- common percy! - yeah let's go! on a trip. book with priceline. you save more, so you can “woooo” more. - wooo. - wooo. wooooo!!!!! woohooooo!!!! w-o-o-o-o-o... yeah, feel the savings. priceline. every trip is a big deal. klondike could not have picked a worse time, a harder time to announce the end of a favorite treat, choco taco the in a talker shape cone. fans have been upset ever since klondike said it had to make some quote, very tough decisions about which products to continue in order to meet demand. in a tweet last night, however, klondike did hint at a come back, saying they are working hard to bring back the choco taco quote, back to ice cream trucks in the coming years. we can only hope. the news >> how are you gonna lead into continues, let's hand it the show with the end of the choco taco, anderson?

over to cnn tonight. >> everyone now hates this whole thing. is there a caramel burrito coming at some point? if the push pop goes, i'm out of here. thank you so much, everyone. that just ruined our day. thank you, anderson cooper. we appreciate it. i am laura coates and this is cnn tonight. so, for everyone out there wondering which came first, the chicken or the egg? or maybe the doj or the committee investigation. it might become more clear. the committee maybe flexing its legislative and oversight powers to illuminate what led up to and what really happened on january 6th. but the doj isn't waiting for the torch to be passed. it appears to be investigating the actions of donald trump himself. that's according to the washington post tonight. cnn can confirm the key aide to mike pence, his former chief of staff, mike short, and his lead counsel, greg jacob have already testified before a federal grand jury. pretty high up!

the prosecutors asked hours and asked questions of meetings that trump himself led. meetings like the one jacob described at the january six committee, remember this? >> mr. eastman came in. he said, i'm here to request that you reject the elector. i said, john, if the vice president did what you are asking him to do, we would lose nine to nothing in the supreme court, wouldn't we? and he and initially stated, well, we'll lose 7 to 2. and after some further discussion acknowledged, well, you're, right we would lose 9 to 1. >> six and two, half dozen in another. as for his credibility, jacob's credibility. keep in mind his version of events was already shown before a federal judge. and, that judge's conclusion is quote, more likely than not, that president trump corruptly

attempted to obstruct the joint session of congress on january 6th, 2021. and the post reporting seems to indicate this goes beyond just witness testimony. that the doj, back in april, i might add, received phone records of trump officials including former chief of staff, mark meadows. cnn's own reporting that the department has subpoenaed documents from state lawmakers in arizona, and also in georgia, involved in a plan to submit fake pro trump electors. a plan that was laid out in emails obtained by the new york times. in the words of a pro trump lawyer, quote, we would just be sending in fake electoral votes to pence that someone in congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the fake votes should be counted. now, a follow-up email suggest alternative votes sounds better than saying fake votes. now where have we heard that

alternative sounds better than fake before? i am racking my brain. remember when that might have been? the timing of all this reporting comes as merrick garland doing what he doesn't often do as attorney general, sitting down with a network television journalist on camera. >> we pursue justice without fear or favor. we intend to hold everyone, anyone, who was criminally responsible for events surrounding january 6th or any attempt to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another accountable. that is what we do. we don't pay any attention to other issues with respect to that. >> so if donald trump were to become a candidate for president again, that would not change your schedule. or how you move forward or move

forward? >> i'll say again, that we will hold accountable anyone who is criminally responsible for attempting to interfere with the transfer, legitimate lawful transfer of power from one administration to the next. >> he'll get tired of saying just. that the questions are going to keep coming to him. my guest tonight know the players and they certainly know the stakes. olivia troye worked with marc short, and greg jacob on mike pence's staff. shen wu is a prosecutor, and miles taylor was the chief of staff of the homeland secretary under trump. glad to have you all here today. merrick garland probably gonna get tired of having to answer that very question. remember he if you days ago was like, listen, i said when i said, i will say it louder again. which is weird for him to have that tone. but one displays that he keeps getting the same question. do you intend to hold trump accountable? when these questions are coming, what goes through your mind? is it to singular and myopic a focus? will it harm, politically speaking other aspects of? it what is your thought?

>> i think that he really needs to decide if you want to say something more specific. or really just say nothing at all. because the usual reasons for giving nothing about the investigation don't really apply here, everyone knows the issues here. he's not tipping off everybody. he certainly doesn't have to say we have to indict him. but he certainly could've said, what we just learned today. which is that, of course, we are looking at trump behavior, we're asking questions about him. today's reporting with the first time we even heard questions being asked about it. i think you could say that. >> i've got to say, i think as much as the attorney general is trying to be disciplined about what he is saying, he is tipped his hand. maybe not that most recent interview, but just before that he said, this is the most important investigation in justice department history. it's not the most investigation if you're looking at peter navarro, or one of these low level legs, it is the most important investigation in the justice department history, if

you're looking at the president united states. up into this point, garland has been a sphinx in washington, d. c., but to the point you just made, we may not know the sphinx answers. but we now know the questions he's asking. the questions are about donald trump. we are now literally within feet of the ex president of the united states, the people who sat feet away from him. the phone that we're in feet of him. there is zeroing in on the ex president and i think that much is clear at this point. >> is he a sphinx because he's cutting off his nose -- to spite his face right? now what is the sphinx -- analogy? i want to go into this in great detail. >> we will mix all the metaphors. >> why is he thinks? tell me why he's the sphinx in washington, d. c.? >> it is everyone's guessing, would he try to do. i think he stopped his hand. the something off the stands, now i know we'll talk about trump 2024 and will he won't be. but there is something very fascinating about this to me. before he ran for president, he was basically under investigation. given what was happening with russia, once he became president, was investigated over russia and the ukraine call. after his election, he was

investigated for january 6th and is now. this is a man who is perpetually under investigation. but this one looks like it's getting closer to the ex president than any of those ever did. >> he is teflon don, right? what you just, named all of those happened before you got millions and millions of votes. so you have to wonder, politically speaking, is any of this getting through? you were part of -- you know, you know this very. well as any of this resonating with people in the way that, i guess, the committee maybe hopes it will? >> i think it is. i think the hearings have been very effective and the way they've approached. it's very methodical. they're hearing from republicans themselves. that's what really matters here. these were people who were there until the very end in the trump administration, who were loyalists. who did their job diligently. and i think that message is resonating when they come forward. and say, this is what donald trump did this day, these are the facts, this is what we lived. it's firsthand testimony. i don't think you can skirt around it, but to get back to garland, trump went out of his way to -- the department justice, the fbi,

the intelligence community. i have to give some credit to garland here where he does have to be very careful with this investigation and methodical to make sure that he is reflecting the impartial-ness that we were traditionally always wanting to expect from the department of justice, especially in the united states. that's something i think about. >> i want to play for you what he says about the reason for being closer to the vest. the committee is very public, and obviously the court of public opinion once everything on the table all the time. he says why they have to be much more circumspect. here he is. >> we've been moving urgently since the very beginning. we have a huge number of prosecutors and agents working on these cases. it is inevitable in this kind of investigation that there will be speculation about what we are doing, who we are investigating, when our theories are. the reason there is the speculation and uncertainty is that it's a fundamental tenet of what we do as prosecutors and that investigators is to do it outside of the public eye. >> and of course that's true.

but olivia, you know -- short, right? you know jacobs. tell me a little bit about what they're testifying to in that grand jury. >> i feel like there's no one more apropos to testify to what they witnessed in the days that lead up to january 6th -- , what was going on internally in the white house. what the president was trying to do -- webb eastman was trying to do. what greg jacob -- him and i worked very closely together, he is a man of integrity. and he believes very much so in the rule of law in this country. so i have no doubt that they talked about the amount of pressure placed on the pence team and on mike pence himself. >> shan, why haven't we heard from mike pence? i know there are people in the line. help people understand. why not the proverbial? why not that person? >> two issues. they are politically, which i'm not the expert on. he probably does not want to go on record --

, keep that as little as possible. >> no witness wants to do that -- we don't care about that in doj. >> doj is going to be slightly concerned with what is the status, at this point. he would be tremendously valuable. but they are getting all of that information from the people near to him. as a prosecutor, i think you have to make some decision about pence first and if i was his lawyer, i would be looking to make sure i had some guarantees that you weren't looking at him as a target or subject. that may cause of delays in terms of getting him in front of the grand jury. >> i'm gonna give a harsher assessment. it ultimately comes down to a lack of courage. i just got to say, this was the one issue following through on the law, was the one place where we've given pence any credit for showing backbone during this administration. otherwise, in the oval office, he would stand there and he would smile and he was not. even when the president wanted to do illegal things. i sat there like i'm sure olivia has when trump said things like, i want to get rid of the judges. let's get rid of the judges and ignore the rulings. and mike pence, rather than intervening saying, mister president that would be illegal,

that was the same mike pence that would stand and not his head. i'm not expecting pence to stand up any further than he has. i think he did the right thing, i don't think that makes him a superhero. >> we'll see what he ultimately will do. or maybe he's been asked to do already. we just don't know what is been asked of him. but on a day, we know what was asked him what he actually. did i am like you, i seem to hold my designation of heroism much closer to the vest. consistency overtime -- i think it's very big. shen woo, thank you so, much miles and olivia, stand by -- we're coming back to you as well. the january 6th select committee might not have any more hearings planned itself september, but that does not stop them from releasing more eye-opening testimony. this time, donald trump's acting defense chief testifies just how many troops he was told to have ready on january 6th. and, could trump's hold over the gop be slipping? cnn poll suggest more republicans think it's time to maybe find someone else.

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.

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. ♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪ you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on your discover card.

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. ♪ you ain't seen nothin' yet ♪ ♪ b-b-baby, you just ain't seen n-n-nothin' yet ♪ ♪ here's something, ♪ ♪ here's something you're never gonna fff-forget, baby ♪ get a dozen shrimp for only one dollar with any steak entrée. only at applebee's. (dad) ohhhhoooo.... (man) woah, woah, woah! no, no, no, no! ugh... (woman) huhhhhg.... (woman) ughh. ohh... (dad) no! ohhhhhh. (man) ugh, ugh, gaaahh. (woman) n, n, n, n... uggggg... (vo) don't worry. you may feel every ding,

but your subaru's value won't. the subaru outback has the best resale value in its class. (man) check please. fishing helps ease my mind. kinda like having liberty mutual. they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. woah! look out! [sfx: submarine rising out of water ] [ sfx: minion spits bobber ] minions are bitin' today.

[ sfx: submarine hatch closes, submarine dives ] ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ hello! minions: the rise of gru, only in theaters. hey! >> the january 6th select committee has put out brand-new video. it shows trump's acting defense secretary denying there were orders to have troops ready to protect the capital. >> i want to be clear that since then in february 2021, mark meadows said on fox news that, quote, even in january, that was a given, as many as 10,000 national guard troops were told to be on the ready by the secretary of defense. is there any accuracy that statement? >> not from my perspective. i have never been privy to any plans of that nature. >> never given any direction or

order. that is testimony given under oath. as opposed to this moment. >> i definitely gave the number of 10,000 national guardsmen. i think you should have 10,000 of the national guard ready. they took that number, for what i understand, they gave it to the people at the capitol, which is controlled by pelosi, and i heard that they rejected it because they -- >> gave that number to the people at the capitol. i may need more specifics there. olivia and miles are still with us. we are joined also by alex burns, national political corresponded with the new york times. i'm glad to have you all here. we were told, no more hearings until september. you've all marked off your calendars. you're waiting to take a breath. you cannot wait for the next one. i understand. we thought -- it would be radio silence until. then this tells you for every statement that might come out,

i will leave this year for you at the table, what do you make of the decision to do that? was it trying to undercut the prospective notion that trump doesn't have a like to stand on in the public eye? what is this about? >> this committee has been very delivered all the way through about putting out information added time and manner of their choosing to just dominate the news cycle. and yeah, to deny donald trump a clear lane to make his own case at any point ever, right? this is not necessarily the thinking of the committee. but i think it sure works out for them politically that donald trump is coming back into the public eye with a series of big speeches about the america first agenda. there is another drop of that, just like that. and i think donald trump should soon if he continues to happen. >> it's scary, right? you don't necessarily know what's out there. so if your camp, or others, not just focusing on him, there are others and they might have little tidbits, or the bread crumbs spread out along whatever trail they want to have. but politically speaking, i'm

always wondering this. if the endgame is accountability, the big umbrella of accountability, i so often have people say you know, if you prosecute a former president, it is going to really divide the nation. let's just move on and beyond the truth. and i wonder, do you really think that prosecuting or holding accountable in some way, shape, or form, somebody who might be engaged in this behavior, will that divide our nation irrevocably? or the absence of doing that the problem? >> i'm going to say two things on that. and i hope that alex and olivia come in and it hit me on both sides. i think it would be cathartic for this country and potentially violent. on the catharsis piece, look, americans want to know that no one is above the law. the committee has already shown that laws were broken here. they have made a good case and they are not even the prosecutors. they are not the the justice department. they are congressional committee that doesn't have the ability to do this prosecution. but i think they have a really

compelling case of that laws were broken. especially that key law, disrupting a proceeding of congress. it's cathartic to the american people to know that no one, even a president, is above the law. so that's important. but at the same time, i highlight violence very warily. because whether trump, if he is prosecuted or convicted, or trump, if he is prosecuted and exonerated, people in the law enforcement community have told me and i'm sure olivia that those situations could both and violently. is that trump supporters, if convicted, could be out there in the streets conducting acts of violence. and if he's exonerated, i think you could see riots in this country. so i think it's definitely a dangerous situation, but not a reason to not go forward with the law. >> is that we are hearing? >> to's point, i've had these conversations national security circles where there is concern. where a prosecution or holding him accountable in that way would lead to violence, would lead to civil war, the direction that we are heading in, that everyone is concerned about in the country. my argument on that is, are we

not already on the brink of? that we are kind of already there? and if you decide that we are going to be a nation that is not going to uphold the rule of law, also, what are we seeing internationally to the world? what are we seeing on the world stage to foreign adversaries and international partners, now the rule of law no longer matters? that wealth and power actually can undermine the rule of law, is that the president we want to set based on the fact that we fear violence? i mean, we already have i was right. now we are already experiencing. that there is already great concern about political violence regardless in upcoming elections in the future because of how divided we are. and also, a lot of it because of donald trump's rhetoric and beholden-ing he's done with these extremist groups. >> it is to me just such a bizarre american perspective that you cannot prosecute somebody who used to run for a government or the country will fall apart. it happens in other places of the world all the time. they have indicted former presidents and prime ministers in countries like france and israel and korea and brazil. those countries are still around. i am not saying it's easy for

them, and i'm not saying it would be easy here. but it is this sort of legacy of watergate, the pardon of rich or nixon. the only way that you can turn the page is to not hold the person in charge accountable. i think it is a really kind of strange american exceptionalism. >> well, speaking of turning the page, vice president mike pence was speaking today and he want to sort of turn the page. he had an interesting statement about how he and trump are not so different on the policy front, just on the focus. i'm curious. >> i don't know that the president and i differ on issues but we may differ on focus. i truly do believe that elections are about the future. and it is absolutely essential at a time when so many americans are hurting, so many families are struggling, that we don't give way to the temptation to look back. >> what a very nice way of saying, please stop talking

about what happened in the past. that's what he is saying. am i just giving him too much credit? alex is like no. >> they do disagree on the hang mike pence issue, right? i think that is a place where they do not have the same agenda. >> they are not in agreement that should happen. you are correct. that is right. >> but seriously, look, i think one of the challenges here, when the many challenges here for mike pence is yes, how is the question of how you pursue relationship with donald trump and your own the trump administration. but also is that mike pence is saying you don't talk of the past, you talk about the future. mike pence's path as the vice president is the only reason why he is seen as a serious candidate for the president in 2024. he has not been an ideological visionary for the party. he is not seen as one of the big ideas people, one of the electrifying charismatic, new guard leaders. >> this is an issue is trump. >> his association with trump's role in congress, basically a stalwart member of the party in good standing for a very long time, culminating in his service as vice president. and you cannot tell a story

about that phase of your career and spinning it forward with a set of new ideas. i think it is awfully hard to compete. i think a lot of people have talked to republican politics think it's awfully hard for him to compete with either ron desantis's of the world, who really do represent a next generation and do not need to untangle what they were doing in the oval office at any given date and time. >> but this new poll though, look at this new poll. there is a new poll that seam and has from srfs from the end of july, a couple of days ago actually, where you have republican leading voters, whether they want the nominee to be trump or somebody else. and they say donald trump, 44%. and then a different candidate, 55%. so, not a total runaway, but that is pretty significant. >> these numbers were flipped a year ago. in fact, they were worse than that. it was something like 75% wanted to see donald trump. so that is very significant. a lot of damage has been done to trump here politically throughout all of this. more and more people want to see a new phase.

i also would caution you cannot overstate the stranglehold that trump's maga movement has on the levers that determine who the nominee is, all the way down to the precinct captain level. the manga team has been exceptional and infiltrating the republican party and taking it over. that does give donald trump a built in advantage and i don't think you can underestimate it. as far as whether pence could be competitive, i mean, look. alex made great points, but if you want to know what's the mike pence vice presidency is like. mike pence is a guy with an erect posture, and a flaccid conscious. he stood up tall, but he did not stand up to donald trump. and you just saw in that clip. he stood up tall in the speech, but he still, after people tried to assassinate him, could not stand up to donald trump and say we disagree on issues. that tells you everything you need to know about mike pence. >> i'm not mature enough to respond to a use just. said olivia troye, alex burns, and miles taylor, i really appreciate it so much. and still to come, the fight behind the scenes to preserve a

landmark case. we have new cnn reporting on just how hard chief justice john roberts tried, try to save roe v. wade. and what this could mean to the effort in the long run. 30 million u.s. adults have a sleep disorder or sleep apnea, which causes fatigue, snoring and a lack of motivation. i've talked to health care providers, i've searched online, but it wasn't until cpap.com that i actually felt relieved. their live professionals helped me find the right product. and hey, with more sleep, i've got more energy and i'm sharper throughout my day. don't believe me? check out thier reviews.

use code "tv20" for 20% off of your order. visit cpap.com today. you might have heard of carvana and that we sell cars online. we believe buying a car should be something that gets you hyped up. and that your new car ought to come with newfound happiness and zero surprises. and all of us will stop at nothing to drive you happy. we'll drive you happy at carvana. new projects means new project managers. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get

your shortlist of quality candidates, whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. visit indeed.com/hire and get started today.

right now, a cnn exclusive on what happened behind the scenes with the supreme court leading

up to the landmark decision overturned roe v. wade. multiple sources telling cnn's 's joan biskupic that chief justice roberts fought hard to preserve the right to abortion. but a potential deal with one of the conservative justices ultimately collapsed. the real question is why. joan is here with the inside story. joan, look, the chief justice had been successful in the past trying to cajole and persuade behind the scenes. but with that lead draft opinion, things seem to have changed. is that the moment -- >> bottom line, laura, i wonder if he ever was going to be successful. but once it was leaked, then it really eliminated the chance almost to about zero. you are exactly right, the chief has been successful in the past. the chief himself has switches vote at the 11th hour, as we know most memorably in the 2012 obamacare case. he has been someone who knows that votes switch sometimes. they don't always stay the way, as this one did, in december they voted five conservative saying we totally want to

reverse roe. chief justice john roberts in the middle, said he wanted to uphold that mississippi ban on abortions at 16 weeks. and then of course the three remaining liberal saying, please leave abortion right the way they are now. but your question about his private negotiations where he's seeking concessions and offering concessions, that all goes on in sometimes just one or two justices that he's dealing with. it's not his most successful moments -- dealing in small ways with his colleagues. >> who wasn't here that he -- was >> his best prospect was brett kavanaugh. but he did not rule out amy coney barrett either. because both of those are the newest justices. they were not as locked in as clarence thomas, alito, and gorsuch was -- based on what they had written before. but one thing about brett kavanaugh, as he always gives mixing those on these kinds of things. and he can be ambivalent.

and he was i'm sure open to what the chief said, even after he voted the way he did in private to reverse roe. but you know what's, in the very end, he almost always goes with the hard-line antiabortion move as he did here. but again, the key i think was once everything became public on may 2nd, when political published that leaked first draft -- >> with his name is on the people signing on to the majority. >> exactly, it wasn't explicit, but everyone knew that sam alito thought that he had a majority. then the world knows that brett kavanaugh has voted a particular way, and that justice can bear. it is very hard to go back on the. and one thing i want to say, and this is something you will know from the dynamic of these nine, the hard right conservatives were very anxious about what the chief is doing. and they wanted to get the opinion out sooner because they did not want anything to thwart their majority. >> now the plot thickens though, as to why there is a leaked opinion in the first place.

>> i know. >> it wasn't very strategic. >> leading back up, it looks completely strategic. i do not know if i believe that for sure though, because of course, the supreme court was still involved investigation and we are about to hit the three month mark and they have not found the car culprit or culprits. so, i also wonder if maybe a change hands a couple times we forgot to politico. because, remember that draft was dated february 10th. and they published it in may. but, you know, the new reporting just shows how vigorously they try to investigate this. but with no luck. i mean, just the idea that it dropped, having it out there, makes people think, you can't change your mind, there is an opportunity to negotiate but we don't deal with the scenes and make concessions. because now you have to know that i'm changing your mind, and the public knows that is not by the seas private motions. >> right, cause we're at times the chief himself switched votes. we did not know that initially. >> it had to be ferreted out

after the fact. but in this case, everyone would have known if brett kavanaugh suddenly was in the middle, as a chief has, to uphold the mississippi law but not reverse roe and as you know well, they never, when they first took this case, when they said they were going to hear it, they didn't, they said they were only going to hear it on the question of whether a 15-week ban was unconstitutional. and they went much further, and this is what we have now >> while, as i said, the plot thickens as to who exactly leaked it. and now the why. we might know a little bit more about the why, june to suffolk, thank you for reporting, great to have you here up next, we are going to hear from a texas woman who experience firsthand what can happen when strict new abortion laws take a fact. now, when her pregnancies on the became complicated, that is when her nightmare began.

when moderate to severe ulcerative colitis persists... put it in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when uc got unpredictable,... i got rapid symptom relief with rinvoq. check. when uc held me back... i got lasting, steroid-free remission with rinvoq. check. and when uc got the upper hand... rinvoq helped visibly repair the colon lining. check. rapid symptom relief. lasting, steroid-free remission. and a chance to visibly repair the colon lining. check. check. and check. 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 1 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. put uc in check and keep it there, with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq. and learn how abbvie could help you save. the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know where to go.

seen this ad? it's not paid for by california tribes. it's paid for by the out of state gambling corporations that wrote prop 27. it doesn't tell you 90% of the profits go to the out of state corporations. a tiny share goes to the homeless, and even less to tribes. and a big loophole says, costs to promote betting reduce money for the tribes, so they get less. hidden agendas. fine print. loopholes. prop 27. they didn't write it for the tribes or the homeless.

they wrote it for themselves. when you need help it's great to be in sync with customer service. a team of reps who can anticipate the next step genesys technology is changing the way customer service teams anticipate what customers need. because happy customers are music to our ears. genesys, we're behind every customer smile. the overturning of road does not just affect women looking to and unwanted pregnancies. i'm about to introduce you to a woman who had to endure days of medical horror and bureaucracy.

elizabeth weller wasn't excited mother to be. but her water broke way too early, at just 18 weeks. that means the chance of survival for the fetus then plummeted. while elizabeth chances of deadly infection went way up. now at first, elizabeth and her husband, james, were given two options. continue the pregnancy, try to get the baby to 24 weeks, and hope for the slight chance of survival. or, and the pregnancy. they chose the latter, but the procedure was blocked. why? because the whalers live in texas, where abortions are illegal if there is a fetal heartbeat. so to get one, elizabeth had to wait until the fetal heartbeat stopped. or, until she got so sick that the doctors had to terminate the pregnancy as a medical emergency. the weller's, they join me now thank you for being here today,

elizabeth and james. i'm so sorry to be meeting you under these occasions. and i'm just heartbroken at the choice you had to make, let alone the treatment that you received. could you just walk me through, elizabeth, a little bit about what that was like to know that you had to endure four days waiting until you are either sick enough or until the heartbeat stopped? >> yes, so the mental anguish that followed having to leave the hospital was something that i would never wish on anybody. the following day after having to grapple with the fact that my daughter, who i wanted so badly, was going to die was just a on earth. it was torture having to wake up every day in a home knowing that i want to fill that house with my baby girl, and the future that we created in our

heads of what this house was going to look like, how is going to feel. and then to be in my home in this sense of doom and broken promises that were created all around me, because we had just started to work on her nursery. and now, having to grapple with the fact that she was going to leave. that she was not going to make it. walking through our home was kind of like walking through a tomb. >> it shifts devastating for me to hear that. i am so sorry that that is what you had to experience. and betrays, the broken promises, the hopes of what you have gone. through you and your husband, james. james, can you talk me a bit about, you're in texas, most people think that the overturning of the roe v. wade and dobbs decision as being someone else's problem, those who have an unwanted pregnancy. as you and your wife are sitting here today, you wanted your daughter. and yet, the choices that you

had to make were ones dictated oftentimes by the doctors, fearful, it seems, of having to contend with that very decision. what was that like for you, as a father? >> we wanted nothing more then to fill that house with children. and there were points during our ordeal where we are looking at flights to denver or to albuquerque so that we could stop her from having her life put in jeopardy. and i feel like, although i was born and raised here in texas, i do not know if i want to start a family in texas. i feel like sometimes my only real option for a family is to sell our house and moved to a state where, if something were to happen to my wife during pregnancy, her life does not need to be put on the line for it. >> it is amazing to hear that statement. and i want people to understand, elizabeth, you endured a great deal.

you had days of having to wait until you were considered sick enough, that in and of itself in my mind just sounds sick to even compliment, to think that you someone would even make you go through. that owes your pain? like why did you have to go through? i want people to understand that this was something that really was horrific for you. >> so there are two levels to that pain. the first one is mental, and the second one is physical. physically, my body was reacting to the cramps and the continued exit of amniotic fluid from my body. i was starting to experience and nausea, just from the amount of stress and pressure that i was going through, having to grapple with the fact that one, i'm losing my baby, and to, i cannot do anything to minimize the suffering that she is enduring inside of me. because for a lot of people,

you have to realize that this is a baby without amniotic fluid. she being encased in her own sack, and the pressure of my body is on her. so i have to injure the physical pain of one, my body now starting the process of contractions. and starting to, what is in a sense, rejecting a failed birth inside of me. and on top of that, having to grapple with the mental anguish of it all. there was a point in time on friday, the day that i was going to get induced, before we even knew we were even knew we were going to get an induction to happen. and that morning, through the pressure, and through the mental anguish of it all, i heard a sound of gas in my abdomen. and for me to have heard that

sound, it was very high pitched. and to me, in my moment of anguish, i thought that that sound of gas was actually my baby screaming because she was about to die. and even though that is completely rational, not within the rihanna reality, that is where my mental health was at. and that is the consequences of what these laws that are in action in texas are doing. it is not just the fact that you are gobbling with the pain of having to lose a baby girl that you wanted so bad. but now having to deal with the anguish of knowing that you need a medically necessary procedure. and the state of texas to tell you know. >> elizabeth, i am just so sorry to hear, even for a moment, to think what that would have been like and what it continues to be. i want to thank both of you for

sharing your story. i know that it is difficult to do. i think it is so brave, and it speaks to your humanity to really talk about, explain, what is so deeply personal. because the world needs to hear what you went through. thank you to both of you. and i am very, very sorry for your loss. >> thank you miss coates. >> justice, well, it might have been delayed. but it was not denied. i teen convicted after a notorious central park attack that happened back in 1989 is now exonerated in the year 2022. what is it like to finally truly be free? one of his codefendants knows, and he will join us next.

corner

s

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.

as a business owner, your bottom line is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network with no line activation fees or term contracts... saving you up to $500 a year. and it's only available to comcast business internet customers. so boost your bottom line by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities. with xfinity internet, you get advanced security that helps protect you at home and on the go. you feel so safe, it's as if... i don't know... evander holyfield has your back.

i wouldn't click on that. hey, thanks! we got a muffin for ed! all right! you don't need those calories. can we at least split it? nope. advanced security that helps protect your devices in and out of the home. i mean, can i have a bite? only from xfinity. nah. unbeatable internet. made to do anything so you can do anything. well, that's it for us tonight. don lemon tonight starts right now. don lemon. >> hey, how are you? >> i got my shoulder pads working today. >> you do, i feel like it's dynasty night, again, is blake carrington coming over with krystal, or joan collins? >> they wish they wish they had this. i was a dallas fan. not very south fork, not very