american language so there are ways to talk about woke that is positive i mean the phrase stay woke took off during 2014 in the wake of michael brown's killing by the police and ferguson, there is nothing wrong with taking these phrases and using them as long as you're using them the way they are meant to be used but often as happens with black culture. it gets weapon is against us eventually. >> thank you very much, for this conversation. and i am sure the episode will be fascinating. be sure to tune in, the all new season of united states of america. premieres sunday at 10 pm eastern only right here on cnn. we will be right back.

we've been streaming all day from every room. the power and speed of this super-sonic wifi from xfinity is incredible. mom! mass speeds was my idea, remember? get minion net, with speeds of

up to one minion bite per hour. [ low screaming ] but that was an epic fail. with xfi we can stream, share, swipe, like... impress your mom with super-sonic wifi. it's unbeatable internet for a more unbeatable gru. i mean, you. thank you for joining us tonight i will be back tomorrow night i hope to see you, starting right now. >> we will see you tomorrow

night this is lemon tonight and look the clock is ticking. in fact by this time tomorrow when we meet again the january 6 committee may have some answers from none other than pat, he will talk with them behind closed doors tomorrow, the white house counsel who reportedly said quote we will get charged with every crime imaginable if then president were to go to the capital on january 6, the one who reportedly called the plot to replace the acting attorney general with trump loyalist jeffrey clark quote our murder suicide pact. in their subpoena letter the committee told us some of what they want to ask the former white house counsel about. including then-president trumps awareness of and involvement in quote the submission of fake electoral ballots to congress and the executive branch. the attempted appointment of jeffrey clark is acting attorney general and efforts to interfer