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 interfere with the

congressional certification of the electoral resorts on january 6. now, you heard jeffrey clark's name again right there, right? well, we have some new police body camera footage tonight of the early morning raid on his home just last month. as part of what authorities are calling an ongoing fraud investigation. clark answering the door in his boxers and a dress shirt and then being asked to wait outside while officers executed a search warrant. >> mr. clark, how are you, good morning. can you turn that off for me. can you step outside for me, we have a search warrant and need to speak to you. can you step outside for me? >> can i call my lawyer. >> yes. step outside. we have to clear the house to make sure it is safe, is your wife home? >> no, nobody is home. >> you can absolutely call your

lawyer. >> according to police reports obtained by cnn a series of electronic devices were seized that day. even deployed an electronic sniffing dog to make sure they didn't miss a thing. it is not clear whether jeffrey clark is the subject of a criminal investigation but sources have previously told cnn that the raid was part of the doj's sweeping investigation into the effort to overturn the 20/20 election more broadly. i want to bring in cnn congressional correspondent ryan nobles, i am glad you are here because tomorrow as you know pat cipollone will testify behind closed doors and we are learning that he was in the dining room with the then- president as the insurrection was unfolding that could be pretty insightful for the committee that he had a first row and front row view. >> that is true laura and cipollone would be among the small group of people that had

access to that dining room on january 6 where we know the former president spent the bulk of his time and part of what the committee is looking into is just what exactly the president was doing on january 6 and what he wasn't doing may even be more of their focus but there could be an issue here and you understand this as an attorney better than anyone because pat cipollone is an institutionalist and someone who is very concerned about the office of the counsel to the president and he may evoke a privilege and not answer specific questions particularly questions that have to do with his direct reactions with the former president and that could include instances of what was happening in that dining room. there is murky ground on whether or not he has the ability to invoke that privilege of course that privilege belongs to the current president joe biden and he has said anything having to do with his investigation does not enjoy that privilege this is not something that will be able to be ironed out over a lengthy court battle so there will have to be some sort of

give and take between the committee and cipollone into what questions he is willing to answer and it does appear that he is willing to talk about something just how far the committee gets with him we will have to wait and see. >> the idea that conflict and if he is an institutionalist as the white house counsel and then of course the person who now owns that privilege saying go ahead and speak there will be a conflict there at issue and we remember his role in the first impeachment trial and hearing on these issues but we also saw as you saw this video i mean the police body camera footage of the recent raid on jeffrey clark's home we remember his name from the testimony of the likes of richard donahue. he was pretty substantial testimony and we know that the committee still wants more information about his attempted appointment at attorney general at doj. that very testimony we already heard more, right? >> that's exactly right and pat cipollone could be the person to give them the answers to those questions, cipollone was

among the group of individuals that were attorneys that were both in the department of justice and the white house that threatened to resign en masse if the president went through with his plan to try to install jeffrey clark as essentially a puppet, attorney general that would try to execute these investigations into these really thin claims of voter fraud in places like georgia and many ways that decision by cipollone and donahue and rosen at the department of justice to stand in the way of clark's appointment could really have been the difference between the country facing a constitutional crisis and not of the department of justice had acted on this effort to look into these voter fraud claims it could've created a real problem but getting back to that video for a second laura i am sure there will be critics that say why are we showing this he is in his boxer shorts. but i think it is important because it shows just how vital

the department of justice investigation is and how far- reaching it is they wanted to make sure that he didn't go back into this, that house and mess with any potential evidence under the guise of putting his clothes on before he came out, this shows the department of justice views him as a key component to their investigation into the efforts to overturn the election results and that video demonstrates it and it is part of these ongoing kind of dual track investigations that the department of justice and in the house of representatives. >> to quote my great- grandmother he used to say the truth is naked a lot has to go put on some pants. maybe that's appropriate here or not. may she rest in peace, i appreciate your time tonight. i want to bring in a former senior investigator for the committee, john wood, to see you here, you were an investigator with the january 6 committee intellect a few weeks ago so you i am guessing have a pretty good sense of everything the committee knows and the why in the house and the directions they may be going in and i have to ask you, what do you think that pat cipollone can shed

some light on, what are the key areas that you are most eager to hear more about, we have heard testimony from donahue and testimony from cassidy hutchinson, the name has been mentioned a lot of times. why do you want him to talk now? >> well, he was both literally and figuratively in the room where it happened so he knows so much about what led up to january 6 and the events on january 6 itself including a lot about what the president was doing during those 187 minutes while the capital was being attacked before the president finally issued a statement asking the rioters to go home. i think one of the things that i would be most interested to know is whether or not pat cipollone will either cooperate or contradict a very powerful testimony that was given by cassidy hutchinson has a few days ago, that will be really interesting there may be some things like the allegation that the president lunged at the

secret service driver that he might not know about. but some of the things cassidy hutchinson said directly involved conversations when pat cipollone was right there in the room so he may be able to shed some light on how credible she was. >> i want to pause and listen to that and remind the audience about the things that she described hearing and also heard directly from pat cipollone, listen to this. >> i saw mr. cipollone that morning. and he said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the capital cassidy keep in touch with me. we are going to get charged with every crime imaginable. if we make that movement happen. >> something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood will be on your hands. >> if he is corroborating that that he legitimately said those things, and i don't have any reason to doubt that she heard these things but if he actually goes there and corroborates what does that do for the american elect there it him of the primary audience of this, that these were the warnings

that were given by the white house counsel to the den president january 6. >> tells us a lot of things, first it would instantly give cassidy hutchinson a tremendous amount of credibility even beyond the credibility that she had just by her demeanor at the hearing. also one of the things the committee is going to want to know is did he give the same advice to the president my guess is that pat cipollone was a he cannot discuss his direct conversations with the president but if he does do that at least if he says what he said in front of people like mark meadows and cassidy, it will give a lot of insight into the information he was given to the president. if he knew what he was doing was illegal and wanted to do it anyway that is very troubling for the president. >> we talked about this yesterday with john dean and make a comment about these issues as well and the idea of privilege and it's likely obviously the white house counsel would have more of a legitimate viable claim of privilege than most other people.

but if he were to have relayed the information that he related to the den president like he has that private confidence and water coolers it and the conversation later on about what he just told and spread it around. the privilege kind of goes away. in a different context, right. >> there are a lot of gray areas here and not a lot of case law on executive privilege but i think what you are saying is right, the direct conversation with the president particularly if it involves legal advice may be the strongest even though there there could be a compelling need that can sometimes overcome that privilege. but if it is just a statement not about what he said to the president but just a statement of his own views that he made in front of cassidy hutchinson i think the argument for privilege is a lot weaker there. but of course there's not going to be time for the course to resolve all this so they will have to be some back and forth

accommodation between the select committee and lawyers representing cipollone to work out exactly where the boundaries are of what he will and won't say. >> that's the beauty of negotiation the give-and-take that has to happen and there is that sort of damocles that you talk about the appetite of the public also the reluctance to engage in a litigation on these issues but i want to play a moment from when you question warmer counsel to mike pence, you questioned him about john eastman still trying to overturn the election even after the insurrection. i have to ask you to watch yourself for a moment. >> what was vice president mike pence , his reaction, you showed him the email where doctor eastman after the attack on the capital still asked that the vice president delay certification and send it back to the states. >> he said that is rubber room stuff. that he was still pushing us to do what he had been asking us to do for the previous two days. that that was certifiably crazy. >> i mean reminder this is mike

pence and his counsel. if he can give a more color to what was happening behind the scenes in the same way is that what you would consider a win for the committee in the hearing? >> it is huge, i think the fact that the former white house counsel is speaking on the record to the committee is a big win and every bit of information they get will just add to that win. so i think he could have a lot to say about john eastman now i can't say anything about what pat cipollone said during his private interview with the staff of the committee but i will say that i don't think any good lawyer thinks that this so-called eastman theory which is the vice president can unilaterally decide the outcome of the election is correct and pat cipollone is a very smart guy and a very good lawyer so i would expect that he would contradict the theory that john eastman was espousing i think the big question that cipollone

might be unwilling to answer is did he express that you directly to the president and that is something i think he will be pressed on tomorrow and we don't know if he will answer it or not. >> finally on that point john, it will be videotaped tomorrow and it will be transcribed we have already seen how the hearings have gone where prior videotaped testimony from bill barr, evocative trump and the like and those people that appear in person, it is played and it is broadcast at these hearings. do you think the same thing will happen here or is there some chance that part of those negotiations it was look, you can videotape me or transcribe me but you can't play it, is there a world where that agreement would've been made? >> i would be really surprised if the committee would've agreed to it in fact i think the fact that this interview is occurring before the next hearing is a sign that the committee really wanted to get this done on videotape so it could potentially use clips from that interview in the next

hearing or maybe the one after that so i think the american people will see at least some excerpts of pat cipollone. >> that is important to me as a prosecutor i want to see someone's body language and see how reluctant he is to actually give an answer because whatever comes after that the answer you give after having your teeth pulled essentially for some reason it rings more true. we will talk more about this different day. i appreciate it. >> what could be another blockbuster hearing from the january 6 committee is just days away. and what they have learned about the extremist groups at the rally that preceded the attack on the capital is coming up. 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. and a blowtorch. if you wake up tnking about the market and want to make the r. get decision tech from fidelity. [ cellphone vibrates ] you'll get proactive alerts for market events before they happen... and insights on every buy and sell decision. with zero-commission online u.s. stock and etf trades. for smarter trading decisions, get decision tech from fidelity. the mosquitoes are just all over the quiet please. okay. wow! [light bulb breaks] hey! i said get a pro. i did get a pro. an orkin pro. [mosquitoes buzzing] i got you. got mosquitoes? don't call any pro, call the orkin pro. orkin. the best in pests. this is john.

he hasn't worked this hard to only get this far with his cholesterol. taken with a statin, leqvio can lower bad cholesterol and keep it low with two doses a year. side effects were injection site reaction, joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath. with leqvio, lowering cholesterol becomes just one more thing life throws your way. ask your doctor about leqvio. lower. longer. leqvio.

hi. we're zerowater. and we believe everyone deserves the purest tasting water. that's why we strive for zero. you see, to some it means nothing. but to us, it means everything. here, take a look. this meter showing triple zeros means our five-stage filter did its job, and that virtually all dissolved solids or tds have been removed. and all that's left is the purest tasting water. let's compare. a two-stage brita filter stops here. but our five-stage filter doesn't quit. zerowater. we strive for zero.

in just a few days a january 6 committee will hold their seventh public hearing. this time the focus will be on the role of extremist groups we are told and what ties they may have had to the trump white house. former cia counterterrorism official phil mudd. nice to see you here tonight. i have to ask you, in june we had the head of the proud boys and i think there were four other top members they are here on the screen who are charged with seditious conspiracy by the doj, in january, 11 members of the oath keepers had the same charge giant and thrown at

them. these are very serious charges. a whole lotta president because no one wants to have a whole lotta president on a case like this, the question is how do you build it, what do they have to prove to make this stick and actually meet their burden? >> there's a couple things that i would be looking at here, let's look at the technical side obviously i want to see communication among these individuals beforehand that communication could be phone and email. they will take a while to sort that out you saw as many months before these charges were brought laura the reason it will take a while is other cases are easier they will go before prosecutors first but putting together those phone and email logs and then starting to get into interviews. and things like searches of homes and laptops. task the more difficult questions, what did you want to do, who did you speak with, why? to figure out whether there was that knowledge and coordination

that would lead to these conspiracy charges. that takes a long time, the last thing i would say is lies. one of the reasons this takes a while and i thought it was such an interesting charge is all these people are going to talk about each other and some of them are going to lie so if you will bill that case you have to have the time to crosscheck lies over months and see who is not giving the truth laura. >> some will lie some will squeal. and talk about corroborate and crosscheck that as well and we remember quite well, that time that trump was telling the proud boys to the phrase with i think stand back and stand by. and the committee actually showed some evidence that this trump to eat telling supporters to come to washington saying it be there, we will be wild was a call to arms of her groups like the oath keepers and proud boys in fact listen to what some members told the january 6 committee. >> i remember donald trump telling people to be there. >> he said i have something very important to say on

january 6 or something like that. is what got me interested to be there. >> well, i am wondering how you think the committee will use interviews like that or testimony like this to build their case because obviously what the committee is doing is not a criminal prosecution or a pursuit, what doj and their charge would be is to pursue it in a criminal angle, there is likely to be obviously a little bit i don't mean this in a pejorative way, some cross- contamination of what they are seeing but will those videos and testimonial evidentiary moments the impact full for doj as well? >> i don't think so. let me be clear here obviously what the president did was immoral, inappropriate, this is unacceptable in america but if somebody says the president told me to stand by, if somebody says the president told me to show up in washington and he had something important to say, if somebody

says the president said he was angry about the election that it was stolen, that is a long way from saying there was coordination and communication, something or the white house or other officials had knowledge of the storming of the capital or spoke to someone about it. the people in the defense and there is no defense in this case is you know, the president was just angry and of course he wanted to talk to his followers, i will be really interested to watch in the hearing next week about whether there is a specifics about foreknowledge, conspiracy, communication with the white house not just loose talk from the president there was inappropriate but i don't think illegal. >> i think it is more than fair to think about it that way in the sense of is there some personal meeting of the minds or somebody's interpretation of the statement, one could be criminal, one could be not happenstance but not as easy case to prove, the burden from the prosecution and of course as you state the committee is actually trying to connect these groups to trump i mean,

betty thompson told jake tapper witnesses have described conversations between extremists and people in trump's orbit and we have seen photos of roger stone resent with oath keepers trying to serve his detail and security detail. but what will it take in terms of the orbit specifically to know that they were direct did by trump or to prove that they were either given a command, given the code red so to speak or someone in his orbit, will it be that precise statement of trump said to me the following statement or does the circumstantial evidence of this at some point for you tip the scale? >> i would be concerned about circumstantial evidence because the committee has so much now if they go too much circumstantial people who have been persuaded, i was skeptical until a few weeks ago and the more i watch this the more i say this is far worse than i anticipated. if the committee goes to circumstantial people like me are watching i hope with open eyes and with sort of a cold

stare at this, are going to say please don't go political, give us facts. here's a couple facts i would look at. in terms of looking at things like email and call logs where they are direct communications between either individuals directly in the white house circle or between people or with people on the orbit, people like roger stone, i want to see direct communications. those communications won't necessarily have content, phone x call phone y, that was roger stone. i want to see content pieces, about what they intended to do beforehand and were those communications with people in the white house circle, i want to see facts about communications and sort of conversations to conspiracy beforehand. not the president just told me to show up. >> i remember one moment there was the testimony that someone said look the president asked me to do two things, one was a vote for him the other was, on january 6 and i remember having a bit of the same reticence of skepticism that you had with this possibly being enough in

the court or the case i was prosecuting, he can't claim he doesn't really know all of what is going on in terms of being totally ignorant of the facts around it but we will have to see what happens next, thank you for your time as always it is good to see you. can't claim he doesn't know at least who the next witness is, he will testify before the committee and he knows them because he is the former white house counsel. the question will be will pat cipollone be able to potentially do may be the most damage to him yet? stay with us. i just love our new alexa. dad,d, it's a buick. i love that new alexa smell. it's a buick. we need snacks for the team. alexa, take us to the nearest grocery store. getting directions. alexa will get us there in no time. it's a buick. let's be real. don't make me turn this alexa around. oh my. it's painful.

the buick enclave, with available alexa built in. ask “alexa, tell me more about buick suvs.” meltin', breadin', bakin', shreddin'. slicin', dicin', spicin', ricin'. if you're swissing it, then you're missing it. fryin', flyin', savorin', favorin'. over rotini. inside a panini. egging, maining, siding, plain-ing. bunk the inglorious. one ape's victorious. krafsingles. square it. rearchers believe the first person to live to 150 has already been born. it could be you! wow. really? of course, you'll have to eat your greens, watch your stress, wear sunscreen... but to live to 150, we're developing solutions that help doctors listen to your heartbeat while they're miles away, or ai that knows what your body will do before you do. cool. introducing elevance health. where health can go. ♪ age before beauty? why not both? visibly diminish wrinkled skin in just two days. new crepe corrector lotion

only from gold bond. champion your skin. you might have heard of carvana and that we sell cars online. we believe buying a car should be something that gets you hyped up. and that your new car ought to come with newfound happiness and zero surprises. and all of us will stop at nothing to drive you happy. we'll drive you happy at carvana. 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. ♪ 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.

from her white house counsel pat cipollone is set to testify the january 6 committee behind closed doors just really a few hours from now. you know what he says could reveal a whole lot about trump's role possibly in the insurrection and maybe more importantly how the public sees that presumed role. the next guest initially thought the january 6 committee would it matter. but now he has recently said that he was wrong. max booed a senior fellow on the council of foreign relations joins me now, max i was talking to film a that said he too was initially skeptical. and then as the hearing went underway, as more testimony came in, he seems to be changing his tune on these issues and frankly even before you had cassidy hutchinson who was the top aide for mark meadows testified you said

there was something about these hearings that you thought we are not having an impact. what is it about the hearings now that is shifting your viewpoint? >> well, they are not normal congressional hearings laura where the members give speeches instead of asking questions and squabble. we have seen those kinds of hearings. too many times to count. and this is very much an exception and part because of the miscalculation that mccarthy made where he pulled his numbers from the committee so there is only two republicans and they are both interested in getting the truth instead of defending donald trump and so you have these very disciplined hearings where the numbers are actually trying to get out what happened instead of trying to upstage one another. or to score cheap partisan points. and you have you know this hearing where they are not spending five minutes each questioning the witnesses they are actually doing in-depth questioning and using combining video clips with questioning of

the witnesses and i think finally the thing that really makes these hearings so compelling laura is the fact that almost all of the witnesses are republicans, these are trumps people. who are testifying against him. the whole smear campaign that their republican party and trump have been drinking against the january 6 committee is saying that these are partisan attacks, that this is just anti-trump paranoia. but anybody who has lots to those hearings and roughly 20 million americans have watched those hearings anybody who has watched them has seen a very serious attempt to get out the truth by asking questions of actual trump supporters. and there have been no grandstanding or political speeches just this litany of evidence provided by those on the inside and so i think it has been very effective and much more effective than i expected. >> max i couldn't agree more on the idea of how there is a subversion for the public in confirmation hearings for

example i call it speech when the member of congress is really just giving a speech and there is a little moment for a question or you actually nod and that is very much it for the witnesses it is very different here what you said something important here now, it wasn't just the fact that these are republicans who have been testifying overwhelmingly because we know there is a lot of chatter about those who are invested being called rhinos and the likes of liz cheney, and accused of nothing less than that. but you said trump supporters in fact some people testified have said that they would actually vote for trump again including bill barr who mentioned that he would vote for him if you are the rnc nominee, the person i am most interested in so far in fact is pat cipollone and i'm wondering about your assessment of whether you think his testimony could be a really big game changer i mean he was somebody very visible during the first impeachment trial. he is somebody who sent the

letter about what trump did not have to do in order to comply with congressional requests. he can't possibly be construed as somebody who was not a trump supporter let alone a republican, with his testimony be a game changer for people you think? >> it could be, it is hard to know how far he is going to go, how much of him we are going to see, we have been pretty regularly surprised which in itself is actually kind of surprising because i really thought we knew everything there was to know about what happened on january 6 prior to the hearings but they are consistently coming up with surprises most recently with cassidy hutchinson's testimony of course ms. hutchinson who i think is very impressive as a witness had no motive to do anything except tell the truth and she was a fairly low level person were obviously pat cipollone was a very senior person. much more direct access to trump and was much more involved in trumps schemes to subvert the election so potentially could be a very

important blockbuster testimony but again we just i don't know, what he is going to say or how much he will wind up appearing on camera. >> there is no crystal ball or particular set remedy or recipe for how this will bake in the oven but if you look at these hearings as a whole, people say it doesn't look good so, for donald trump the idea that he is a focus of this committee and the revelatory information coming out for some seems to be pointing in his direction and it doesn't make him look good. will this have an impact do you think on the republican party overall i mean is it possible if it just hurts trump directly it wouldn't expand to those who really are supportive of him? have that domino effect, is that a risk here? >> that is a great question to which we don't get to know the answer there has been some sort of speculation laura that there is growing trump fatigue within the republican party and this could help somebody like rhonda santos who wasn't involved in the events of january 6 but at

this point that is really speculation and i'm seeing people right off donald trump saying they he is passed the date. i've been hearing that since 2015 and has never been true, maybe it is becoming true now but we just don't know but i was kind of alarmed there was something i was looking at before coming on air where it said that actually republican views of january 6 have shifted in the wrong direction over the last year that now something like 60% of republicans surveyed said that the events of january 6 were a legitimate protest. that is crazy, that's the inversion of reality and so it is hard to know how much of the january 6 hearings are actually penetrating the republican people. >> we should see and you are right, anyone who considers and can count donald trump out easily doesn't realize his nickname is that for a reason,

we will see what happens and look ahead to the hearings and what we might learn. thank you. nice seeing you. so the fourth of july parade shooters a father is now speaking out, he is telling the new york post i didn't do anything wrong. but he faced charges? we will talk about it next. with a jitterbug? or returned from war, drdreaming of the possibilities ahead. ♪ wherere 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.

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.

he says i did not do anything wrong. the father of the highland park shooter in an interview with the new york post today saying quote he bought everything on his own and they are registered to him, they make me like i am groomed him to do all of this. i have been here my whole life and i'm going to stay here, hold my head up high because i didn't do anything wrong. he tells the post he decided to

sponsor his son's firearm card even after two previous incidents with police because he thought his son would take the weapons to a shooting range. for more on all of this i want to bring in cnn legal analyst and the professional joey jackson, i'm so glad you're here, i have been really waiting to hear your opinion on this, not only because you are of legal mind but from the perspective of i've been wondering what you think he is talking now. this father. and a lot of cases we see where you have a massive shooter and people who are suspected of committing crimes you wonder what the parents are saying but they don't necessarily give these wide sweeping interviews and talk about what they did or didn't do wrong why do you think he is speaking out and apparently helping out and working with law enforcement? >> yes, great to see you, i think certainly it is imperative to say what i didn't do anything to have that reaction to attempt to separate himself from the crime and his

son, from what was actually occurring here to what impacted this community and impacted this country. my view of the matter is that he is likely to face criminal charges and let me tell you why. i think the first thing laura is that there is a general frustration with respect to these mass shootings that are happening everywhere. and i think prosecutors are seeing that and they're making an assessment of what can we do, what role can we play in order, right, to hold people accountable at all levels not just the shooter but anyone and everyone who might've had a part right, what can we do to hold them accountable, that frustration leaves away creativity, what am i speaking of with respect to the use of the law, you and i both know, you think of dangerous weapons and you think it is a dangerous weapon, it could be a comb that prosecutors have used to prosecute cases to use as a deadly weapon to move forward, what analogy am i making here? in the event for example that you have a crime that is

committed, you don't have to be the person who engaged in the act, you can be a person in that chain who engaged in reckless behavior. you as a parent for example had knowledge of your son's proclivities, you had a knowledge of his mental health, you knew he was a danger to himself and was a danger to the public. he knew that the police confiscated 16 knives, a dagger and a sword, yet in the face of that you support an application to move forward. we have seen right as it relates to this and i step number two, we have seen the prosecution right now of the crumley's, the michigan school shooter. killed and injured seven. they are being prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter, they are not suggesting they intended to do it, the prosecutor there suggesting they were reckless, i suggest you hear that a parent having knowledge of that is reckless as well, final point if you wanted to deter this from happening then you have to look at everywhere that you can find

accountability. if these mass shooters are not concerned about the people they are killing and the lives they are taking away and destroying perhaps if they know that their own parents and families will be prosecuted they will be concerned about that and perhaps they will think twice before they commit mass shootings. it is likely he will be prosecuted. >> or it might incentivize people to abide by the red flag provisions and be more proactive and assuming the persons cannot have access to it. i want you to put on your defense attorney cap on here what you do of course so well. and i am wondering the idea that you have these prior incidents that happened at the home where police were brought in, and you have incidents and you talked about the father mentioning the possibility of a psychotic or psychiatric break in some way.

and having just talk to his son 13 hours before where he called a different method shooter idiotic behavior. do you expect them to try to drink about a diminished capacity argument like what will be, we haven't heard yet to the official plea from him either not guilty or even guilty in this instance, do you expect him to raise a diminished capacity defense? >> so there are two things, the defense for the father with respect to i think crimes that he could be looking at and they will argue that these issues with my son and the suicide attempt and the fact he was going to injure the family they were remote, they happened much earlier than this particularly happened, he was better at the time and therefore how would i know it wasn't foreseeable so that's what the fathers issue will be, with respect to the sun diminished capacity that is very difficult as would insanity and as you know laura, here is why. how diminished is your capacity if you plotted and you premeditated and you thought

about and you scoped out and you determined that this is what you are going to do so now conveniently at trial, you just didn't have the mental state and didn't know what you are doing. you were unaware and were not thinking about it but you plotted for weeks in order to do it so it just cuts against the grain of common sense and great prosecutors like you, really tear apart that shred of look ladies and gentlemen of the jury let's use your common sense and a person like that doesn't have diminished capacity they have a very good capacity and knew exactly what they were doing and what they thought we were they were going to do is exactly what they did therefore guilty so i think that would be a hard defense to go for as it relates to the shooter in this case. >> having a conversation with police officers. i spoke with an eye towards thinking about that defense, he apparently contemplated carrying out another act in medicine decided against it. you have a whole thing and you have a lot there that you point out so well as always. joey jackson everyone thank you for being here tonight it is

nice to see you we will follow the story. well, 140 days in a russian prison. but today we are seeing britney out in public. as she pleads guilty in court.

researchers believe the first person to live to 150 has already been born. it could be you! wow. really? of course, you'll have to eat your greens, watch your stress, wear sunscreen... but to live to 150, we're developing solutions that help doctors listen to your heartbeat while they're miles away,

or ai that knows what your body will do before you do. cool. introducing elevance health. where health can go. . a major development in brittney griner's case in russia. the wnba star pleading guilty today to drug smuggling charges and telling the court that she never had any intention of breaking russian law. the 31-year-old faces now up to ten years in prison. but her russian legal team is hoping that the guilty plea will result in some form of leniency. griner was arrested at moscow's airport in mid-february after russian officials said that they found cannabis oil in her luggage, and they accused her of then smuggling a narcotic device -- substance, excuse me. her lawyer says griner told the court that she accidentally put

it in her luggage while packing in a hurry. a senior u.s. diplomat in moscow meeting with griner in court today. >> i was able to speak with ms. griner in the courtroom. she said that she's eating well. she's able to read books and, understand the circumstances, she's doing well. most important, i was able to share with ms. griner a letter from president biden, and ms. griner was able to read that letter. >> the president's letter was in response to the one that griner handwrote to him, pleading for his help and telling him that she's terrified. the biden administration said it's working to bring her home along with all other americans, it says, are wrongfully detained. there's speculation that griner pleaded guilty in the hopes of triggering some kind of a prisoner swap between the united states and russia although tonight there's no indication that a swap is imminent. it all started with the

rioters infiltrating the capitol, but the doj's investigation into the people actively trying to overturn the election, well, it's gotten much bigger, and that's up next. onlys are forever: love and liberty mutual customizing your car insurance, so you onlnly pay for what you need. (emu squawks) if anyone objects to this marriage, speak now or forever hold your peace. (emu squawks) (the crowd gasps) no, kevin, no! not today. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

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

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. the january 6th select committee is just now hours away from interviewing a very critical witness, trump white house counsel pat cipollone. this is the man who was in the oval office with the then-president for critical meetings and also before, during, and after the insurrection. the interview tomorrow, we're told, will be transcribed and will also be videotaped. and it comes as we're learning that the justice department's investigation into the plot to overturn the 2020 election is picking up some steam. sources telling cnn republicans connected to the fake electors

scheme need to turn over documents as soon as tomorrow. cnn's sara murray has the latest. >> reporter: laura, as we're gearing up for another round of january 6th congressional hearings next week, the justice department is moving ahead with its own probe of january 6th. of course it keeps its targets close to the vest, but it's clear their investigation is moving closer to the political circles surrounding former president trump. in battleground states across the country, gop activists, republican party chairs, and even a state senate president. >> i am the senate president of arizona, and it is our job to make sure we have fair and accurate elections. >> reporter: -- are getting hit with subpoenas. as early as this week, some republicans tied to the plan to put forward fake electors for donald trump are set to turn over information to federal investigators, sources tell cnn. >> they have something they think is a crime, they'll bring an indictment, and that's when you'll find out what they're doing. >> reporter: the justice department's investigation into january 6th began with the violence that erupted at the u.s. capitol.

and charges against more than 800 alleged rioters, including the leaders of the proud boys and the oath keepers. but in recent months it's expanded to cover the fake electors scheme in seven battleground states with subpoenas to karen fan, david schaffer, and arizona republican party chair kelli ward. >> do not let this election be stolen. >> reporter: the probe also inching closer to trump as investigators raided jeffrey clarks home, the former doj official who pushed donald trump's voter fraud claims. >> even brought along something i've never seen before or heard of, an electronic sniffing dog, and they took all of the electronics from my house. >> reporter: and also seized electronics from former trump election attorney john eastman, who peddled baseless fraud claims and pushed a legal theory that vice president pence could block the 2020 election certification. >> all we are demanding of vice president pence is this afternoon at