much closer to plunder, heritage, jupiter. the biggest biden our solar system. and therefore under 30 million miles. way to the left of jumpers famous great red spot a storm bacon up to swallow earth acquainted. nasa we see the shadow europa or jupiter's opening moves swell. there's off these new photos giving us another view of europa and two other means. and in another image of the seniors hard to see ranks. that webb can pick a pale objects, while also capturing detail on fast-moving bright objects, both of which will come in handy as explores jupiter, mars and saturn. the news continues, i want to head over to laura coates and cnn tonight. thanks anderson, thank you all, i am laura coats, and this is cnn tonight. guess what? the missing tax from conservatives on january 5th and six, they are, still missing. no, they have not been handed over to the general six committee. now, the national archives want answers to what they called the quote unquote potential unauthorized deletion. forget about trump's

closest advisers. secret service was omnipresent, full stop. those text were and by the agents but a city in the rooms where it happened could be the key to the investigation, as testimony, of course, presents themselves as well. giving evidence about the coronation of trump's plans leading up to and on the day of the riot, but who spoke to the president that day, who also was in the room as things were happening, and what the president may have told them. maybe communications about what exactly was happening inside the white house over those nearly 187 minutes, well over three hours, filling in the gaps, gap soon when donald trump told 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. we know that is the very focus of thursday's primetime hearing. we have someone tonight who knows the people who were in the white house with then president trump

during those three hours. he knows them quite well. trump's former acting chief of staff, nick mulvaney, will join me in a moment. he knows matthew pottinger, one of trump's deputy national security advisers, who is able to testify on primetime night thursday and, he is still in contact with 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 every failure to act. i want to zone in, for a moment, on a key one, that is the moment noted as to 20 4 pm. the moment that trump sent out this tweet. it is up on the screen, but, i don't have a ready to, i will let this rioter do it. >> and our constitution --

>> that was outside our capital. this was inside. >> hang mike pence! hang mike pence! hang mike pence! >> the reaction from the oval office hearing chants of hang mike pence, well, here is cassidy hutchinson retelling conversation about trump's reaction to that. >> marquette responded something to the effect of, you heard him path, he thinks mike deserves it, he does not think they are doing anything wrong. >> deserved what, exactly? keep in mind, there were gallows being both outside and chance of hanging the person who was the next in line of succession. unless you think trump was not aware of all of what was happening at the capitol at the moment, as we watched it unfold, listen to this. >> the testimony further establishes that mr. meadows quickly informed the president

that he did so before the president issued his 2:24 pm tweet criticizing vice president pence. >> mark meadows, as and chief of staff mark meadows. trump's former deputy press secretary sarah matthews is also going to testify on thursday, apparently. 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 visor, he testified that he resigned because of that tweet. >> that is where i knew i was leaving that day, one cyber in that tweet. >> i am wondering what other holds pottinger might be able to fill in. we want to have access by thursday, secret service text messages, but what else can you tell us about what was happening in those hallways? maybe you can speak to trump's

alleged failures to call up the national guard. this is from jonathan carl's book, called the trail. he says pottinger could see trump was not there. he was still in his private dining room watching television while the capital was being ransacked by his supporters. after several minutes, chief of staff mark meadows rushed by. passengers stopped him and asked if it was true that the white house was blocking the deployment of the national guard. meadows said the report was false. quote, i've given very clear instructions to the guard to get the got over there to control the situation. meadows told him, and then rushed back in to see trump. let's be very clear. there's been no evidence yet that we've seen that the president actively delayed the guards deployment. but we know according to joint chiefs chair mark milley, it

was pence who issued the order, even though milley was told to say that it was trump, who gave the version of the code red. the guard not show up until 5:20 pm, according to the select committee. for those of you trying to keep track of this timeline at home, yeah, that's nearly three hours after that tweet. pottinger and matthews, they both resigned on january six. so too did mulvaney, trump's former acting chief of staff who was, at the time, special envoy to northern ireland. >> mick, thank you for joining as tonight. it's interesting, because we are on the cup, frankly, of the january 6th primetime hearing event. we are learning that one of the witnesses, in fact, two of them, are people that you might know or at least the nature of the positions, in particular. i'm talking about matt pottinger and sarah matthews, both former colleagues of yours. give us a sense about what rules they would have been playing in the white house to hone in on why

their testimony might be so impactful. >> thanks, laura, for having me. i would have to guess a little bit because, in my mind, they are somewhat unusual people. sarah makes sense. she is in the communication shop, in the press shop. she would be interacting with the president relatively frequently, especially on a big media day like january six. it makes sense that she would be testifying, or she may have seen something that the press shop is right around the corner from the oval office. the proximity is considerable. the fact that she might have see something or heard something directly make some sense. matt 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. matt is a deputy national security adviser. he is in asia china specialist. he's an unusual sort of witness. when i saw his name pop up, i said, to myself why would matt even involved in this? it may be that he was filling in for robert o'brien on a particular

day as the chief deputy. he it would be curious to see what he saw at his vantage point was. because his office isn't anywhere near the oval office. it is curious to see what both these folks have to say. there they are interesting witnesses, in my mind, for the last airing on the primetime hearing. because of the distance from the president. >> obviously, this is a committee that has two fairly prominent republicans. i know they are named as republicans in name only, congressman liz cheney and congressman adam kissinger. you see this committee as a democratic committee and partisan one, or more of a bipartisan effort to uncover the truth? >> i don't describe it as bipartisan or partisan. it is anti trump, it just is, regardless of whether or not the people there are democrats or republicans. there is nobody defending the president from the podium. there is nobody defending the president in the interview room. there is nobody defending the president when they give testimony. that is when i say -- i very much which that -- had seated the republicans that

kevin mccarthy had asked for. i i think it would have, in a roundabout way, it would've accomplished more of what pelosi wanted to accomplish here, which more people would have watched these hearings if jim jordan was on this committee. people needed to see some of the testimony about how trump really lost the testimony in 2020, but because of the way it shook out, nancy pelosi rejecting some of kevin mccarthy's requested republicans, that it turned off half the country. i think that is unfortunate. i think everybody would have benefited from watching the testimony over the course of the last seven hearings. >> jonathan carl reported that pottinger rushed to the outer oval office just before 3 pm on generous expand had interactions of some kind with mark meadows, asking about the national guard, in particular. and he drafted his recognition at that interaction and also after seeing trump's tweet about mike pence and the lack of courage, et cetera. does that square with the math pottinger that you know? >> it does. that is a credible guy. he is an 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. they may have worked for another republican during the 2016 election. he wouldn't be hard-core trump to me. i think he supported the president and administration for several years. 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. matt pottinger was probably better off professionally to sail off in the sunset and do a lot of his academic work. it does not benefit him from by coming forward at this point and saying i have something to say. it is probably bad for his can we are to do this because of the public attention that it will. i think of math says something tomorrow under oath, i will believe it, or at least put a great deal of credibility on the, until somebody comes forward. that is matt is a very credible guy. it will be curious to see what he has to say. >> this coming thursday will be the primetime hearing. i am curious as to what you make of mark meadows behavior, as it

has been described so far. from cassidy hutchinson, he was essentially thumbing through his text messages. you can't tell if he is describing him as more aloof, disengaged, demoralized or just somehow completely disregarding what is happening there at the capitol and in the white house. what do you make of the conduct -- that is a chief of staff on january six not being able to go to the president and convince the president of anything or just weigh in in a significant way. >> actually, the thing that caught my attention during cassidy hutchinson's testimony, when i first started paying attention, closely to these hearings, i had been watching but not deep diving into them -- was when she said something that i doubt many people paid attention to. she said the president was very upset about not being able to go to the capitol, when he was in the limousine, because mark meadows told him that he was. what that told me was that the chief of staff had failed in the very first part of the job, which is the chief of staff gets paid to tell the president

things he does not want to hear. if you cannot tell the president of the united states something that he does not want to hear, then you have failed in that job. one when cassidy mentioned that, that is when my ears perked up and i said, oh my goodness gracious, what was going on in the west weighing? the testimony she gave after that sort of reinforced that mark had lost control, that mark was not comfortable telling the president things he did not want to hear, that mark had disengaged. >> you had friends in the room when this happened. people around mark meadows that day, i believe. what was their impression of mark meadows behavior, his demeanor in that moment. >> i was texting back and forth with friends of mine at the moment. who are still in the building. of course, i was gone by then on january six. they were in the building on january six. i was texting back and forth with them during testing hutchinson's testimony. i said, was mark completely incompetent or was he having a nervous breakdown? the response the person gave me was that it was a little bit of both. again, that is based on cassidy hutchinson's testimony, based on the tweet from somebody there. there is no hard

evidence of that yet. we are i'm likely to get mark meadows of the story, because it looks like he will not testify. i think that is unfortunate. but if you have a chief of staff who is detached sitting on the sofa all day, tweeting while roland rome burns, that is the sign of a broken white house. while the president is ultimately responsible for his own actions, the president is ultimately response for the people he hires, the chief of staff has a great deal to do when it comes to the responsibility of how a west wing is run. >> mick, you are uniquely position and qualify to talk about how the west wing under trump would have run as chief of staff. given your experience, what would it have been like in those moments to try to talk to donald trump, the president of the united states at the time about what was happening. would have taken? would have been herculean efforts, or would have taken a receptive audience? >> it would have depended, laura, on the relationship up to that point. if there had been a track record of going to the president and saying, mister president, we talked

need to talk about this. we have a problem with this. mister president, this hurt us today. we have to fix this. the groundwork gets gets laid on the president is used to hearing from somebody. ideally, it would be the chief of staff. if the history up to january six is, oh, mister president, these are great, but where would you like to do? that's great, fabulous, that's not a problem. then it's very difficult to change gears and critical moments and say, mister president, you lost the election. mister president, we cannot do this, mister president we could be in trouble with this. it's very difficult to she shift gears like that if the relationship is not set. if the president does expect the chief of staff to tell himself that he does not want to hear, then he is unlikely to be able to listening to it if it comes at very a late moment. our conversation with mick mulvaney continues. he may have lost interest in being part of the trump white house, but the question is, would he support putting trump back in the white house in 2024?

that's coming up. this is a charged lemonade from panera, and it's a force of nature. a delicious boost of plant based caffeine from guarana and green coffee extract. enjoy these and more when you join panera's unlimited sip club. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade is more than a trading platform.

it's an entire trading experience. with innovation that lets you customize interfaces, charts and orders to your style of trading. personalized education to expand your perspective. and a dedicated trade desk of expert-level support. that will push you to be even better. and just might change how you trade—forever. because once you experience thinkorswim® by td ameritrade ♪ there's no going back. my mom says that breyers is made with real milk. [cow mooing] i think i can hear the mooing. [girls laugh] breyers natural vanilla is made with 100% grade-a milk and cream and only sustainably farmed vanilla. better starts with breyers. (energetically) you guys are crushing it! see how the 8 grams of healthy protein in land o' frost premium meat gives you energy and keeps you full? let's get those buns toastin' bread. cheese. 10 more. go! ♪ i'm getting shredded! ♪ make the smart choice. land o'frost premium meat.

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

(man) [whispering] what's going on? (burke) it's a farmers policy perk. get farmers and you could save money by doing nothing. just be claim-free on your home insurance for three years. (man) that's really something. (burke) get a whole lot of something with farmers policy perks. (dad) bravo! (mom) that's our son! (burke) we should. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ with less moderate-to-severe eczema, why hide your skin if you can help heal your skin from within? hide my skin? not me. dupixent helps keep you one step ahead of eczema, with clearer skin and less itch. 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. ask your doctor about dupixent. hey, did i tell you i bought our car from carvana? yeah, ma.

it was so easy. i found the perfect car under budget too! and i get seven days to love it or my money back... i love it! [laughs] we'll drive you happy at carvana. >> welcome back. the secret service today turned over thousands of documents to the january six committee as part of a subpoena that was issued to the agency last week. secret service officials tell cnn that none of those thousands of documents included these missing text messages sent on the day prior to and on januar y 6th. the agency insists that the records were lost during a phone migration program, and they're still working on recovering those messages. whether or not they were improperly and purposely deleted is now the key question that several federal agencies,

including the national archives, definitely want answered. so how does mick mulvaney see it? here's the rest of our interview. >> we're learning a lot about the idea that secret service text messages i've seem to have gone proof in the night. but not able to retrieve certain texts from january 5th and sixth. there was supposed to be some sort of a date on migration -- secret service to upload to some sort of internal server. that did not happen. we're learning more and more about it. what do you make of the fact that we're not gonna be seeing text messages that seem to have gone away from those dates in particular? >> i'm not quick to ascribe guilt or at least underhanded-ness here. secret service is a bureaucracy like any bureaucracy, and they make mistakes like this. this happens all the time, unfortunately, and the federal government, and i do happen have to to know -- i had a secret service detail for a year and a half. some of the highest integrity people i know are attracted to that area of surface. so i will be slowed to sort of see something underhanded here until i see something more than what we've

got. it certainly looks bad, there's no question about it. we love to have everything out in the open. of course, the secret service inside, number one, but they've been cooperating with the january six committee from the very beginning. i haven't heard anything to the contrary. i think the released several hundred thousand emails and other communications from january 5th and sixth, so while it looks bad, i encourage people to sort of take a deep breath on this one before we ascribe any sort of guilt here. 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 ones secret service, where -- biden appointees. this doesn't fall neatly into any sort of conspiracy. i don't see anything underhanded yet, but certainly, 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 herculean after all. as you mentioned, full circle, this committee, you believe, is anti trump. it seems that their focus is to ensure that the american public, through transparency, no longer believe that he could be a viable president of the united states if he were to run for reelection yet again. we don't yet know if he intends to do that, but if he is in fact the rnc nominee, do you intend to vote for him? >> i've answered this question this way. i'm one of those republicans who hopes that former president trump doesn't run. and all fairness, we don't need him anymore. he changed our party. we have built a new generation of folks, ron desantis, nikki haley, mike pompeo, go down the list, a folks who can give us the same policies, ig, defense of the middle class that donald trump gave us without the baggage.

face it, as i'm -- as a republican, i'm sitting here tonight wondering if the election was today, and joe biden was the democratic nominee, there's only one mainstream republican that could lose -- i'd be hard-pressed to support him. >> the republican party no longer needing donald trump might not be the view of millions of people who did vote for him as his base. so if he decides that he intends to run and not a lot of people do, you'll have quite a choice on your hands. >> i think we've moved beyond donald trump clearing the field. i think that's one thing that the january six committee has accomplished, although i don't know if that's what they wanted to accomplish -- i thought they wanted to bring encourage charges, or encourage the department of justice to do so. to an extent, they wanted to woo him politically. i think that's happened. polls for the first time say that a majority of republican primary voters would prefer someone other than donald trump. that's a big change over the course of the last six or eight weeks. eight

weeks ago, i doubt seriously that any top tier republicans, pence, pompeo, tim scott, desantis, we're considering running for president. i think now many of them are our. even nikki haley suggested she might run. i think that something that's changed over the course of the last 6 to 8 weeks, and it's changed because of the committee. so i think they were out to sort of get him, from in jail, i certainly don't think that's gonna happen based on the evidence we've seen now. but if they wanted to damage him to the point where he might not win or might not ron, i think that may be the result of these hearings. >> to paraphrase, great taste, last feeling. more policies, less drama would be the way to. go mick mulvaney, thanks. much >> thanks, laura. >> critics of these hearings say they're a waste of time with nothing new to show. but i have someone here who served on legal teams and both impeachment teams against trump,

including the one -- what does he see from the committee's work, and what will he be watching for thursday night? that's next. one question hangs pretty well over the january six hearings. will any of the evidence leave the justice department to indict trump? you heard mick mulvaney say why his expectations were ♪ "shake your thang" by salt n pepa when you're tired of looking at your tired old bath, we fit your style, with hundreds of design options. bath fitter. it just fits. visit bathfitter.com to book your free consultation. 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. hybrid work is here. it's there. it's everywhere. but for someone to be able to work from here, there has to be someone here

making sure everything is safe. secure. consistent. so log in from here. or here. assured that someone is here ready to fix anything. anytime. anywhere. even here. that's because nobody... and i mean nobody... makes hybrid work, work better. hmmm. -good morning jen. shall we see how you slept? all right, sleep tracker, let's see the damage. oh! that's not good. you sound... tired. oh, thanks. what? when did i- morning! oh, great. there's two of them. good days start with good nights. so i would ask your doctor about both. calling doctor johannes. no, please, i can do that. all right?

so many people are overweight now and asking themselves, "why can't i lose weight?" for most, the reason is insulin resistance,

and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now, there's golo. golo helps with insulin resistance, getting rid of sugar cravings, helps control stress and emotional eating, and losing weight. go to golo.com and see how golo can change your life. that's g-o-l-o.com. night? that's next. one question hangs pretty well over the january six hearings. will any of the evidence leave the

justice department to indict trump? you heard mick mulvaney say why his expectations were or were not. i mean, admittedly, it is an unprecedented prospect, and idea that would normally be unheard of. again, when it comes to what we have seen over the past, i don't know, 68 years, it has been quite unprecedented. donald trump often entered uncharted waters. he was the first u.s. president to be impeached not once but twice and the first president to, well, insight, as they say, an attack on the u. s. capital. let's get perspective from barry berke, the chief counsel from trump's second impeachment trial, that was a result of january six. barry, good to see you here. i am curious about your perspective, in particular, because of the fact that some have been really critical of the hearings other committee, in general. they view it as a failed attempt that impeachment. number two, now it is the new avenue to do this. i'm curious about what your take has been about with the committee has been able to produce, specifically, are

other things that you wish you could have known or had for the impeachment involving january six? >> great to be here, laura. i have to tell you, it is very gratifying to me as chief impeachment counsel for the second impeachment to see with the committee has been able to do. you will feel very proud about the case and evidence that we presented to establish donald trump at committed high crimes and misdemeanors. we showed how he perpetuated the lie that the election was stolen, some of the crowd, and sat in them and refused to act, in fact, encourage them on. with the committee hearing has shown is the power of having congressional subpoenas that can be enforced. with an independent department of justice that was prepared to hold witnesses in contempt, like steve bannon and others, that forced other insiders with firsthand information to come forward and testify. once they did that, they were going to tell the truth, or else they would be committing a crime. i am, in all the great work the

committee did, 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 supported every we did in the impeachment. it goes beyond that and raises questions about donald trump's criminal intent and whether she could or should be prosecuted for the acts that he did. i watch it with, again, appreciation and gratification. >> you think that he should be held accountable does time, arguing that there is more information coming out from the impeachment. obviously, the impeachment trial was shortly after january six. we are more than a year after. we have 1000 witnesses that have given depositions at some point in time with the committee. do you think that now given the breath of what we have seen, is there enough? not just for the high crimes but for the idea of actual trials or charges against donald trump or anyone else in his direct orbit? >> laura, will i will tell you

is that i have had clients as a defense lawyer who have been prosecuted for a shadow of evidence against donald trump. there is overwhelming evidence that he took steps to interfere with the election. now, there is equal amount of evidence that he had criminal intent. he knew what he's doing was wrong. he told the senior leaders of the department of justice to say it was fraud, leave the rest to me. i do think a principle of no person is above the law, and if the evidence that there, they should be prosecuted. more importantly, i should be -- whether cases are brought. here, there is incredible incentive to bring this case for that reason. there are people that are not only saying that they will interfere in future elections, they are running for public office with a campaign promise. the department has the obligation to send that message. if you engage with crimes and interfere with the most important principle underlying our democracy, free

and fair elections, you will be prosecuted, regardless if you are an elected official, present or former. >> that would be the theme, no one above the law. there are entire campaigns whose entire platforms are about this notion and will oversee elections across the country. it is arguable, i am wondering whether or not mark garland will come forward in full scope at this point in time. i'm wondering about timing in particular. one of the things that hung over the impeachment trial against donald trump about january six was the idea of timing. in that case, it was about the fact that it was an outgoing president, could you still have impeachment for somebody that will no longer be in office? now the question is about the time of the doj in terms of the rule that is in the justice department, where they don't want to be seen as

interfering in any way with upcoming elections. they have a cough day before they believe the public will oversee the investigation or notes it there of, in a way that will impact elections. listen to what lisa monaco, the deputy ag, about the question about whether they will continue to investigate norm ring that the timing is difficult ahead of them. >> we will continue to do our job, to follow the facts wherever they go, no matter where they lead, no matter to what level, and we will continue to do our job to investigate what was fundamentally an attack on our democracy. >> when you hear that, what do you think? they're saying that they will continue with any investigation, even if it means somebody like trump is not on the ballot, for something more brought? >> i then day will 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 want to rush it, they should not delay it. they should be aware and not do something short of bringing charges that could have an effect on the election that is unintended.

>> really important point, barry berke, thank you so much. so the question now is, where are the secret service text messages from on and around generous? exported to go? select committee thought they would get them today. what does the service now say? the questions are growing and political and legal pros will try to help me answer them next. here's a question, what from unitedhealthcare. medicare supplement plans help by paying some of what medicare doesn't... and let you see any doctor. any specialist. anywhere in the u.s. who accepts medicare patients. so if you have this... consider adding this. call unitedhealthcare today for your free decision guide. ♪ wealth is breaking ground on your biggest project yet. worth is giving the people who build it a solid foundation. wealth is shutting down the office for mike's retirement party. worth is giving the employee who spent half his life

with you, the party of a lifetime. ♪ ♪ wealth is watching your business grow. worth is watching your employees grow with it. ♪ ♪ new astepro allergy. no allergy spray is faster. with the speed of astepro, almost nothing can slow you down. because astepro starts working in 30 minutes, while other allergy sprays take hours. and astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid free allergy spray. now without a prescription. astepro and go.

up to 8 weeks of relief with cytopoint. that's a lot more fun time, right max? yup. it's life-changing time. ♪ ♪ cytopoint is a long-lasting treatment for allergic dermatitis. just one injection given by your veterinarian can control allergic itch for 4-8 weeks. it's life-changing itch relief that brings back the fun in life, day after day. now's the time to ask your veterinarian for cytopoint.

happens if secret service is text messages from january 5th and january six are never recovered? would it hurt the insurrection investigation and will any one be published for that? let's discuss with former democratic senator and u.s. attorney doug jones, former prosecutor shan woo and former rnc communications director, doug high. i am so glad that you are all here. when you think about the secret service text messages, kind of the casablanca thing, of all days in the entire rolled, these are the ones that seem to have gone away. what do you make of this? mick mulvaney set, i will not read into anything nefarious yet, notice the word, yet. skeptics, are you there? >> i am skeptical, regardless of what movie said about nancy mulvaney -- she didn't, kevin mccarthy did that. look, i think you have to have a healthy dose of skepticism here. it is either something

nefarious or pure incompetence. everybody knows those text messages should have been preserved. it is a document that should have been preserved. they should have prepared for that, planned on that. i am assuming that they -- -- here. it is either something nefarious or pure incompetence. everybody knows those text messages should have been preserved. it is a document that should have been preserved. they should have prepared for that, planned on that. i am assuming that they did. i think there is a lot of questions. >> are you putting too much emphasis on it? obviously, people who tied to texas, the thumbs are so there. you could ask people, or did you write, where did you tax, we can ask those questions. this is form over substance? >> i think this is important. >> thank you, champ. >> spoken like a true former prosecutor. we need to -- they have to do that because they may never get those messages. i find it hard to believe that

this is something that's been wiped that way. the secret service seems like they are able to do that. they need to talk to the people. it is gibberish that has been coming out for the secret service today saying that they are not sure that that data has lost was not lost. how do you even know which messages were lost if you are saying you cannot find them. that is very confusing. >> when mulvaney was talking about the bonds he would have the secret service agents, whether on capitol hill or those that could secret service protection, that is a real bond. it does not change the fact that this is been a troubled organization secret service for several years now. they especially documented a series of mistakes and ignores a problems that they have. this is not immediately pass the smell test. then you have the other problem that donald trump's candidacy from day one did not pass the smell test. a

lot of republicans were willing to go along, as far as january six or beyond. when they saw it was all over, at least. trump came from a place of dishonesty. we have come to a place where the very things we need to bc just happened to disappear. it does not pass the smell test. >> laura, let's not put too much emphasis on them. these are text messages. they are not court reporters taken down everything seen and heard. they're talking about security, but the odds are that they are also talking about their kids and when they will get away, or somebody said something stupid, another agent. think about how people use text messages today, even on the job. in every trial an investigation, there is owes some gaps. i don't think we need to put all the emphasis on this that this would make or break the case. i don't believe it is. there may be dynamite stuff in there, which would bolster a case, but i think the fact that they are not there, i don't think will hurt the case. >> not to mention, we all have seen in the past when congress was having a hearing for social

media giants, they basically have a vocabulary glossary, talking about a lot of acronyms, lol, et cetera. you can always ask the person. the real question for me is on thursday, we will have in prime time, prime time is happening, my expectations are already through the roof, which is always a dangerous thing. i think in primetime, you will show me something, i am waiting to be shown something. i'm wondering because the last thing we saw was about the idea that i will connect the dots between these groups and a donald trump administration. in a way, there was the over promising and under delivering on that notion, but will this be something? what do you want to hear? what are you waiting to hear in the last hearing? this is something you're thinking, god, if i were doing this, i do want this. what is that nugget? >> i am not expecting anything, i'm not waiting to see anything, well i am waiting for them to do is to just complete the investigation. finish it up, and i think the way to finish that up with the way that they have set forth this entire, it has been well done. 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. i think that is all that will be. i think your people will be shocked. i think we have already heard a lot of that. we have seen the tweets and other things, i'm not sure there will be a ton of blockbuster. there must be something that is surprising. but it will be the completion. it will be the final chapter of what the committee has done. >> then, of course, the report. you're not have -- the idea of not being left undone. charl tierney, charl tierney, i'm glad you are here to. the idea of, this is not a time that you will ask for a verdict at the end of it, that you will know what's now want people to think. nicola may, we will talk more about this. they seem to think that the verdict was essentially to clear the way

for other rnc nominees. i am not sure that will be the case, but what do you think? >> i don't think whatever agreement movie on that. i would say that the closing remarks at this hearing and finale in primetime, it is not going to put the prosecutor now in the coffin on trump. they are a congressional committee that will end on that political note, which is to really point out what he was thinking and have people say that he did not want to do anything. i think that does and on a very strong back fighting note. it will not be a composite oreo final note. gusts were gonna come back to dog heye, oh, i have something to say about this very issue. stick around, everyone. it's coming, up all of the big trump electors in one state -- that just got put on notice. and if i were any of them, well, maybe i'd be looking for a lawyer asap. plus, the steve bannon in contempt trial. he's letting his lawyer doing the talking inside the courtroom, but outside, his gums are flapping.

he's making his own witness wish list, and many people are on it. stay tuned. >> all 16 of the fake electors wouldn't be a thing. yeah, dad! i don't want to deal with this. oh, you brought your luggage to the airport. that's adorable. with shipgo shipping your luggage before you fly you'll never have to wait around here again. like ever. that can't be comfortable though. shipgo.com the smart, fast, easy way to travel. when traders tell us how to make thinkorswim® even better, we listen. like jack. he wanted a streamlined version he could access anywhere, no download necessary. and kim. she wanted to execute a pre-set trade strategy in seconds. so we gave 'em thinkorswim® web. because platforms this innovative

aren't just made for traders -they're made by them. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire

moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. many taking rinvoq saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 2 days. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death,

heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your doctor about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. [ "back to life" by soul ii soul ] what if you could change your surroundings with the touch of a finger? now you can. biometric id... inside the innovative, new c-class.

>> all 16 of the fake electors in georgia who are part of the plan to overturn the 2020 election on behalf of donald trump are now targets in a criminal investigation tonight. the fulton county georgia prosecutors looking into -- does this mean they're closer to deciding on criminal charges? as the probe drawing any closer to donald trump himself? back with me now, doug jones, shan wu, and doug heye. you think about the ways in which georgia, pretty unique in terms of all the sort of states that have had discussions around the lies, around the election. georgia didn't seem to be buying it when it came to, obviously, purdue versus kemp. kemp did not have that angle. is this an example of that being the trump fatigue that mick mulvaney was talking about? the idea of look, he sort of cleared the way for others because they aren't buying it anymore. they don't to deal with it. >> we see when donald trump goes all in, it guarantees him about a third of the vote. the rest of it is up to those candidates, and what you had was a popular governor who took on trump on one thing, but otherwise, was very firmly in line with, by and large, trump's policies, against

someone who not only lost their senate race, who donald trump called a loser, but someone who ran a terrible campaign and lost two years earlier. republicans are trying to inch away from donald trump. they can't run from, but when you hear on capitol hill, privately, sometimes in a very coded language, sentence or two, by mitch mcconnell, something that suggests republicans moving forward in 2024 can do other things. that's where you're seeing more and more rhonda sentenced, tim scott's got a book coming out, a lot of people mick mulvaney talked about who want to run. politicians are often self interested, big shock -- >> we all mean, you former senator. we all mean you. >> none of those people are condemning trump's actions. there is still wrapping themselves with trump. every canada the out there, they're

wrapping themselves in trump, saying that the election was stolen, and they're not condemning what they've heard. it's just nothing but crickets coming from capitol hill, on the actions that were taken, and the threat to democracy that we saw. that, i think, is a real tragedy. >> why do you hear privately and publicly -- liz cheney or adam cans senior, often mere mirrors of what reality is. -- >> the idea of the public versus the private conversations, i associate those with who shirk away publicly -- wouldn't be asking for the chance to lee. if you're gonna be a member of congress, maybe should be one of these people like, consequences be -- but the idea of, why do you think -- there is this reluctance to say publicly about something as basic as white mick mulvaney said, this fatigue? >> because of what doug just said, that those 30% of the people out there who regardless

of what you say, are gonna be a trump voter, and they're gonna be there for him, i'm gonna defend him at all costs, and every one of those politicians do not want to alienate that 30% of the vote. that's why you've got all that list that nick talked about. not a single one of them has condemned the actions of donald trump and what happened before, during, and after. they've talked about it and said it's time to move on, but how, everybody says that. it's time to move on. they say, we don't need to look at the past, we need to step forward. folks need to put the country first and start talking about democracy and wrapping themselves and that flag instead of the donald trump flag of silence. >> you know who was silent today was steve bannon on the courthouse steps. he was looking for a microphone, he found one, there was this moment where he tried to call out betty thompson and others to say come on down, -- i don't,

know the partisan is right, here it is. >> betty thompson said it staffer over here. where is betty thompson? we subpoena thompson, and they're hiding behind these phony privileges. he's too gutless to come over here himself. he's made it a crime, made it a crime. not a civil charge of wanting testimony, but a crime. and he didn't have the courage or guts to show up here. i challenge benny thompson to have the courage to come to this courthouse. he's gonna charge me with a crime, he's got to be man enough to show up here. >> we lost sight of benny thompson, i think he has covid now. but there's also the idea of that statement. shannon, -- not prosecuting anyone. he's a different branch of government entirely, right? >> i think the ideal -- between bannon's lawyer, his lawyer said, look, you have to keep a lid on it in the courtroom, let me do the talking, but -- >> he used to work with the

lawyer in the same office. is it surprising to you that he's that vocal? i tell you, the judge as a trump appointee. he's gonna know that they're talking on the courthouse steps at some point. that's not gonna offend the judge or get him in trouble? >> i think it will. i'm a little surprised the judge didn't tell him not to talk outside the courtroom. i think that is problematic. i think that it's probably a very difficult client to control. >> that was the understatement of the air. i want to tell you -- what do you think? >> look, i think it's a mistake, always, to let a client speak to the media, especially like that. what was so bizarre to me, listening to steve bannon, is that he challenged and said bennie thompson didn't have the guts to show up in court. steve bannon didn't have the guts to show up in front of congress for a lawful subpoena. he just basically thumbed his nose. he didn't have the guts, didn't have the courage, -- he can

hide behind his microphone for his podcast and bright bright, but he didn't have the guts to stand in front of a committee and be questioned about what he did. >> details, details. i did reference the prices right, i should remember -- yeah, i used to watch with you, grandma. thanks so much. doug jones, shan wu, doug, thank you so much. we'll be right back. hey, (man) [whispering] what's going on? (burke) it's a farmers policy perk. get farmers and you could save money by doing nothing. just be claim-free on your home insurance for three years. (man) that's really something. (burke) get a whole lot of something with farmers policy perks. (dad) bravo! (mom) that's our son! (burke) we should. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ wait!!! let me help—land o' frost premium meat. delicious and no by-products! toss it in.

ay, moi? ok. weeeeeeeeee! make the smart choice. land o'frost premium meat. ♪ 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. this is lily. when you see things differently, you can be the difference. ♪ capella university sees education differently. our flexpath learning format

helps you control the pace and cost of your master's degree. when a normal day is anything but normal, we fit your schedule, with our unique tub over tub process installed in as little as a day. bath fitter. it just fits. visit bathfitter.com to book your free consultation. oh, hey. buying a car from vroom is so easy, all you need is a phone and a finger. just go to vroom.com, scroll through thousands of cars. then, tap to buy. that's it. no sales speak. no wasted time. just, straight up great cars. right from your phone to your driveway. go to vroom.com and pick your favorite. wooo. oh yeah, she digs it. buy your car on vroom.com vroom. get in.

this is xfinity rewards. our way of showing our appreciation.

with rewards of all shapes and sizes. [ cheers ] are we actually going? yes!! and once in a lifetime moments. two tickets to nascar! yes! find rewards like these and so many more in the xfinity app. thanks for watching everyone, i'll be back tomorrow night. don lemon tonight starts right now. hey, don lemon. i was eavesdropping. >> you were? >> i was a eavesdropping. >> what did you learn? >> as he's dropping a new