12-year-old who fractured his skill after falling from a bunk bed at the little league world series in pennsylvania. those close to easton oliverson says he is no longer sedated. he's asking for water and been waving to his parents and mouthing the words "i love you." officials at the little league world series say the bunk beds don't have guardrails. they've now removed all the bunks from the rooms. thank you so much for joining us. ac 360 starts right now. good evening. after more than a week of threats against fbi agents incited by the former president and his supporters and after one failed attempt on their lives, our top story tonight is anything but academic. the consequences of it could be very real. late today, we learned that some of the former president's allies want him to publicly release surveillance chemical video of agents searching mar-a-lago last week. he's already suggested on several occasions they might have planted evidence while they were executing the search warrant. there's no evidence of that at all. just today on his social network, he linked to an article

describing the fbi as the, quote, fascist bureau of investigation. we'll talk more in a moment about the debate within the former president's circle over putting out the surveillance video or not. but according to reporting in "the new york times" by cnn political analyst maggie haberman, investigators already have at least some surveillance video from earlier before the raid, which may have actually triggered the search. quoting now, officials then used a subpoena to obtain surveillance footage of the hallway outside a storage room at mar-a-lago and saw something that alarmed them. they also received information from at least one witness who indicated that more material might remain at the residence, people familiar with the investigation said. tonight's lead story comes at the end of a day that saw a string of related developments, including rudy giuliani going before a grand jury, the outlines of a plea deal involving alan weissle berg, and a declaration of political war from congresswoman liz cheney. we start with the surveillance footage and cnn's kaitlan collins. what do we know about this video

that the trump people are considering releasing? >> so we expect that it's several hours of footage, anderson, because, of course, this raid went on -- this search, the raid that the former president has referred to it as, but the search warrant they exe executed, they were there for several hours. they got there, we're told, about 9:00 in the morning and left about 6:00 p.m. so it could potentially be several hours worth of surveillance footage that the former president has in his hands because as we know when fbi agents arrived on the scene, they asked to turn the cameras off. we're told it's pretty standard, not that unusual of an ask by sources inside the justice department. but they did make that request, and that is not something that was granted by the officials on the ground at mar-a-lago. and so now it is in the hands of the former president and his attorneys, this surveillance footage of what happened at mar-a-lago that day. and what we are hearing from sources is that there is basically this internal debate happening over whether or not they should release it, with some people saying that it is not a case of if they release

that surveillance footage, but when they release it. but the debate comes down to two points, which is one, how does it benefit trump? some have argued it could have to show these fbi agents inside the home of a former president teaking these boxes. we know they went inside a storage room where a lot of this material is being held, but trump also said they went into his office and private quarters at mar-a-lago as well. the other side of the coin is some people in trump's orbit don't think it would be all that beneficial to show fbi acts in the home of the former president, of course picking up these boxes that they say had classified information in it that he should have never taken to mar-a-lago in the first place. so whether or not it ultimately gets released remains to be seen, but it is certainly a debate happening inside his orbit right now. >> the people at mar-a-lago, they could edit it however they wanted. they could cut out as much footage as they wanted if they were going to -- if they have control of it, they can release whatever they want and keep whatever they want. >> reporter: yeah, that's true. also one concern would be that it would potentially mutt these

fbi agents at risk because it would show and reveal the identities of the agents who were there. that was one concern that we saw officials had after you saw the search warrant that was put out that was released. it had the names of fbi agents on there. so that's been a concern as well. one other thing, though, is that when these fbi agents went in to conduct this search, they likely knew where these cameras were placed. "the new york times" and cnn has confirmed they did subpoena surveillance footage from mar-a-lago before this search actually happened. we were told obviously one of those cameras was placed outside the room where these materials were being held. so it's not like they don't know exactly where these cameras were. they had a pretty good idea of it. but whether or not it ultimately comes out remains to be seen. but it does show this debate playing out between the justice department and trump and his attorneys over what should come out, what information should become public, and of course we know the affidavit that led to that search warrant is the next thing that is potentially being

considered before that judge tomorrow. >> yeah. kaitlan collins, appreciate it. stay with us. i want to bring in law enforcement analyst andrew mccabe. also cnn contributor john dean, who has some experience with tapes. andrew, what do you think the reaction within the fbi would be to the release of these surveillance images? >> deep concern. deep concern for a number of reasons. first and foremost, when you're executing a search warrant for the purpose of recovering potentially highly classified material, the last thing you want to have is a video of that material released to the public. that's the entire purpose of the warrant to recover material, get it back into a place that's -- >> so the fbi would actually be concerned about what the camera might pick up? >> exactly, exactly. then, of course, second, and a very close second, i might add, is the increased risk that it will pose to these agents. we already know that the trump camp in mar-a-lago released the documents last week that contain the identities of two agents that were on the scene. i'm sure there were many more than two agents on the search

warrant. probably a dozen or more folks that were there. those folks will now all be added to this group that's been targeted by the president's most extreme supporters and will be subject to the same threats and threats of violence as will their families. >> it's incredible that we're talking about a former president potentially endangering fbi agents. i mean it's remarkable. >> it was unthinkable and with any other former president, but that's where we are. >> from a legal standpoint, is there any way that releasing this footage helps the former president, or is it more from a public relations -- >> not that i can think of. well, i think it's a political effort on their behalf. i can't imagine that it would show the fbi planting or doing anything improper. they know the cameras were operating. so i think that it's really an effort by trump to somehow use that material to try to make himself look like a victim. it's his constant theme of his

grievances. so there's just -- the other thing is you've nailed it. the identification of the agents or the possible editing of the tape could distort the entire search. so there's just no good can come from releasing this. >> kaitlan, is that the reaction that some of the former president's advisers are hoping, that if they are arguing for the release of the footage, that it adds to sort of the indignity, the grievance list that the maga world has? >> the argument we've picked up on from sources is basically they think it could energize people to see these agents actually inside the residence of a former president, which of course is very unusual, and that is something that even attorney general garland himself noted last week when he held that rare moment. they believe that it could help energize his base further than it already has, as you've seen, a lot of republicans come out and criticize the fbi. some of them even the more extreme members saying defund the fbi. they're arguing that this could

show just how rare this it is what trump has claimed this is, which is a politically motivated search. of course we know it was a lawful search warrant that was signed off on by a judge. you even saw pence today arguing about that saying, you can criticize and question the attorney general, but don't criticize the rank and file law enforcement officers for just doing their jobs and carrying it out. of course, that would be their identities that would be revealed potentially if this was releases. but some of the people advocating for the release believe this would be good and would help energize his base and basically give him another round of support that he has seen from republicans to show these fbi agents actually inside his home. >> andrew, what kind of protections does, i mean, an agent whose name is not redacted and is released out into the public -- do they have? >> very little. fbi agents, unlike some other intelligence community agents, fbi abts don't operate undersunder any

sort of cover. they're ready to go into court and take a stand and swear an oath and testify when that is required of them. so they are very exposed. i don't know that any of them ever anticipated they would be exposed in this way and certainly not by a former president. but the idea that he would increase the risk that they face for some sort of political gain is, i'm sure, horrifying to those agents. >> "the new york times" reporting about the justice department getting a subpoena for earlier before the raid for some of the surveillance images, the room where this material was, and there being concern about something they saw. how do you interpret that? >> well, anderson, i would expect that after the meeting in june, the agents were probably aware of the video surveillance, i'm told, outside the room. so surveillance that would indicate who had access to that room. i would expect they reviewed that footage very closely to try to determine every person that

had been into the room during the course of the surveillance they had access to. they may have been concerned about specific individuals they saw accessing that room and therefore having access to that material, or it may just have been a simple matter of volume, an overwhelming number of people going in and out all day is very different than a room that maybe had been described to them as, you know, locked under a special padlock and not accessed by anyone. >> john, could this open the president or his allies up to any kind of legal liability if an attack happened on fbi agents or other federal law enforcement after release of their identities? >> it's possible he's taking in some jeopardy. i'm thinking he's more likely -- while he's seeking a short-term gain, the long term is going to be, i think, harsher on him. one, for doing it, particularly if anything does happen to any of the agents, if it is a clear distortion of what the raid was about and he tries to play that

up, and that will have a long-term negative impact. the base is not the majority, you've got to remember. they're loud, and they're an active minority, but they certainly don't control the entire narrative. so i think short-term thinking, where he thinks he can get one day's headline that's positive for him, si stir the base up a little bit, and he'll be happy with that. as i say, in the long term, i think it's going to be harmful to him. >> thanks so much. appreciate it. coming up next, what we are learning about a plea deal from the man who was for decades the former president's top corporate money man. what alan missalberg is expected to plead guilty to and what he agreed to testify about in the future. and later, congresswoman liz cheney's vow to do anything it takes to keep the former president from being elected again, ahead on 360.

go kick the ball to mommy. hah, you see that? he's a natural. i just need a little bit more. you're making all the difference out there kid. he's america's next big export. no pressure right? pressure, pressure? pressure, pressure, pressure. pressure, pressure. so where do you think this pressure's coming from? everyone. don't look at me. i'm just here for the mints. [ cheering crowd ] so much pressure. pressure makes diamonds. true. pulisic! he scores! incredible! it only takes a second for an everyday item to become dangerous. tide pods child-guard pack

helps keep your laundry pacs in a safe place and your child safer. to close, twisuntil it clicks. tide pods child-guard packaging. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ "shake your thang" by salt n pepa 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. ♪( music: good vibes by moa.l.m.munoz, ryan t, short)♪ ♪ bout to get down, living it up ♪ ♪ never touch ground, never enough ♪ ♪ got me feeling good vibes ♪ ♪ everything's everything's good vibes, good vibes ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ voltaren. the joy of movement. ♪

. big development now in another high-profile case we're following involving the former president. this one involves the manhattan district attorney's office and allen weisselberg, the former longtime chief financial officer of the former president's namesake company. he is expected to plead guilty tomorrow to a 15-year tax fraud scheme. that's according to a source familiar with the matter. the terms of the deal are still being finalized. weisselberg may end up testifying against the company. that's despite the fact that he's not entered into a cooperation agreement with prosecutors. i'm joined now by kara scannell, who has been following it. what exactly is he pleading guilty to, and what does that mean that he's not entering into a cooperating agreement? >> right. so allen weisselberg was indicted last year along with the trump organization, and it was in a 15-count indictment going back 15 years that he was involved in this off-the-books compensation scheme, basically not paying taxes on some corporate benefits he got like a

company apartment, car leases. >> so the trump organization would pay his car lease, would pay school tuition for his grandkids or things like that? >> exactly. and then he wasn't paying income tax on that. so he's going to admit to all of this tomorrow according to sources. he will plead guilty to the entire indictment, and he will -- he's agreed to testify at trial. the trump organization, the corporate entity, no individual, is going to trial in october on these charges. now, they have had testimony from other people. they've had an accountant who was worked with the trump organization who has testified before the grand jury. but this will be a live witness. it will be allen weisselberg, the longtime cfo. he's been with the company for 40 years, going to testify against the company if it gets to trial. >> is it just testifying in this particular scheme against the company, or the company and other things they may have been involved with? >> well, that's the thing here. this is just for his testimony in the tax fraud trial. you know, remember, he got charged with this because prosecutors were trying to put

pressure on him to cooperate in their much broader investigation into the trump organization's finances and whether they misled lenders and insurers. but weisselberg was not willing to cooperate with that investigation. he was indicted a year ago july. he's on the cusp of the trial in october. he just lost some motions to dismiss the indictment. he's now come to terms and said he's going to cooperate with this investigation. and for him, he gets some certainty here because according to this deal, he would serve five months in prison with time off for good behavior. we're looking at 100 days. but these days would be served in rikers island, you know, the notorious new york city jail. but he gets the benefit of not having to go to trial to potentially get convicted, to face anywhere from one to three years in prison to as much as 15 years in a new york state prison. so that's kind of the calculus for him. he gets some certainty. he knows he will serve a limited prison term, and he will offer this cooperation. >> what's next for the criminal investigation in new york?

is that still ongoing? >> well, it's still ongoing, but as you probably remember, the previous district attorney, cy vance, had authorized his prosecutors to move forward with an indictment or to seek an indictment before the grand jury against the former president. the new district attorney, alvin bragg, came in, reviewed the evidence and said he didn't think there was enough there. one of the issues is they didn't have a cooperator, someone like weisselberg who was willing to tell the story behind the numbers. that investigation has slowed down. sources tell me it's still ongoing, but there remains a lot of questions of what could they get that would satisfy the new d.a. that they have enough to bring an indictment when they didn't after already more than three years of investigating. >> kara scannell, appreciate it. joining me now, elliot williams. why would they do a plea agreement with this guy if he wasn't going to cooperate in any criminal trial? >> believe it or not, anderson, going to trial is really a matter of resources and costs

and benefits the prosecutors have to think through. does it make more sense to go to trial and run the risk of losing and spend the resources or guarantee that you get a conviction and someone going to jail? it sounds sort of odd to the layperson. >> it sounds like prosecutors kind of blinked. they decided, well, we'd rather get the conviction than -- >> than nothing, or maybe lose because so much of what would have been on trial here is subjective. now, some of it, you know, there would be financial statements and records and so on. but this question, this is what kara was talking about a little earlier. when we're talking about compensation or tuition being paid, there's a question, well, maybe this might have been actually part of his compensation package. a jury could have been tricked by that or at least been confused enough by it to not get a conviction. >> rudy giuliani testified before a grand jury in georgia. the fact that he has been informed he's a target of this investigation, how does that influence his testimony? >> here's the thing. many people think they can talk their way out of testimony, and maybe -- you know, we've seen

rudy giuliani publicly. maybe he thought he might have been able to save himself by talking. if his lawyers were smart, they probably advised him to just keep his mouth shut because of the tremendous risk of jeopardizing his own rights if he does ultimately get charged with a crime. >> so he could have just pled the fifth during this? >> yeah, and oddly enough that can take five or six hours because every question other than, you know, what's your name, rudy giuliani -- like so for instance, how long has you served as donald trump's lawyer? i plead the fifth because that could come up in a conspiracy trial. every possible fact. so hour after hour. proper again, it seems odd, and it can take an entire day of doing that. we saw that with the president quite recently. >> there is a federal hearing tomorrow in florida regarding the unsealing of the affidavit that was used to get the search warrant of mar-a-lago. we should point out cnn and other news organizations have been pushing to try to get it

actually released. the justice department obviously does not want it released. what's the likelihood that it would get released? >> i would say highly, highly, highly unlikely that it would get released because, number one, you want to protect the rights of innocent people, protect your evidence, protect your agents and the work they're doing. usually courts defer to prosecutors when they say we will jeopardize our case if this becomes public. the judge would have to supersede that in effect and say you know what, justice, you don't know what's best for your own cases and the fact that there are innocent people here. you know what, there's enough public interest here, let's make it public. >> could the judge rule they would redact any agents' names, any witness names? >> if they redact this document, anderson, it's basically going to be a search on whatever date, august 5th or whatever, black box for five pages, 20 pages. >> elliot williams, appreciate it. coming up, we're going to

explo explore the future of liz cheney. and later we'll be joined by doris kearns goodwin to discuss cheney's fate and democracy's fate as well.. or... his nose. listen, i'm done settling. because this is my secret. i put it on once, no more touch ups! secret hadh balancing minerals; and it helps eliminate odor, instead of just masking it. so pull it in close. secret works. vo: as families struggle with inflation- congress and president biden are doing something about it. congress just passed the inflation reduction act, reducing costs for millions of families. it lowers the cost of drugs and ramps up production of american-made clean energy. that means lower energy bills for families jobs for our communities and the boldest plan to take on climate change we've ever seen. the inflation reduction act will

“bring relief to millions of people” congress just got it done. if you wake up thinking about the market and want to make the right moves fast... get decision tech from fidelity. [ cellphone vibrates ] you'll get proactive alerts for market events before they happen... and insights on every buy and sell decision. with zero-commission online u.s. stock and etf trades. for smarter trading decisions, get decision tech from fidelity. everyone gets a free new samsung galaxy z flip4 with a galaxy trade-in. any year. any condition. really? even if my old phone looks like this? *gasps* dude why? *gasps* how could you? it's okay people. i've trained for this. it's not complicated. new and existing customers get a free galaxy z flip4 with a galaxy trade-in.

any year. any condition. wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities.

as we reported before the votes came in last night, wyoming congresswoman liz cheney was planning her political future, win or lose. the votes certainly came in, and she certainly lost badly to a candidate backed by the former

president. as you might expect, he managed to get in his share of gloating. as for the congresswoman, she vowed to be part of a broad coalition to keep the former president away from the oval office. now, when asked this morning whether that included actually running for president, here's what she told nbc's savannah guthrie. >> you didn't say yes or no, and that's fine if you're thinking about it. but are you thinking about it? are you thinking about running for president? >> it -- that's a decision that i'm going to make in the coming months, savannah. i'm not going to make any announcements here this morning. but it is something that i'm thinking about, and i'll make a decision in the coming months. >> so that said, the question is who might support her? also, would it even take votes away from the former president, which certainly would seem to be her objective. for insight, we turn as always to harry enten. put congresswoman cheney's loss in perspective. >> the last time we were here in which someone who voted to impeach trump lost in an historic way, i went back to the

beginning of the century. i'm dug deeper in the data sets and what do we see? liz cheney lost by the second widest margin of any house incumbent in the last 60 years. losing by 37.4 points, this is just not anything i've basically ever heard of except for one election in 2010. this is like nuts. i mean that's really it. i don't know any way to say it than this is just not anything that i'm used to. >> especially considering how well she had done previously. she won with -- >> 70-plus percent of the vote. she clearly did something very, very wrong in the voters' minds. >> cheney says she'll make a decision about 2024 in the coming months. outside of wyoming, how do americans view her? >> i don't really understand this whole idea that she's going through. you know, i guess she has to do something now. look at her favorable rating nationally among all voters. you know, well south of 50%. you look among republicans, where is it? it's 13%. independents, well south of 50%. she does have a base, though. it's democrats. that's where her favorable

rating is above 50%. but the idea you might be able to stop donald trump in a republican primary when your favorable rating is just 13% doesn't make any sense to me. >> the question is does she really think that or does she just want to get on the debate stage and try to tear him down a little? >> to me, if that is her idea, she is basically persona non grata among republicans. if anything, if she took trump on, it might make trump more popular. >> why do you think she faces such an uphill battle? >> i mean she's basically this unicorn, right? you know, think of how many people you know who -- >> a principled person. >> a principled person may be a unicorn in our society these days. think of people who are both pro-life and also believe that biden legitimately won the election. what percentage do they total up of the population? they total just 13% of all voters. >> what if she were to run as a third party or independent candidate? >> third party candidates just don't really work in this

country. you have to go all the way back to ross perot, right. you just look since the beginning of the century, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020. look at the top third party candidate. back in 2016, gary johnson is going to do so well because hillary clinton and donald trump are the two least liked national candidates of all time for major party nominees, and he got 3% of the vote. it just doesn't work. i don't understand this. >> if her goal is to defeat the former president, running as an independent might take votes away. >> it might take votes away from biden. this equation doesn't make sense when i run it on my statistical software. we're going to run a little python maybe. >> you can put that in your wallet. this is harry enten's wallet. it's the biggest wallet in the world. >> you take a bite out of it here. there's more cow here than in your burger. >> thank you very much.

joining us, alyssa farah griffin, also david urban. alyssa, what do you think congresswoman cheney's lane would like like in the short term and potentially in 2024? >> well, i don't disagree with any of harry's analysis. i just want to be unequivocal about one thing. liz cheney lost for one reason and one reason only, that she denied the election milth, the lie that the election was stolen. she could have held that congressional seat comfortably for the rest of her life. but what her lane is this, and i do think harry is right about this. if she runs in 2024, she's not running to be president, though she would be a decent general election candidate. she would be running to a spoiler to donald trump, to juxtapose on a debate stage while he goes off spreading lies, spreading conspiracies, showing what a principled, conservative woman looks like and what our american values should be. i think it's powerful.

i think she resonates with women. i think we'll see more polling in the coming months ahead that she's actually a formidable, inspiring figure. but she'd be running to be a spoiler. >> david urban, obviously 2024 is a long way off but not that long way off. do you think liz cheney would be an effective spoiler against the former president? >> anderson, i think today is liz cheney's high watermark. when her father left office, he left with 17% favorability. so i noted from harry's polls that she's slightly more favorable. let's face reality. when you're looking at running in a presidential primary for, let's say, either on the republican or democratic ticket, there are major obstacles along the way to get to the end goal, right? so each state has really tough requirements getting on the ballot if each state, let alone getting on a debate stage, right? if you remember the last republican primary, all the candidates had to sign a pledge

saying they would in fact support the eventual nominee at the end. i can never see liz cheney signing that pledge. if her goal is to defeat donald trump, she'll never make it to the stage with donald trump. ronna mcdaniel and the rnc will ensure that liz cheney is not even in the same state when there's a presidential debate taking place. today is her high watermark. >> david urban's right about this. the rnc will definitely rig this coming election against anyone who wants to oppose sort of the direction it's heading in terms of promoting election fraud and election lies. i would say this. she's got a few things in her favor that matter a ton. money, name i.d., and extraordinary favorability with women. i don't have the polls in front of me but i promise you in the coming months, you're going to see among women on either side of the aisle, they see her someone who stood against the men and did the right thing. and that's incredibly powerful. >> i just -- i disagree. i don't see a lane forward for her in even the most favorable,

favorable of years, there's not a lane forward for liz cheney. she happens not to be a very good retail campaigner. she's more of a policy wonk and a people person. she doesn't like pressing the flesh. if you know anything about iowa politics, iowa caucuses and new hampshire, it is intensive retail politics. people in iowa would expect to meet you two, three, four, five times before they decide on you as a candidate. liz cheney is just not that person. >> alyssa, if it's not a presidential run or, you know, even not a wholehearted presidential run thinking she'd actually win but just wanting to try to, you know, stop the former president, what other lane would there be? i mean there's really none unless she's running for something, right? >> well, listen, i think running for office is something she should consider surely for that juxtaposition. but if not that, she's going to be a formidable voice for the country. i will say this.

you know this, anderson. our politics are cyclical. there is going to be a time in the near future that donald trump is not the overwhelming force in our country, and i think our politics are going to course-correct where people are tired of conspiracy theories. they're tired of lies and they're frankly tired of electing lunatics, like the woman harriet hageman who beat her. and i think that's the moment when liz cheney who did the right thing and said the right thing could be a formidable force in the future. i don't think she's going anywhere. i find her deeply inspiring. i know many women do. i think that's a lane and it's a power that she has behind her. >> david, the congresswoman cheney was asked on the "today" show this morning about the ongoing battle in the republican party or for the soul of the republican party. i just want to play what she said. >> i think the republican party today is in very bad shape, and i think that we have a tremendous amount of work to do. i think it could take several election cycles.

but the country has got to have a republican party that's actually based on substance, based on principles, you know, based on a belief in limited government and low taxes and a strong national defense, a believe that the family has got to be the center of our community and of our lives. and those are the principles i believe in. that's what the party used to stand for, and we've got to get the party back to that. >> david, do you think her vision for the party is realistic? >> listen, anderson, i'm not sure it's not there currently. unfortunately, everybody sees the party through the lens of donald trump. i believe most republicans still believe in those core values that liz cheney just articulated. i think that they just see donald trump as the best person for them battling for those values. that's what i see, and as i talk to people across the united states, pennsylvania, florida, other places i travel, they see him as the best standard bearer for fighting for those values. those values -- they believe in

all those values, anderson. they just think that trump is currently best suited to fight for them in these particular instances. >> alyssa, the final thought, and then we've got to go. >> listen, when elected leaders lie to the general public and 60% of americans think that the election was stolen, that's going to have an effect. those are the values the republican party should be for, but it's not what they're electing. harriet hageman accused joe biden of being the biggest human trafficker in america. is that really the kind of person republicans want representing them? no. >> appreciate it. thanks so much. coming up, pulitzer prize winning historian doris kearns goodwin to talk about the future of congresswoman cheney, her party, and this country. ♪ ♪ the thing that's different about a vrbo vacation home.

you always have the whole placto yourself. no strangeat the dinner table making things awkward. or in another room taking up space. it's just you and your people. because why would you ever share your vacation home with someone you wouldn't share your vacation with. ♪ ♪ 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. republicans in congress call them "entitlements." a "ponzi scheme." the women and men i served with in combat, we earned our benefits. just like people earned their social security and medicare benefits. but republicans in congress have a plan to end so-called "entitlements" in just five years. social security, medicare, even veterans benefits.

go online and read the republican plan for yourself. joe biden is fighting to protect social security, medicare and veterans benefits. call joe biden and tell him to keep fighting for our benefits. do you want some more? wait till you see me on the downhill. see you at home. enjoy advanced safety at the lexus golden opportunity sales event.

between two initiatives on sports betting. prop 27 generates hundreds of millions every year to permanently fund getting people off the streets a prop 26? not a dime to solve homelessness prop 27 has strong protections to prevent minors from betting.

prop 26? no protections for minors. prop 27 helps every tribe, including disadvantaged tribes. prop 26? nothing for disadvantaged tribes vote yes on 27. during her speech last night, congresswoman cheney drew comparison between her election loss and those of abraham lincoln before he became president. >> the great and original champion of our party, abraham lincoln, was defeated in elections for the senate and the house before he won the most important election of all. lincoln ultimately prevailed. he saved our union, and he defined our obligation as americans for all of history. >> the congresswoman then quoted

a passage from one of lincoln's and the country's most famous speeches, the gettysburg address. she spoke of the great task remaining, that the government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from this earth. doris kearns goodwin is the author of leadership in turbulent times. doris, it is great to have you back on the program. thanks so much for being here. where does it say about where we are that a congresswoman standing up on principle for her beliefs and for truth and facts about the election not being stolen is overwhelmingly voted out of office? >> well, you know, i think she can take solace from lincoln because as she pointed out, he was defeated in 1858 in the senate race. but what he said at the time, i think, is really important.

he said, don't worry about me to his supporters. i'm not disheartened. i've made a hearing on the most durable issue of the day, and that will be remembered long after i'm gone. so there's a sense that where are the people right now that are willing to take, as you suggest, a principled stand even if they're going to lose? and then the other great example that lincoln can provide is in 1864, he was told in the summer of 1864 by the republican bigwigs, there's no way you're going to win that election in november. you're going to lose unless you're willing to compromise on slavery, not insist on the emancipation proclamation, just have the union restored. and he said, i would be damned in time and eternity if i turned my back on the black soldiers. he was willing to lose that election. but then what happens? everything changes. the mood of the north changes when atlanta falls. there are victories in the fall, and he's able to win that election with both the union and emancipation. so who knows what the future is going to bring? we're just talking about 2024. there's the assumption that it

will be trump there. maybe it won't. but at least she's got renown. she's done something worthy, and i wish more of our politicians would think about their future and how it will remember them than winning one stupid election again. >> i spoke to tim alberta from "the atlantic" last night, who wrote, quote, this country is tracking toward a scale of political violence not seen since the civil war. it's evident anyone who spent significant time dwelling in the physical or or virtual spaces of the american right. i know you've resisted the idea that the u.s. could be heading toward a civil war. i'm wondering do you still feel that way? >> well, you know, people keep asking me are these the worst of times, and i keep trying to say, no, no. we've been through the civil war. we've been through the great depression, the early days of world war ii. but it prompted me to look back at a timetable of the 1850s, and it does prove pretty chilling. i mean you have so many echos, i think, of what we're sieeing

today. you have a partisan press. people only read the press of the people they liked. you had people who were not speaking the same language. the same event was interpreted in a different way. you had people from different sections who regarded themselves as the other rather than common american citizens. most importantly, when lincoln was elected and after the civil war started, what he said was that one of the central ideas they were fighting beyond the expansion of slavery was the idea that if you have a democracy and if you have one party, in that case, the democratic southern party, willing to break up the union simply because they lost an election and they won't accept that loss, then democracy will prove an absurdity and then ordinary people can't govern themselves. so that's where we are now. it's still incredible to me that people can say that the truth is on one side and we're fighting the truth. the truth is that election was not stolen, and if we fight about the fundamentals of that, then the trust in institutions is gone, and the basis of democracy. but we still have the chance to fight that.

the other chapters of our history still can be written, and that's what i've got to keep believing. that's where the optimism comes from. >> it's so infuriating because we have more information now at our fingertips than they had in the 1850s, and you could understand why people just reading the newspapers that, you know, spoke to them would feel one way. but now there's no excuse for people going down these rabbit holes of fantasy and conspiracy. i spoke to you on january 8th of 2021, two days after the insurrection. you said that in 100 years from now, people will say that we suffered one of the worst crises we've ever been through, and you hope people will be stunned that it even happened. given what we've seen in the year and a half since then, do you still think that, that people looking back in 100 years will be stunned by what happened? >> i certainly hope so, but it gets more scary. i mean when i talked to you that last time, i was certain that it would be regarded as an aberration, and there were hope in those early days after the

attack on the capitol. you had mitch mcconnell talk about the fact that president trump was practically, he said, and morally responsible for what happened. kevin mccarthy said that he was responsible for what happened. and then all of a sudden, things changed, and you have breaking news, and we're forgetting about january 6th. i've taken some sense of comfort in the january 6th hearings, which have proved, it seems to be, beyond a reasonable doubt that there was responsibility, that the election was fair, and that there is a responsibility for what the president did in terms of actually stimulating the mob. and we were beginning to make, i think, breakthroughs. "the wall street journal" editorial against it, and now everything's turned around of course because of the search warrant. but i think that truth will out in the long run. >> you just returned from normandy, i understand. you heard on the omaha and utah beaches where allied soldiers, incredible courage, charging into the fire against the german forces on d-day.

those allied soldiers were obviously making sacrifices for something bigger than themselves. what do you think standing there, what lessons can be applied? >> oh, i'll tell you, anderson, when i stood there and i just thought about those soldiers and what they were willing to sacrifice for honor, for duty, for freedom, for fighting against a fascist, nazi country, that was the greatest threat to western civilization, and now that very democracy is at issue. and where are the people willing to sacrifice for that? we've got to hope that this next generation coming along will have those goals in mind, will have a sense of language and words that mean something. when i was there, when they were quoting churchill, of course, and churchill was able to arm the army with the power of words, you know. and eisenhower giving the order of the day to those d-day troopers, saying you're about to embark on a great crusade, the eyes of the world are upon you.

we've just got to hope that somehow along the line, when you remember those moments in time, it will give you a sense of pushing ahead that this is our fight that has to be fought. this is absolutely true. it's not an exaggeration that when an election is not accepted, peaceful transition of power is not accepted, that democracy is at issue. but it's our democracy, it's us, and we have to fight for it. and i feel more in need of fighting for it now than i did right after january 6th. >> doris kearns goodwin, bless you. i'm so happy to talk to you tonight. yeah, it's -- you give me hope. thank you. >> i hope so. thank you. >> all right. i wish you the best. coming up, western states facing mandatory water cuts due to the drought-stricken colorado river. we'll have a live report from bill weir at lake mead next. d e and plan membeber, to back me up. you're not my y wife. no, i just stand in for her on set during the boring stuff. the boring stuff? are you kidding, i'm announcing

a family plan where just two lines gets everyone the $15 price. i'm literally revolutionizing the category! yeah, she owes me huge for this one. can you please let her know i'm upset? really? no. don't tell her i said that.

♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪ you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on your discover card. lysol is donating 28 million wipes to schools in need, so they can kill 99.9% of viruses and bacteria. keeping kids together here, at places like the lunch table. where they can share who they truly are.

chicken nugget man. because when kids are together, they thrive. lysol. here for healthy schools. 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. nevada and arizona are

cutting water usage from the shrinking colorado river. lake mead is 25 miles from the las vegas strip, and it provides water to millions of people. right now it's at only 27% capacity. cnn's bill weir is there for us tonight. walk us through how low these water levels are. >> reporter: it's so staggering. even if you haven't been out here in a couple of years, anderson, to see how far it's gone back. this was the water line in 2008. this is where that marina that's way in the distance was back then. it's a long walk to the top of the hill up there, is where the drought started in the year 2000. it has fallen down. as you said, it's at 27% capacity. lake powell, a little bit upstream, not much better off. as a result it's just been going down and down, triggering these agreed-upon new cutbacks here. they got some monsoon rains recently, you might have seen the flooding at the imperial palace in vegas, that was enough to raise the water levels here

19 inches, but it's still 25 feet lower than it was at this point last year. we're getting dangerously close to deadpool here, anderson. you can't send any water downstream, it wouldn't generate any power. it would have huge economic implications. the mission in the year term is to try to save the system in the next couple of years. and to talk about the infrastructure projects we'll need to keep people alive in this new world. >> how are officials trying to cut water usage? >> reporter: that's some encouragement not to water in the middle of the day. maybe think about tearing up your lawn. but that doesn't go nearly far enough. governor newsom in california asked for voluntary cutbacks, they went nowhere near what they needed. water managers of the states are frustrated, they were hoping the bureau of reclamation, the feds, would come in and be the tough parent and say, no, we're going to cut this by a couple of

million water-feet. they couldn't agree, now they're frustrated. nobody knows what to do. in the meantime, the water is evaporating and the lakes get lower and lower. >> they've also discovered human remains, what's the latest on that? >> reporter: yeah, just this week, it was the fifth report of human remains. right on the swim beach, right in this area here. they're not sure if these were bones from another body that had been found earlier. but this is another gruesome discovery here. they found a body in a barrel with a bullet wound in the head that they believe was a mob hit from the late '70s, early '80s, as well. they've found boats from world war ii era that sank here as well. this was all desert until we decided to build hoover dam and try to control the flow of all that snowpack melting. and it's created 40 million, you know, society for 40 million people, from albuquerque to san

diego. but the old way of thinking, that this is a land of abundance and you can use as much water as you want forever, those days are sadly over. the emergency level is higher than people even realize yet. >> it's stunning to see how far it is. we appreciate it. we'll be right back. ♪(music: dance! by christian a medice, elisha noll)♪ ♪ are you ready? ♪ ♪ ahh yeah ♪ ♪ you're going out tonight ♪ ♪ dance ♪ ♪ get with the groo and ♪ ♪ dance ♪ ♪ get up and move let's ♪ ♪ ♪ kick off your shoes a ♪ ♪ show me how you ♪ ♪ dance ♪ 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. so we need something super disctintive. dad's work, meet daughter's playtime. wait 'till you hear this— thankfully, meta portal helps reduce background noise. zero lace model. adjusts to low light. and pans and zooms to keep you in frame. take a look at this. so the whole team stays on track. okay, let's get you some feedback. i'm impressed. great, loving your work. meta portal. the smart video calling device that makes work from home, work for you. this...

is the planning effect. this is how it feels to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. this is what it's like to have a comprehensive wealth plan with tax-smart investing strategies designed to help you keep more of what you earn. and set aside more for things like healthcare, or whatever comes down the road. this is "the planning effect" from fidelity. i wish that shaq was my real life big brother. what's up, little bro? turns out, some wishes do come true. and it turns out the general is a quality insurance company that's been saving people money for nearly 60 years. for a great low rate, and nearly 60 years of quality coverage- go with the general. the citi custom cash℠ card automatically adjusts to earn you more cash back in your top eligible spend category. hi. ♪ you don't have to keep tabs on rotating categories... this is the only rotating i care about. ... or activate anything to earn. your cash back automatically adjusts for you. can i get a cucumber water?

earn 5% cash back that automatically adjusts to your top eligible spend category, up to $500 spent each billing cycle with the citi custom cash℠ card. i love it... [voice vibrating] the news continues. let's hand it over to alisyn camerota and