as well. there are new photos giving us another view of europa and two other moons. you can see jupiter's hard to see rings. it's proof that webb can pick up pale objects and capture detail on bright, fast moving objects. the news continues. laura. >> thanks, anderson. and thank you all. i'm laura coats and this is "cnn tonight." guess what? the missing texts from secret service from january 5th and january 6th are still missing. and, no, they have not been handed over to the january 6th committee. and now the national archives wants answers about the, quote, unquote, potential unauthorized deletion. forget about trump's closest advisors. secret service was omnipresent. full stop. the texts written by the agents who would have been, by necessity, in the rooms where it happened could be the key to the

investigation as the testimony, of course, of them, themselves, as well, giving evidence about the coordination of trump's plans leading up to and on the day of the riot, about who spoke to the president that day, who also was in the when things were happening and what the president may have told them. maybe communications about what exactly was happening inside of the white house over those nearly 187 minutes. well over three hours. filling in the gaps. gaps between when donald trump told his supporters to go to the capitol and when he tweeted a video to the rioters telling them that he loved them and to go home. now, we know that's the very focus of thursday's primetime hearing and we have someone tonight who knows the people who were in the white house with then-president trump during those three hours and he knows them quite well. trump's former active chief of staff nick mulvaney, he knows matthew pottinger, one of

trump's deputy national security advisors scheduled to testify thursday. and he is still in contact with some of the people who were in trump's orbit on that very day. suffice to say, each one of these moments is very critical. every single moment of any failure to act. but i want to zone in for a moment on a key one. that's the moment 2:24 p.m. the moment that trump sent out this tweet. it's up on your screen. but i don't have to read it to you. i'll let this rioter do it. >> mike pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our country and our constitution. that was outside of the capitol. well, this was inside. >> hang mike pence! hang mike pence! >> the reaction from the oval

office hearing cants of "hang mike pence," to cassidy hutchinson retelling a conversation about trump's reaction to it. >> responded something to the effect of, you heard that he thinks mike deserves it, he doesn't think they are doing anything wrong. >> deserved what exactly? i mean, keep in mind there were gallows being built outside and chants of hanging the person who was the next in line of succession. and lest you think trump wasn't aware at all of the violence at the capitol at that moment as we were watching it unfold, listen to this. >> the testimony further establishes that mr. meadows quickly informed the president and that he did so before the president issued his 2:24 p.m. tweet criticizing vice president pence. >> mark meadows, chief of staff mark meadows.

well, trump's former deputy press secretary, sarah matthews, is also going to testify on thursday. remember, she already testified to this. >> the situation was already bad. and so it felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire by tweeting that. >> and matthew pottinger, that former deputy national security advisor, he testified that he resigned because of that tweet. >> that's where i knew that i was leaving that day, once i read that tweet. >> i am wondering what other holes pottinger might be able to fill in now that we don't have access by thursday, secret service text messages. what else can you tell us about what was happening in the rooms, in the hallways? maybe you can speak to trump's alleged failure to call up the national guard. this is from jonathan karl's book "the trail" where he says pottinger could see trump wasn't there. he was still in his private dining room watching television

while the capitol was being ransacked by his supporters. chief of staff mark meadows rushed by. pottinger stopped him and asked if it was true that the white house was blocking the deplo deployment of the national guard. meadows said the report was false. i had given clear instructions to the guard to get the guard over there to control the situation, meadows told him, then rushed back in to see trump. now, let's be very clear. there is no evidence that we've seen yet that the president actively delayed the guard's deployment, but we do know that according to joint chiefs chairman mark milley it was peps who issued the order, even though milley was told to say that it was trump who cgave the version of the code red. the guard didn't show up until 5:20 p.m. according to the select committee. for those of you trying to keep track of it this timeline at

home, yeah, that's nearly three hours after that tweet. pottinger and matthews, they both resigned on january 6th. so, too, by the way, did mick mulvaney, who was at the time special envoy to northern ireland. mc, thank you for joining us tonight. we are on the cuspk, frankly, of the january 6th primetime hearing event. we are learning that one of the witnesses, two of them, are people you might actually know or the nature of their positions. matthew pottinger and also sarah matthews. both former colleagues of yours. give us a sense about what roles they would have been playing in the white house to kind of hone in on why their testimony might be so impactful. >> yeah, thanks, laura, for having me. i would have to guess a little bit. in my mind they are swhau unusual people. sara makes sense. she is in ht communications shop, press shop and she would

be interacting with the president relatively frequently, especially on a big media day like january 6th. she may have seen something. the press shop is around the corner from the oval office, the proximity is considerable. so the fact she might have seen something or heard something directly makes some sense. matthew pottinger is a different story. i know matt. matt was there when i was in the chief of staff's office, the young lady was not. and matt is a deputy national security advisor. he is an asia china specialist. a very unusual sort of witness. when i saw his name pop up, i said why was matt involved in this? he may have been filling to in for robert o'brien that day. curious to to see what he saw and what his vantage point was because his office isn't fear the off office. curious to see what they have to say. very interesting witnesses for the last hearing and primetime

hearing because of their distance from the president. >> this is a committee that has two prominent republicans. they are named at rhino, liz cheney and adam kinzinger. do you perceive this as a democratic committee and partisan one or a bipartisan effort to uncover the truth? >> i don't video describe it as partisan or bipartisan. it's anti-trump regardless whether the people are democrats, republicans. there is nobody defending the president from the podium. there is nobody defending the president in the interview, when the folks give testimony. so that's what i say when i say it's the democrats. i wish very much that nancy pelosi had seated the republicans that kevin mccarthy asked for. i think in a roundabout sort of way it would have accomplished more of that pelosi wanted to accomplish here which is i think more people would have watched these hearings if jim jordan, andy biggs were on the commit. i think they needed to see the testimony about how trump really

lost the olyelection in 2020. nancy pelosi rejecting some of kevin mccarthy's republicans, that turned off half the country. everybody would have benefitted from watching this testimony. >> jonathan karl reported that matthew pottinger rushed to the outer oval office before 3:00 p.m. on january 6th and had interaction of some kind with mark meadows asking him about the national guard in particular and he drafted a resignation e after that interaction and seeing trump's tweet about mike pence, lack of courage, et cetera. does that square with the matthew pottinger you know? >> it does. matt is a very credible guy, honest guy. i think matt had not been one of the most pro-trump people going into 2016. but that describes a lot of republicans. if they worked for another republican during the 2016 election. so he wouldn't be hardcore trump to me but he certainly supported the president, worked for the

administration for several years. but if he saw something that encouraged him -- or forced him to resign, much as i did, i respect that. he has no reason to lie. matthew pottinger was probably better off professionally to sort of sail off in the sunset and continue to do a lot of academic work. it doesn't benefit him by coming forward and saying i have something to say. it's probably bad for his career to do this because of the public attention it's going to get. so i think that if matt says something tomorrow underneath i will belief it and put a great deal of credibility on that unless someone else says something else while they are under oath. curious to see what he has to say. >> this thursday had be the primetime hearing. i am curious as to what you make of mark meadows' behavior so far. we heard from cassidy hutchinson he was texting or thumbing through his text messages. you can't tell if he is aloof or disengaged or demoralized or completely, you know, disregarding what's happening

there at the capitol and in the white house. but what do you make of the conduct -- that's the chief of staff on january 6th not being able to go to the president and convince the president of anything or just weigh in in a significant way. >> yeah. actually, the thing that caught my attention during cassidy hutchinson's testimony, when i first started paying attention really closely to the hearings, i had been watching them, not really deep diving into them, w when she said something. she said the president was very upset about not being able to go to the capitol when he was in the limb sfwleen because mark meadows told him he was. that told me the chief of staff failed in the very first part of the job which is the chief of staff gets paid to tell the president things that he doesn't want to hear. if you cannot tell the president of united states something that he does not want hear, you have failed in that job. and when cassidy mentioned, that's when my ears pricked up. what was going on in the west wing and the testimony she gave

after that sort of reinforced that mark lost control, mark was not comfortable telling the president things he didn't want to hear, mark had sort of disengaged. >> you had friend in the room where this was happening, people around mark meadows that day, i believe. what was their impression of mark meadows' behavior in this moment? >> i was texting back and forth to friend still in the building. i was texting back and forth during cassidy hutchinson's testimony and i said, was mark just completely incompetent or was he having a nervous breakdown? the response the person gave me was it was a little bit of both. that's based on cassidy hutchinson's testimony, based on the tweet from somebody there. there is no hard evidence of that there. we are unlikely to get mark meadows' side of the story because it looks like he is not going to testify and that's unfortunate. if you have a chief of staff detached, sitk on the sofa all day tweeting while rome burns, that is a sign of a broken white

house and while the president is ultimately responsible for his own actions and responsible for the people that he hires the chief of staff has a great deal of responsibility for how a west wing is run. >> you are qualified to talk about how the west wing under trump would have run as chief of staff and the ideas of how that would go down. given your experience, what would have it have been like in the moments to try to talk to donald trump, the president of the united states at that time, about what was happening? what would have -- would it have been herculean efforts or would it have taken a receptive audience? >> it depends on the relationship up to that point. if there had been a track record of going to the president and saying, mr. president, he with need to talk about this, we have a problem with this, mr. president, this hurt us a little bit today, mr. president, we have to fix this, then that groundwork gets laid and the president is used to herring hea hearing fthat from somebody, aisle dely the chief of staff.

if the history up to january 6th is mr. president things are great, what would you like to do, that's great, that's fabulous, everything is wonderful, not a problem, it's difficult to change gears in a critical moment and say, mr. president, you lost the election, mr. president, we can't be doing this rally, mr. president, this is a problem, mr. president, we be in trouble with this. that's difficult to shift gears if the foundation and relationship is not set. if the president doesn't expect the chief of staff to tell him stuff he doesn't want to here, he is unlikely to listen if it comes at a very late moment. >> our conversation with mick mulvaney continues. he may have had lost interest in being part of the trump white house. the question is would he support putting trump back in the white house, say, in 2024? that's coming up.

if you don't repaint every now and then, it's like the old you is still hanging around. younger zoe: i'm listening to music. so today, let's paint... ...with behr, america's most trusted paint brand, and make your home, yours. behr. exclusively at the home depot. cookies and breyers. that's like getting two desserts!

wait... do we have to thank our moms twice? i don't know... (laughs) breyers. 100% grade a milk and cream, and loaded with delicious cookie pieces. better starts with breyers. [acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout]

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. debunk the inglorious. one shape's victorious. kraft singles. square it.

welcome back. the secret service today turned over thousands of documents to the january 6th committee as part of a subpoena issued to the agency last week. but a secret service official tells cnn that none of those thousands of documents included those missing text messages sent on the day prior to and on january 6th. now, the agency insists the records were lost during a phone migration program and they are still working on recovering those messages. now, whether or not they were improperly and purposely deleted is now the key question that several federal agencies, including the national archives, definitely wants answered. so how does mick mulvaney see it? here's the rest of our interview. we are learning a lot about the idea that secret service text messages have seem to gone poof if the night from january 5th and january 6th.

there was supposed to be a data migration, the onus was on the secret service to upload to some sort of internal server. that did not happen. we are learning more and more about it. what do you make of the fact that we are not going to be seeing text messages that seem to have gone away from those dates in particular? >> yeah, i'm not quick to ascribe guilt or at least underhandedness here. secret service is a bureaucracy like any bureaucracy and they make mistakes. this happens all the time, unfortunately. >> in the federal government. i do happen to know. i had a secret service detail for a year and a half. some of the best and most honest and highest integrity people i know sort of attracted to that part of -- that area of service. so i will be slow to sort of see something under handed until i see something more than what we've got. it certainly looks bad. you would love to have everything out in the open. of course, the secret service has said, number one, they have been cooperating with the january 6th committee from the

very beginning. i have not heard anybody say anything to the contrary. they released several hundred thousand emails and communications from january 5th and january 6th. whale it looks back, i encourage people to take a deep breath before we ascribe any sort of guilt mere. keep in mind the inspector general who reported this was actually a trump appointee and by the time february rolled around the folks running dhs, which uruns secret service, wer biden appointees. this doesn't fall neatly into any category. no see any conspiracy yet. it bears investigation because you can't do that. you can't not disclose information. the government has to be entirely transparent every chance it gets. >> keeping an open mind in washington, d.c. that might be herculean after all. i haven't heard that before. this committee i believe is anti-trump. it seems that their focus is to

ensure that the american public through transparency no longer believed that he could be the viable president of the united states if he were to run for re-election yet again. we don't know if he intends to do that. if he is the rnc nominee, do you intend to vote for him? >> i have answered that question in way. i am one of those republicans who hopes the former president trump doesn't run. in all fairness, we don't need him any more. he changed our party. we have a lot of folks, a new generation of folks, ron desantis, mike pence, mike pompeo, go down the list of folks who could give us the same that donald trump gave without the baggage. as a republican i am thinking if the election were otoday and jo biden was the nominee for the democrats or kamala harris or gavin newsome, there is one mainstream republican who could lose and that's donald trump. knowing what i know, i would be hard pressed to support donald

trump again. >> obviously, your thought of the republican party no longer needing donald trump might not be the view of millions who voted for him as part of his base. if he ultimately decides i intend to run and none of the other people could, you will have quite a choice on your hands whether to -- >> keep in mind, i think we moved beyond donald trump clearing the field. i think that is one thing that the january 6th committee has accomplished. i don't know if that's what they wanted to accomplish. i thought they wanted to bring criminal charges or encourage the department of justice to bring criminal charges. to the extent they wanted to wound him politically, i think that happened. there is been polling data recently for the first time says that a majority of republican primary voters would prefer somebody other than donald trump. that's a big change over the course ever the last six or eight weeks. eight weeks ago i doubt very seriously any top tier republicans, again pence, pompeo, tim scott, desantis were considering running for president. i think now many of them are. i think nikki haley today hinted

she might run in a speech she gave in israel. i think that is something that has changed over the course of the last six weeks, eight weeks, and changed because of the committee. i think they were out to sort of get him and try to throw him in jail, i don't think that was going to happen. i don't think it's going to happen based on the evidence we have seen now. if they wanted to damage him to where he might not win or run, i think that that may be an outcome of these hearings. >> wow. to paraphrase, great taste, less filling. mick mulvaney, thank you so much. >> thanks, laura. critics much these hearings claim they are a waste of time with nothing new to show. but i have someone here who served on legal teams in both im peemts against trump, including the one for january 6th. i wonder what does he see from the committee's work and what will he be watching for thursday night? that's next. vel up u won't take a time-out one dose of ubrelvy works fast

it can quickly stop migraine in itsts tracks within 2 hours without worrying if it's too late or where you are unlike older medicines, ubrelvy is a pill that directly blocks a protein believed to be a cause of migraine. do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. most common side effects were nausea and tiredness. migraine pain relief starts with u learn how abbvie could help you save. ask about ubrelvy, the anytime, anywhere migraine medicine. ♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪ you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on your discover card. new astepro allergy. now available without a prescription. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid free spray. while other allergy sprays take hours

astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can... astepro and go. 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. ♪

psst. girl. you can do better. ok. wow. i'm right here. and you can do better, too. at least with your big name wireless carrier. with xfinity mobile, you can get unlimited for $30 per month on the nation's most reliable 5g network. they can even save you hundreds a year on your wireless bill, over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. wow. i can do better. yes, you can. i can do better, too.

break free from the big three and switch to xfinity mobile. well over the january 6th hearings. will any of the evidence lead the justice department to indict trump? you heard mick mulvaney before the break, what his expectations were or were not. i mean, admittedly, it's an unprecedented prospect, an idea that would normally be unheard

of of. then again, the past six to eight years, it's been quite unprecedented. donald trump often entered unchartered waters. he was the first u.s. president to be impeached twice and the first president to, well, incite as they say an attack on the u.s. capitol. perspective from barry burke, the chief counsel for trump's second impeachment trial that was the result of january 6th. barry, good to see you here. curious about your perspective in particular because of the fact that some have been critical of the hearing, of the committee in general. they view it as a second bite of the apple, a failed attempt at the impeachment number two. now this is the new avenue to do this. curious what your take has been about what the committee has been able to produce, specifically are there things that you wish you could have known or had for the impeachment involving january 6th?

>> great to be here, laura. and i have to tell you it's very gratifying to me as chief impeachment counsel for the second impeachment to see what the committee has been able to do. you feel very proud about the case and the evidence we presented to establish donald trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors. we show how he perpetuated the lie that the election was stolen, summoned the crowd, incited them and refused to act, encouraged them on. the committee hearing has showed the power of having congressional subpoenas. with an independent department of justice that was prepared to hold witnesses in contempt like steve bannon and others, that forced others to come forward and testify. once they is z that, they were going to be telling the truth or else they would be telling a crime. those witnesses were not prepared to voluntarily come forward at the time of the impeachment but they were compelled, they came forward and provided compelling evidence that fully supports everything

we did in the impeachment and goes beyond that and raises questions about donald trump's criminal intent and whether he could or should be prosecuted for the acts that he did. so i watch it with, again. >> appreciation and gratification of how it supported what we did. >> do you think he should and will be held accountable this time? s there is more information in these hearings. the impeachment trial was shortly after january 6th. we are now more than a year after and a thousand witnesses have given depositions with this committee. do you think that now given the breadth of what we've seen, is there enough not just for the high crimes and misdemeanors, that sort of passed but the actual charges against donald trump or anyone else in his direct orbit? >> laura, what i will tell you is i have had clients as a criminal defense lawyer who have been prosecuted for a shadow of the evidence against donald trump.

there is overwhelming evidence he took steps to interfere with the election and now there is equal amount of evidence about his criminal intent, that he knew what he was doing was wrong when he told the senior leadership of the department of justice just say there is fraud, leave the rest to me. so i believe in the principle no person is above the law and if the evidence is there, they should be prosecuted. but most importantly, it's the deterrent value that often determines whether casing are brought. here there is an incredible incentive to bring this case for that reason. people are not only saying that they are going to interfere with future elections. they are running for public office with that campaign promise. if you engage in crimes to interfere with the most principle underlying our democracy, you will be prosecuted. >> that would be the theme. no one above the law. you are right. there are campaigns whose entire platform is about this very notion and positions that will

oversee elections across this country. it's arguable. i am wondering whether or not merrick garland will go forward in full scope at this point in time. i am wondering about timing in particular. one of the things that sort of hung over the impeachment trial against donald trump about january 6th was the idea of timing and that was about the fact it was an out going president, should you have an impeachment for somebody who will no longer be in office momentarily. now it's about time and doj in terms of this rule that is in the justice department where they don't want to be seen as interfering in any way with upcoming elections. certain sort of cutoff date before they believe the public will perceive their investigations or announcements thereof in a way that would impact the elections. listen to what lisa monaco, the deputy ag had to say about the question they would continue to investigate knowing that that sort of timing is ahead of them. >> continue to do our job, to follow the facts wherever they

go no matter where they lead, no matter to what level, and we are going to continue to do our job to investigate what was fundamentally an attack on our democracy. >> when you hear that, what do you think? that this is a saying they are going to continue with any investigation even if it means someone like trump not on the ballot or something more broad? >> i think they are going to continue with the investigation and bring the charges when appropriate. but what they won't do is let an election interfere with their decision-making. they won't rush it. they shouldn't delay it. they should be aware they don't want to do something short of bringing charges short of the election that's unintended. >> barry burke, thank you so much. so the question now is, where are the secret service text messages from on and around january 6th? where did they go? select committee thought they would get them today and what does the service now say? well, the questions are growing.

and political and legal pros are going to try to help me answer them next. clean ingredients... in a buttery brioche roll. made fresh, to leaeave you... speechless. panerara's new chef's chicken sandwiches. $1 d delivery fee on our app.

people with plaque psoriasis, or psoriatic arthritis, are rethinking the choices they make. like the splash they create. the way they exaggerate. or the surprises they initiate. otezla. it's a choice you can make. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, you can achieve clearer skin with otezla. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla can cause serious allergic reactions. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.

when you see things differently, you can be the difference. -how are you? -good. capella university sees education differently. our flexpath learning format lets you set deadlines and earn your nursing degree on your schedule.

my tribe has lived on this land for 12,000 years. we call it oleyumi. you call it california. our land, our culture, our people once expansive, now whittled down to a small community. only one proposition supports california tribes like ours. while providing hundreds of millions in yearly funding to finally address homelessness in california. vote yes on 27. tax online sports betting and protect tribal sovereignty and help californians that are hurting the most. thehere's a question. what happens if secret service says their text messages from january 5th and january 6th are never recovered? will it hurt the insurrection investigation and will anyone be

punished for that? former democratic senator and u.s. attorney doug jones, former federal prosecutor shan woo and former rnc communications director doug high. i'm so glad you are here. i am wondering when you think about the secret service text messages, the fact that of all the days, kind of the casablanca thing of all the days in the entire world these are the ones that seem to have gone away, what do you make of this? mick mulvaney said i'm not going to read anything nefarious just yet, notice the word yet, but skeptics, are you there? >> i'm skeptical. regardless of what -- mick mulvaney also said that nancy pelosi removed all the republicans off the committee and she didn't. kevin mccarthy did that. look, i think you have to have a healthy dose of skepticism here. it's either something nefarious or pure incompetence in which heads need to roll. it is a document that should have been preserved. they should have prepared for

that and planned on that, and i'm assuming that they did. so we don't know. i think there is a lot of questions here. >> are we putting an emphasis -- i mean, obviously, the people who typed the texts, the thumbs are still there. what did you write? what did you text? you could ask that question, much ado about this former substance? >> that's a important point. >> thank you. >> they really have to. spoken like a true former prosecutor. they have to do that because they may never get those messages. i find it hard to believe in this day and age somebody can be wiped that way. the secret service seems like they are able to do that. they need to talk to the people. certainly the gibberish coming out from the secret service today saying that they are not sure that that data has been lost or that data wasn't lost. how do you even know which messages were lost if you are saying you can't find them? so that's very confusing. >> and when mulvaney was talking about the bond that he would

have with his secret service agents, whether on capitol hill with security details or those who get secret service protection, that's a very real bond. but it doesn't change the fact that this has been a troubled organization, the secret service, for several years. the book documented a series of blunders and mistakes and ignoring of problems that they have. so this doesn't immediately pass the smell test. then you have the other problem, which is donald trump's candidacy and presidency from day one didn't pass the smell test. a lot of republicans went along as far as january 6th or beyond, when they saw it was over. trump started in a place of dishonesty and we come to the very things that we may need to see just happen to be disappeared. it doesn't pass the smell test. >> laura, let's not put too much emphasis on this. these are text messages. they are not court reporters taking down everything seen and heard. they are talking about security. the odds are they were talking about their kids or when they are going to get away or

somebody said something stupid. you know, another agent. think about how people use text messages today. even when you are on the job. every trial and every investigation there is always holes. we see it every time. there is always some gaps. i don't think we need to put all the emphasis on this, that this is going to make or break the a case. i don't believe it is. there may be die might stuff in there. i don't think it's going to hurt the case. >> we have all seen in the past when congress was interviewing and having a hearing for some of the social media giants and they needed to have a vocabulary, a glossary for -- it's probably a lot of acronyms, lols, et cetera, in there. maybe, maybe not. you could ask the person. the question for me, on thursday we are going to have in primetime -- you tell me primetime is happening. my expectations are through the roof which is a dangerous thing because i think primetime, you are ready to show me something.

i am awaiting to be shown something. the last hearing we saw was about the idea to connect the dots between extremist groups and donald trump and the administration. and in a way there was the overpromising, underdelivering on that notion. but what do you want to hear in this last hearing? is there something you are thinking, if i were doing this, i would want this. what is that nugget? >> i'm not expecting anything. i'm not waiting to see anything. what i'm waiting for them to do is just to complete the investigation. finish it up. and i think the way to finish that up, the way they have set for the this entire -- it's been well done. i mean, the way that they have moved from one subject to the next. the last part of this is what was going on inside the white house as this was happening. and i think that that's all that's going to be. i think people are going to be shocked. but i think we've already heard a lot of that. we have seen the tweets and other things. i am not sure there will be a

ton of blockbuster, but there might be something that is a surprise but it's going to be the completion. it's going to be the final chapter of what the committee has done. >> of course, the report, right? you are not going to have the ult being, you know, trial attorneys, the idea of not to leave you out, doug -- >> that's okay. >> trial attorney, trial attorney, glad you are here, too. the idea of this is not a time you ask for a verdict where you are going to know right now what the people think. but mick mulvaney will talk more about this. seemed to think that the verdict s essentially was to clear the way for other rnc nominees. i am not sure that's going to be the case. what do you think? >> i think i would never agree with mick mulvaney on anything. however, i would say -- >> there you have it, okay? >> the closing part of this hearing, at least for now in primetime, it's not going to put the prosecutorial nail in the coffin on trump. they are a congressional committee and it will end on that political note, which is to point out what he was thinking

and have people saying that he didn't want to do anything. i think that does end on a very strong important fact finding note, but it's political. it's not a prosecutorial final note. >> we will come back. doug is like, oh, i have something to say about this issue. stick around, everyone. coming up, all of the fake trump electors in one state part of a plan to subvert the will of the voters got put on notice. if i were them, maybe i'd be looking for a lawyer asap. plus, the steve bannon contempt trial, he is letting his lawyer do the talking inside the courtroom. outside, no, his gums are flapping. he is making up his own witness wish list and you would be surprised who is on it. right back with that in just a moment. why hide your skin if dupixent has your moderate-to-severe eczema or atopic dermatitis under control?

hide my skin? not me. by hitting eczema where it counts, dupixent helps heal ur skin from within, keeping you one step ahead of eczema. hide my skin? not me. and that means long-lasting clearer skin and fast itch relief for adults. with dupixent, you can show more skin with less eczema. hide my skin? not me. serious allergic reactions can occur that can be severe. tell your doctor about new or worsening eye problems such as eye pain or vision changes, including blurred vision, joint aches and pain, or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop asthma medicines without talking to your doctor. when you help heal your skin from within, you can change how your skin looks and feels. and that's the kind of change you notice. talk to your eczema specialist about dupixent, a breakthrough eczema treatment.

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. so all 16, yes 16, deep electors in georgia where part of the plan to overturn the 2020 election on behalf of donald trump are now targets and a criminal investigation tonight. that is according to the fulton county georgia prosecutors. looking into trump's election difference in the state. so this mean they are closer to deciding criminal charges and it's the probe zhang any closer to donald trump himself? back with me now, doug jones,

shed will, at that guy. hi i start here because you think about the ways in which georgia, this pretty unique in terms of all of this sort of states that had discussions around belies around the election. georgia didn't seem to be buying it when it came to, obviously, purdue versus count. campaign of have that angle. is this an example of there being the trump fatigue that make mulvaney was talking about. the idea, look, he cleared the way the others. because they are not buying it anymore. they do not want to deal with it. >> but we see with donald trump goes all in. it carries them about a third. about the rest of it is up to those candidates. when you had was a popular governor who took on the trump -- but otherwise it was very firmly in line with trump policies. i can't somebody would not only lost our son race who donald trump called a loser. but someone who ran a terrible campaign and had lost two years earlier with some help from trump. republicans are trying to inch away from donald trump. they know they can't run from

him. but what you here on capitol hill, privately, sometimes in a very crude language censored by mitch mcconnell. something that suggest that republicans moving forward in 2024 can do other things. that's what you're seeing more and more rhonda scientists, that scott has got bill coming out, a lot of those people that make baby talked about. i politicians are often self interested big shots. getting trump out of the way -- >> we don't mean you. i [inaudible] >> none those people are condemning trump's actions. they are still wrapping themselves in trump. from every candid out there, from alabama everywhere elsewhere, they wrapping themselves in trump. they're saying the election was stolen. they are not condemning what they've heard. it is just nothing but crickets coming from capitol hill on the actions that were took. and the threat to democracy that we saw. that, i think, is a real tragedy. >> when you hear privately modular publicly unless list shiny and kinzinger are often

mirror images of reality. >> i was here that, and i can tell you from someone from the electorate and think about the idea of the public recently private conversations. i associate those with some sort of shortwave publicly and shrink about to ask for the chance to leave. if you want to be a member of congress southeast myself well maybe you should be the person who consequences the name. that is naive, perhaps, in the way washington d.c. and shaking your head. but the idea of, why do you think still all this time there is the reluctance to say publicly about something that is as basic as wet mick mulvaney had to say? the idea, look, there is that fatigue. because of what they'll just said there's 30% of people out there who regardless of what you say is going to be a trump voter. they are going to be there for him and they want to defend metal cost. and every one of those politicians do not want to alienate that 30% of the vote. that is why you got all of it listen that nick talked about. not a single one of us condemned the actions of donald

trump. and what happened before, during, and after. they have talked about and said it is time to move on but everybody says that. it is time to move on. when you know you've got a problem and you say we don't need to look at the look at the past we need to look forward. folks need to step up and they need to put this country first. and start talking about democracy. and wrapping themselves in that like instead of the donald trump like of silence. >> well you know who wasn't silent today? it was steve bannon on the courthouse steps. he was looking for microphone, he found one, there was this moment where he tried to call up betty thompson and others. he said come on down. you're at the tested on the, i don't know, this partisan is right. here it is. >> betty thompson said a staffer over here. where's betty thompson. we subpoena thompson and they are hiding behind these phony privileges. he is to cut this to come over here himself, he has made it a crime, made it a crime. not a simple charge of avoiding

testimony but a crime. and he didn't have the courage or guts to show up here any says a staffer. i challenge benny thompson today to have it come to this courthouse. he's going to be charged with a crime. he's got to be man enough to show up here. >> well we all know that many thompson has covid right now. but there is also the idea of that statement. benny thompson is not prosecuting anybody. he's in a different branch of the government entirely. right? >> i think that a deal was cut there between ben and his lawyer was his lawyer said, look, you really got to keep a lid on it in the courtroom. let me be do the talking. but a lot to chant on the courtroom steps. >> you know the lawyer, right? you used to work with him at the same office, right? it doesn't surprise you that ease that vocal outside? certainly the judges a trump appointee he's going to know that they're talking on the courthouse steps at some point. that is not open the judge will get him in trouble? >> i think it will. i'm a little bit surprised the judge didn't tell them don't talk outside the courtroom.

i think that is problematic for him. i >> think that is probably a different and difficult kind to control. >> that is the understatement of the year. what do you think? >> i think it is a mistake, always, to let a client speaks to media like that. and what was so bizarre to me. listening to sleep and. it is that he challenged and said that benny thompson didn't have the guts to shop the court. steve bannon didn't have the guts enough to show up in front of congress person to a lawful subpoena. he just basically -- he did have the guts, he did have the courage, he could hide behind a microphone for his podcast and breitbart. but he didn't have the guts enough to stand on the committee and the question about what he did. >> as they say. details details, about the facts of life. and since i did reference the prices right. i remind population to have your -- yeah i used to watch with my grandma. thank you so much. doug jones, shampoo, and doug high. thank you everyone, we'll be right back. rough thousands of cars.

then, tap to b buy. that's it. no sales speak,, no wasted time. go to vroom.com and pick your favovorite. new astepro allergy. now available without a prescription. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid free spray. while other allergy sprays take hours astepro starts working in 30 minute so you can. asteprand go. ♪ this... is the planning effect. this is how it feels to know you have a wealth plan that covers everything that's important to you. this is what it's like to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. making sure you have the right balance of risk and reward.

and helping you plan for future generations. this is "the planning effect" from fidelity. time. it's life's most precious commodity, especially when you have metastatic breast cancer. when your time is threatened, it's hard to invest in your future. until now. kisqali is helping women live longer than ever before when taken with an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant... in hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer. kisqali is a pill that's proven to delay disease progression. kisqali can cause lung problems, or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious skin reactions, liver problems, and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain... a change in your heartbeat, dizziness, yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills, or other symptoms of an infection, a severe or worsening rash, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding.

avoid grapefruit during treatment. your future is ahead of you, so it's time to make the most of it with kisqali. because when you invest in yourself, everyone gets the best of you. if you have age-related macular degeneration, there's only so much time before it can lead to blindness. but the areds 2 clinical study showed that a specific nutrient formula can help reduce the risk of dry amd progression. ask your doctor now about an areds 2 supplement.

at xfinity, we're constantly innovating. and we're working 24/7 to connect you to more of what you love. we're bringing you the nation's largest gig speed network. available to more homes than anyone else. and with xfi complete, get 10x faster upload speeds. tech upgrades for your changing wifi needs. and advanced security at home and on the go to block millions of threats. only from us... xfinity.

a, thanks for watching everyone, i'll be back tomorrow night. don lemon tonight starts right now hey donda. >> i was eavesdropping. >> you were? >> when did you learn. i >> was eavesdropping on your conversation and i heard, i think was top jones, who said the problem is that during the 2016 election everyone in the green room would say one thing about the former president. before the cameras are rolling. the commercial break. then of a sudden the lights come on and they say a completely different thing. because it is beneficial to them to say it. and i think -- was a duck jones who sided? he was absolutely right. >> the two dogs. the call themselves the gay freshman were sitting behind the camera by the way. but listen, the thing, if it is irritating to me as somebody who would like t