today. they can help you get started with your idea. call now 800-710-0020. >> excuses, excuses. smart maddock, voting technology technology that suing proxies were lies about the 2020 election is now putting rudy giuliani on blast they say, to avoid turning over, documents. in a new court filing, smartmatic said, quote, the dog ate my homework. since the dawn of time, people made up excuses to avoid doing things they don't want to do. this is exactly what giuliani has done here. we should note, cnn reached out to giuliani's attorney for comment. we have not yet heard back. thank you so much for joining me tonight. cnn prime time with laura coates starts right now. >> let's to see you, kaitlan. always a great show. everyone, good evening, i'm

laura coates. thank you all for joining me. we've got a big show for you tonight with a notable lineup among those joining me, chris wallace, rod begovich, the governor who was freed by donald trump in a sentence, a d.c. democrat that will be important to us calling on the national guard to bring order to the city. we will have a talk on the sexism and racism surrounding a wrappers sentencing. jillian michaels from the biggest loser will weigh in on all of these weight loss drugs. first, everyone, there is breaking news out of ohio tonight. a special election turned into a litmus test on abortion rights, in a post-roe v. wade america. the votes are being counted, and cnn's jeff zeleny is following it all for us right now. jeff, it is a win, it looks like, and a big one, for abortion rights advocates. >> laura, this was a fascinating summertime election that republican leaders who scheduled it had hoped it went

under the radar. it did not do that. this became a full-on campaign, a full-on fight over abortion rights, democracy, and more. voters, according to our projection, our resoundingly rejecting the efforts to make it more difficult to change the states constitution. what this was was a two-step process, the election today in ohio would have raised the threshold to make it more difficult for ballot questions like the one on abortion rights in november to pass. ohioans voted no by a strong majority, at least according to three quarters of the vote that has been already counted. at this victory party here tonight, supporters have this to say to ohioans. >> ohio, we did it! we did it. [applause]

>> tonight is a major victory for democracy in ohio. the majority still rules in ohio. [applause] the peoples power has been preserved. >> so, the campaign now, for that november ballot question on enshrining the protection of abortion rights into the state constitution begins anew. this certainly is a sign of where that could be going. a simple majority, 50% plus one, will be all it takes to support that. laura, what we are seeing, a summer after that kansas vote really shocked the nation in the wake of the supreme court overturning roe v. wade, we are seeing a pattern. a pattern in kentucky, in montana, in michigan, and an ohio, which is why republican leaders wanted to make it more difficult to change the states

constitution. those efforts were rejected today in ohio. certainly, another landmark decision in the post-dobbs decision world here. again, the beginning of a new campaign starts tomorrow to enshrining abortion rights protection in november. laura, as you know, in ohio, a classic battleground state, it leans red, this certainly will be a difficult campaign on both sides, considerable investments of time and money pouring into this state on this issue. laura? >> it's been a microscope and a magnifying glass over ohio for quite some time, not the least of which remember when the then ten year old girl from ohio was seeking to have an abortion, and was refused care, and had to go to a neighboring state. this issue has been long coming. i've got to tell you, all the energy behind you, and the sounds? it is giving off primary, and maybe general election energy over there. jeff zeleny, we will see what happens going forward. also, more news just in, everyone, as donald trump already faces, and you have counted them, three

indictments. cnn is now reporting that, down in georgia, fulton county d.a., funny will, as is likely to present her case to the grand jury next week. the atlanta-based prosecutor has been lining up witnesses in the investigation of donald trump, and of course, his allies, who are trying to overturn election results in georgia, allegedly. this comes as the judge overseeing the federal indictment is refusing to grant trump's request to push back a hearing on the evidence. his lawyers, of course, you look at that calendar right now, they are complaining that their schedule, frankly, is just a little bit too busy, as you can see by those red circles on that calendar. it hasn't stopped trump from intensifying his attacks. there is, apparently, time for that. everyone from the judge to, well, the prosecutors. >> i am sorry, i won't be able to go to iowa today. i want to be able to go to new hampshire today because i am sitting in a courtroom on bs because his attorney general

charged me with something. joining me now, one of trump's surrogates, a former illinois governor, ron begovich. he had his 14 year sentence, and he paid for conviction commuted by the former president of the united states. i am glad you are here. i am adjusted, particularly, and your insight on these matters in particular. let me ask you, i do wonder, and i mentioned, obviously, the commutation of your sentence. in fact, you are supposed to be released, or eligible for parole next year, in 2024, the presidential election year. it is the reason why you are speaking out because of what he did for you then? >> well, thank you, laura for saying you are glad i am here. i'm glad i'm here because president trump committed my sentence. i didn't break a law, cross the line, or take a penny. it was politics, routine political talk. i am here because president trump -- i have a debt of gratitude to him on a personal level, that is for certain. i am here as an american.

what they are doing to president trump, a republican president at the major league level, they successfully did to me, a democrat governor, at the aaa level. they hijack me from office on things that weren't crimes, all talk, free speech, political conversations that were started by then president elect obama. he didn't do anything wrong. neither did i. they came after me, they were determined to get me, they couldn't convict me out a first trial, they try to be a second time, and lay blatantly used and a lawful standard, a standard that supreme court expressed was not the law to convict me on fundraising requests, and so-called sale of the senate seat, which i am known for, it was reversed by the appellate court. they called it nothing more than routine political log rolling. >> i do hear you -- i don't want to cut you off, but i want to be clear, and i understand, obviously, the desire to discuss your own personal case, a jury did convict, if there was an appellate process, the supreme court declined to step in, or interviewing for the five, i believe, 18. i don't want to re-litigate your case because the jury did speak. frankly, the charges against donald trump are quite

distinct. let me focus on what is happening there. i know you have made the comment that it seems to be a kind of political persecution, that it is not actually a crime. what aspect of it do you think, not to be judged by a jury? >> to begin with, i don't think president trump has any chance at a fair trial in washington, d.c., where he received 5% of the vote, and the jury pool. 95% of the jury pool voted the other way. to begin with, he is facing what is unlikely to be a fair trial, and could very well end up having the same fate as me. -- >> should that be the litmus test, how the jury or demographics of an area are voting politically when they are supposed to be voting, or making a finding in terms of verdict? really, the average defendant, as you will know, is not going to be a political candidate, let alone a presidential candidate. how are we to judge the objectivity and impartiality of a jury there? >> the old me, before, what they did to me, happened, i

used to trust the system. now i don't. governments lie. governments, our government lied to us about vietnam, about the iraq war, they lied about me, and they are lying about president trump. these are not crimes that they've charged him with. you don't like trump? vote against him. it is understandable that a lot of people would not like him, democrats in particular. there is new weaponization of politics, of criminal prosecutors engaging in a political process while trump, now, is in the crosshairs of what they are doing. it is really the american people, all of us, democrats and republicans, who are in the crosshairs, because they are stealing from us, our right to choose our leaders and election, free and fair, our right to self government. these weaponized prosecutors have uncontrolled power, and it was a democrat supreme court justice, breyer, who said in the governor mcdonald case that jack smith, himself, prosecuted, i did nothing in the reversal -- just as briar said, the danger of these uncontrolled prosecutors are a threat to our separation of powers. that is what is at stake here. >> i hear that, but i want to pack a couple things here.

one, of course, it is interesting to think about the notion that you make the assertion this would be stealing from a person's ability to choose their candidate of choice. that is part of what they are accusing. again, i'm a former prosecutor, so they have to prove their case in court, as you well know, and a jury as they want to make the ultimate determination. we are talking about somebody who believes in that process still. it's interesting to think about, if that is the goal, to have the voters, ultimately, decide, what is being alleged, of course, is they are trying -- he is trying an attempt of a conspiracy, obstruction, and beyond, trying to take away and neutralize the impact of the votes, and, of course, certification. on this point of the notion of special counsel jack smith, i have heard a lot of conversation with respect to the weaponization. for the audiences and-ification, as you well know, the mcconnell case came down to -- virginia governor, came down to the official act, and whether

they met the requirement and during instructions. let me ask you, do you think there is evidence right now to suggest that jack smith's, either politically motivated, or weaponizing the department of justice, in cahoots with merrick garland? >> i don't know whether about he is doing that in cahoots with merrick garland, but i think he is weaponizing and politicizing, and he is being dishonest. he could very well be guilty of fraud. in his indictment, he claims president trump, -- he doesn't quote president trump accurately, when president trump was there on january the 6th, he said, quote, peacefully patriotically have your voices heard. in the indictment itself, jack smith omits that. that omission is a significant thing. i would suggest that is fraud on the people, and fraud on the court system. he should be the one who should answer to some of these things. this prosecutor, jack smith, is a serial weaponize or of politics. he did it to democrat senator edwards. edwards was given a hung jury.

he didn't to senator menendez, a democrat from new jersey, my former colleague. we are both democratic congressman together. the judge, he had an honest judge, the judge threw the case out for insufficient evidence. my job should have done that. they were republicans. it was a republican prosecutor, bush appointed, republican judge, republican appellate court, and they did a political hit on the democratic governor, but -- >> again -- >> republican president. >> again -- >> yes. >> i want to refocus the conversation. again, i understand the tendency to, perhaps, reject during the conversation about what do you believe was done to you. in terms of what donald trump is being accused of doing, and the prosecutor in this case is not the prosecutor that was involved in your prosecution, number one, and number two, just to clarify, you do not believe -- you do not have evidence that there is actual weaponization, it is just that it is being intimated at this point because of a perception of the politics of those who are in office. is that right? >> i have a strong belief that

jack smith is weaponizing because of my own personal experience, and what i went through. i draw on that experience. that's why i talk so much about it. i loved it myself, i saw it. look, under jackson it's standard, i would be guilty because i believed allen gore won the election in 2000. i go back to prison because of him, that is the standard he is using against president. trump you know who would join me? jerry nadler, adam schiff, and probably nancy pelosi. i remember her thinking gore had won the election, i still think gore won that election. that is not a crime. that is a belief, that is free speech, that is what is under assault today by this guy. i am sorry -- >> i didn't mean to cut you off, excuse -- me >> my fault. >> i am certainly somebody who believes in a respectful, reciprocal conversation. it's a conversation, i've invited you here. i want to hear from you, i just want to make sure we don't talk over each other. what you suggest, and the idea of, had you just questioned whether or not allegra won, i will play a bite without analogy, the tournament goes beyond that. the indictment alleges -- again, i use the word allege for a specific reason, it

alleges far more than just the thinking. in fact, one of the paragraphs does talk about the right to contest, challenge, go to court on these matters. it's the conspire, that last word they are alleging. it seems the allegations are far more than just saying, i believe i won. they are focusing on far more than what happened in january 6th. you are a former governor. let's talk about your personal experience. imagine if the allegations had been involved, and yet you are the governor to receive the conversation, or receive the statements, the pressure campaigns that were mounted. what would you have thought, as a sitting governor, at that time? >> if president trump called me, and was pressing me, is that what you're asking? >> yes, or any president, by the way, via trump at the time, or any president, had they pressed you and said, either the equivalent of, i want you to find a number of votes, or a discussion about a false slate

of electors emerging from your state. what would have been your response as a sitting governor? >> sure. let's say hillary clinton, hypothetically, called me, and i was the governor of illinois. she said, james comey interfered in this election two weeks before, and talked about a new investigation against me, which very well may have led to her losing that election. that's a she called me and said, can you find some votes in illinois that may not have been counted, or whatever the case may be, i would think she was looking at it politically. she felt she had been cheated. she had reason to think that because james comey, another one of these weaponized fbi justice department people, injected himself in that race. you guys are angry trump is the president. blame james comey. a good way have been the reason she. lost was a, hypothetically, she called me, i'd accept that. i understand that she is angry, feels cheated, and believed she actually won when she didn't. that is pretty much the worst of it on trump. he truly believed he won.

he was looking to get it rectified. that is free speech, that is america. what these people are doing is russia. i am telling you, abraham lincoln is growing in his grave, and the ghost of joseph stalin is dancing in the streets with what these weaponized prosecutors are doing to our political system. they did it to me, a democrat, john edwards, a democrat, did it tremendous, a democrat, it sounds like there is no criteria on which a prosecutor can ever go and prosecute an investigation, as long as somebody is -- that capitalist test on these matters. i find the conversation far more expansive, but let me just say when it comes to the rolling of the graves and the dancing in the street, i get the impression that the anger is directed at what happened lead up to january six, far more than just the notion of what is political speech. but, as you know, the criminal intent and ones mens rhea, as they say, is whether you intended to actually commit the

crime, not whether you believe the underlying crime premise. it was not speaking to you. >> it's nice meeting you laura, thank you very much. >> up next everyone, the debate stage for republicans is growing. chris wallace is going to join me on that. and ron desantis is firing, yes, firing his campaign manager. plus a democrat in d.c. that is calling on the national guard to intervene as crime is skyrocketing in the nation's capital. and, the artist and rapper megan thee stallion faced sexist and massage minister attacks for reporting a shooting where she is the victim. now the shooter learns his face. we will discuss. ♪ a beach house, a treehouse, ♪ ♪ honesestly i don't care ♪ find the perfect vacation rental for you booking.com, booking. yeah. like ours is spoiling their dogs.

good, re food is simple. it looks like fo, it smells likeood, it's what do are supposed to be eating. no livg being should ever eat processed food for every single meal of their life. it's amazing to me how many people write in about their dogs changing for the better. the farmer's dog is just our way to help people take care of them. ♪ here's how tommy lost 30 lbs on noom weight. i'm tom. noom helped him use psychology to lose weight.

the mindful aspect made me feel more conscious about what i was eating and why i was eating it. it's actually working. lose weight and make it last with noom weight.

i see irritated gums and weak enamel. sensodyne sensitivity gum & enamel relieves sensitivity,

helps restore gum health, and rehardens enamel. i'm a big advocate of recommending things that i know work. so, the debate stage is growing and, as you know, the rules, while, they are set. all admirable the rivals get ready to convince voters that they are the better choice than donald trump. former vice president mike pence finally now meeting requirements to join on that stage as his former boss is railing against him. meanwhile, isa hutchinson and francis suarez are one requirement away from qualifying for the debate and if they do, it would then make ten candidates eligible, with horizontal trump still teasing about whether he will be number 11. today, fox is revealing the rules, everyone. pretty standard, we're talking

about two hours, an hour less than the oppenheimer movie by the way. no opening statements, one minute for answers, good luck with that. 30 seconds for followups, and some questions will involve sound or maybe video. joining me now is chris wallace, host of who's talking to chris wallace?. and today it is me and chris, it's always good to see you. i'm sure that you have seen by now that the former vice president, mike pence, his campaign has now announced that he has in fact reached that donor threshold for the now first debate coming later this month in milwaukee, which means, of course, that this stage is going to have yet another person on it. it will be ever more crowded. but the question that everyone is really asking is, will there be one additional person in the name of the big elephant in the room or maybe not in the room, that is donald trump. will he show up? >> i don't know. if i had to bet the farm on it i would say probably 55, 45

that he won't show up. not that it has anything to do with pence or one more podium on the stage, but he is so far ahead that i think he really wants to make that statement i don't need you, you guys need me. he might like to stick it to fox news a little bit as well. going against that, it's going to be a big audience in any case, it won't be as big without him, but millions of people, it is awfully hard for donald trump to give up. just say i'm not going to show up when there are millions of people watching. >> i mean, they do say that it is very enticing to have that crowded for somebody like him. but then again, maybe the rising tide will lift all votes and he does not want that. the idea of the appeal and all the focus, he feels as though he doesn't want to give that oxygen back. but desantis and pence have both been sharpening their critiques and criticism of how

he has been, from the january 6th, and beyond, by the way. meanwhile you've got the candidates like the ramaswamy who are very much defending him. i'm wondering from your perspective, what are the matchups when they get to that stage? who is the person, even if trump is not there, who are you watching to see, essentially, really debate on that stage? >> it is a big difference whether trump is there or not there. if he is there the thing i would be fascinated by is the idea of mike pence and donald trump sharing a stage. certainly in the history of televised debates, perhaps of all presidential debates, you have never had a former president and his former vice president on the same stage. that would be just fascinating to watch. and also the whole question of what happened on january 6th is at the very heart of the new indictment, the third indictment against trump.

i'm sure the moderators will be asking trump and pence what went down, how much pressure did you put on him, were you telling him just to delay, or were you telling him to throw back the votes, was it just a suggestion or was it to the degree that you could, a demand? all of those things have a lot of political weight and they also have a lot of legal weight. but laura, let me say one thing. i wasn't exactly the same situation back in january of 2016 when i was working for fox. we had a debate in iowa and the day of the debate we had to completely separate plans. one was if trump, no trump debate and in fact he didn't show up. but the other was at ten or 11:00 that morning, what if he changes his mind, what if at six or seven each angels his mind. so we had two completely different game plans and i promise you the fox will be having those two plans for what

might happen on that night. >> they might add a third plan of what if he gets tired of being there and decides to walk off the stage at some point in time, which he might well be able to do. based on that third indictment, chris, even if they don't share a debate stage they might, if mike pence is a witness, share a courtroom on different sides of this whole issue, but we will see. also the candidates are on that stage and they're going to come in august, coming in august, they have to show why voters should choose them over trump. and i wonder, what are the key questions that you think they need to answer? because obviously there's a lot of focus on all of the legal woes for trump, but at some point i am convinced, chris, that somebody has got to talk about their policies, their campaign, that can't have anything to do whether he is indicted, acquitted, or convicted. >> you mean what they actually want to do for voters in 2024.

>> imagine that? >> one of again whether trump is on the stage or not makes a considerable difference, but having been on debate stages with trump more than once, he is a big presence. even if he is not there, he's a big presence. and i think to rise up to the level where you can really take trump on, where voters will consider going for somebody else rather than trump, they're going to have to show not just that they have good ideas because a lot of the ideas are pretty much the same, but that they can fill that space. people could envision them taking on trump one-on-one at some point and deciding to vote for that person rather than trump. obviously desantis is in the second spot now, so he's got the biggest and toughest challenge to show. he rises to that level, but any of the others who were considerably further back in the single digits in the latest new york times poll have got to show that they could fill that

space, that they could rise to the level of donald trump just in terms of stage presence and in terms of presence in the minds of republican voters. >> if i'm not mistaken, a few days before the actual debate, they're going to have to have a pledge according to the rnc and so would trump if he were to show up. he would have to know that he would support the eventual rnc nominee whoever that might be. also, ron desantis is in the number two spot right now, his campaign manager is in the latest shakeup for his troubled campaign. is it the staff, is it him, is it the candidate, is it the actual platform? why all the changes what are you seeing? >> the reason you're seeing the changes is because it is an unsuccessful campaign. when it started, the day he announced, desantis was pretty close to donald trump and he's gone steadily downward ever since. you can't change the candidate, so it's like a baseball, team you fire the manager.

there are plenty of successful candidates who have gone on to win the nomination and even the presidency who have had staff shakeups. ronald reagan did in 1980, donald trump in 2015 and 16 as a candidate went through campaign managers the way donald trump, the president, went through cabinet members during his four years in office. so it doesn't necessarily mean a disqualification. i have got to say that, just my perception of this at this point, is that the problem with a campaign is not a staff problem, not a statutory problem, it's a candidate problem. and unless he's able to show that he is a lot more appealing on the campaign trail, let alone the debate stage, he could put anybody up there and it's not going to make a difference. he is got to show that he can win the hearts and minds of republican voters and no campaign manager can do that for him. >> chris wallace, thank you so much. >> thank you, laura. >> up next, to conservative

justices siding with president biden on the future of ghost guns in a surprising supreme court ruling. plus a, democrat right here in the nation's capital is begging for the national guard to bring some kind of order, something republicans have been calling for as crime rises in the city. he joins me live, next.

the first time your sales reached 100k with godaddy was also the first time your profits left you speechless. at the counter or on the go, save 20% with the lowest transaction fees and keep more of what you make. start saving today at godaddy.com

well tonight president biden gets a pretty big win from an unlikeliest force as the supreme court is breathing new life into his restrictions on ghost guns, or homemad firearms that cannot be tracked. conservative chief justice, john rober and justice amy coney barrett joining with the courts liberals in the 5 to 4 decision. ghost guns can be assembled in at-home kits, and critics argue that their lack of a serial number and background ships make them attractive to people who are legally prohibited from owning a weapon. the rules were in place as more town just player, and you can bet they will. as political headlines of course are dominating the message from the nation's capital, the city's leaders are now sounding the alarm over a

much different prices on the streets. violent crime jumped 37% from last year, according to the d.c. metropolitan police department. homicide is up 28% with robbery up an alarming, get this, 60%. now, a city council member is calling for the national guard to help restore order. >> we are in a war zone. and those who have not been affected by it directly, you will be directly or indirectly if we don't do something now. bad things happen when good people do nothing. and we have a lot of great -- in our community wanting to do something. but our governor has to step up, our police department have to step up, and our residents have to step up. >> that was city council member trey on white and he joins me now. and trey on white, thank you for being here today. it's stunning to think about what is happening and the crime

rates that are rising, but you have called on even the national guard being used to try to restore some kind of order. that can be very eyebrow raising for a lot of people, thinking about the national guard, not really trained in obviously day-to-day law enforcement. why is that such an important cause of action? >> the whole process is a public health approach, meaning that we should have trauma informed care, access to recreation, mental, things that residents need in addition to responsible policing. i think that we are in a crisis when it comes to d.c.. we have had 596 carjackings, over 1700 people shot in the district in the last three years, and what we are doing is simply not enough to make people feel and be safe in the district and we are looking to have the conversation with new police chief. in fact we are on our third police chief since 2020 and then there are to be more

proactive about addressing crime in the district of columbia, including reaching out to our local national guard to get involved. and that is an issue, because d.c. is the only jurisdiction that the governor or mayor does not invoke the national guard. that speaks to the issue of statehood as well. >> the issue of statehood, one that is very complex and constantly being re-visited. anyone who drive through d.c. sees the license plates, taxation representation, which is obviously the antithesis of what we want to happen. but obviously you want a holistic approach as any community would in terms of addressing what might be some of the root causes of people committing crimes. the law enforcement component of it is obviously going to be very impactful and if you have got the national guard you are not trained to be the ordinary course of law enforcement,, not trained in those ways. do you have concerns about what their presence would be and the way they would help carry out

whatever objectives? >> yes, we do have concerns. you asked me what are the root causes. some of them are concentrated poverty, we are also in d.c. a housing crisis with mostly black residents trying to stay in the city but we lost over 20,000 black residents in the last ten years and the price of living is going up and up by the wages are not. so we have to create access to quality jobs and careers, also access to capital for business owners. we are concerned about the presence of a militarized presence in d.c., that is why we want work with our local partners in the police different and work through what that looks like. i've spoken to one of the lieutenants at the d.c. national guard to try to figure out if -- what that would look like. >> they said that they would need to know what they will be deployed interview, what the relationship with the npd would look, like how long they would stay. i think, as i read their mission, their mission is to keep d.c. safe and i think that

they are in entity which we can get in and out and have some type of leverage with and the local, because the reality is that a lot of our shooters are happening with militarized weapons. i've seen in a last week where a guy with an ak-47 -- to guys. even while i was in the waiting room tonight we had a shooting on 30th street just a week and a half ago on that same exact streak we had six shootings in 45 days, and a girl was shot while sitting in her bedroom on the exact same street. law enforcement are losing officers every day. in fact, last police chief told us that once we are able to off-load the 300 officers that are getting trained now, we will lose 350 in that process. even in my war we are 33 officers short of what we normally have in our local jurisdiction. >> you think the presence of maybe a military trained

national guard would be more effective than local law enforcement? >> i wouldn't say more effective, i think we don't have the manpower to cover the areas and hotspots in d.c.. as a result, we are seeing shootings over and over again in the same areas. in fact, just saturday we had a shooting that at least seven people were shot in our area. if you look at the data, there are shootings two days before that and yesterday morning there was another shooting there at 16th just yesterday. >> it's mind-boggling to think of just the number and prevalence of all of this. i wonder what you made of the former president to his just here last week. he made comments about how he thought the city was in a decline. he commented about it being filthy, broken buildings, and crime. are you concerned that the impression that he had, one, is accurate or speaks to what you are talking about right now. or that it is giving either inaccurate or unfair description of the city as it is. >> to say that the city is in

decline is an overstatement, the city is not in decline. we have on the healthiest budgets in d.c. history, we have strong leadership, we have to figure out ways to invoke the council members the mayor or, the politicians that work with the community, and we don't have all the answers. i believe that our answers are in the community and we have to create resources for nonprofit organizations, local partners to get involved to address the solution because police is not the end all solution to addressing crime. it is part of the equation. >> a very important point. thank you for joining me tonight, we appreciate it. well, in a moment we will talk about what is going on because the rapper and artist megan thee stallion faced sexist attacks for reporting a shooting, and by the way she was the victim of that shooting. now the shooter learns his fate. we'll talk about it, next. plus, another weight loss drug with promising results tonight, but julien michaels is speaking out against these drugs and she will explain exactly why, ahead.

♪ when you have chronic kidney disease... there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. if you have chronic kidney disease, farxiga can help you keep living life. ♪ farxiga ♪ and farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure, which can lead to dialysis. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men, and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect

that may lead to death. a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. farxiga can help you keep living life. ask your doctor for farxiga for chronic kidney disease. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ farxiga ♪

just in, the new york times is reporting that a lawyer who is a trump ally first presented a secret plot to use fake electors to overturn the election results. in a previously unknown internal campaign memo. the memo is from early december 2020 and it was penned by its own offer that it would not actually hold up legally. cnn's legal analyst elie honing is joining me now on the phone. elie, i would've called do anyways after the phone, i'm glad you're here right now. tell me, what is your take on this. i know this comes from a memo that seems to be one can chesebro who people believe in reporting is one of the coconspirators listed in the indictment. or does the reaction to now hearing one of the missing public pieces in terms of how the subplot was actually

planned? >> a couple of important things, laura. first of all, the piece of evidence that the january 6th congressional hearing did not get, and there deserves a ton of credit because a lot of the information that wound up in the indictment first came through the january six committee. but this is now something new that the doj has found. what i found most important and interesting about this memo is that, while the author, mr. cheeseborough, acknowledges that it is very unlikely to, when that is not necessarily a criminal or long shot argument. but the way -- the plan here, according to the memo, and they say it explicitly is let's just create chaos. let's create confusion and in that chaos and confusion, that will give us the ability if mike pence plays along, to send it back to the state. and so that is how it fits into the overall scheme here to steal this election. >> he seems to be wanting to buy some sort of time, and it will likely, i'm sure elie, built into what we see as a

kind of preview of the defense in terms of advice of counsel discussions in these legal memos forming some factual predicate for all those things. elie, stay on this, thank you so much for joining. >> thanks laura, good to talk to you. >> i'll call you later anyways, we all know this, it is fine. let's now switch gears to sexism and misogyny and racism, all part of a debate over a shooting involving the victim, rapper and artist megan thee stallion. now tonight her shooter learned his fate. a judge sentencing tory lanes to ten years in prison after a jury found him guilty of three charges related to the july 2020 shooting. stallion accused him of shooting her in the foot following an argument. his attorney called his sentence incredibly harsh. the l.a. county d.a. said that lane's attempt to silence the stallion. >> over the past three years,

mr. peterson has engaged in a pattern of conduct that was intended to intimidate, silence, and keep her from defending and keeping her truth out. >> the dea also read part of a statement that was made by stallion in court on monday, saying, and i que, every day i think of others ro the world who are victims of violence and survived. it is truly the most powerless, feeling especially when you question whether the justice system can truly ptect you. fortaty, the district attorney's office fought for me, but if it can happen to me imagine those who lack the resources and support systems to help them. for more on all of this i want to bring in taylor compton, music, pop culture, and politics journalist, along with dr. sura otarola who is a professor of writing at lake head university. i'm glad that both of you are here tonight and we are learning more about this.

sarah, let me begin with you here. you heard the sentence now, it is ten years in prison and, based on what we know about this case and really this out a life of its own online, in social media, in the court of public opinion, shaming megan thee stallion, people having their own views about the delay and reporting it, all sorts of notions. what do you make of the punishment? >> i think the punishment fits the crime. i think this is accountability season, finally. we have to think about megan thee stallion. this has been three long years, three years in which it seems that tory lanes and many of his supporters, many of whom are black men and women, launched a campaign of destruction against her in which they were trying to destroy her credibility. you have to think about how this would weigh on someone's mental health. >> of course we see this in other contexts. we know that the reference to her own statement. we see this happening to somebody who is so much in the

public eye, imagine all the people, and i certainly seen my fair share of trials involving something similar that you see this happen. taylor, you say that this really sheds a light on a bigger issue as well, in addition to what specifically happened to her. but on misogyny, misogyny more broadly and specifically in hip-hop. how so? >> >> massage knee is the intersection of anti black racism and sexism, this ways that it affects black women. and with megan thee stallion of a young black woman who embodies the principles of her generation, of taking ownership of her, body of practicing bodily autonomy, of not being shamed for her sexual agency, but taking pride in it. and we know that that is in conflict with the ideologies of massaging, which is the prestigious and hatred of women. she has exemplified to really be a feminist icon a woman that a lot of young black women and girls look up to. so i believe that those are

indicating factors of why she was so harshly judged and in hip-hop a place right now where we are about to celebrate 50 years were women are the vanguard, she was unjustly attacked by tory lanny dababy, drake, which shows an insidious pattern in which these women, and not easy to say lgbt rappers are being treated currently. >> you know, there are those who initially spoke out in defense of lanes, may have had a bit of a one 80, but the point of misogynoir, is still there pending an op-ed about the toll it took on her and how it impacted her mental health and beyond. , to that point, we did see many rappers in her own industry coming to the fence of the person who is accused and they were calling her out for reporting the shooting. but we also did see something, we saw her fans demanding justice on her behalf.

and so, i wonder, how has this relationship between the fan base, between her as a celebrity and the entire ordeal, how is it impacting us all? >> it's funny because when we talk about paris social relationships in the fan culture we usually think about it in a toxic way. i do believe that is an incredibly important aspect to discuss, but here i think that paris osha layton ships, which is essentially this idea that you have a close relationship with a celebrity who is essentially a stranger, this actually, i think, worked in megan thee stallion's favor. she said in her op-ed that she has resources that other people don't have and i think fans are part of those resources. many of her fans fought for her to be heard and to be believed. and i think it's partly because of those fans that she was able to come to find peace,

hopefully. >> taylor, or give you the last quick ordered here as well. >> the fans have really shown that the tide is changing in hip-hop. the ways that we critique and think of black women, young black women who are taking ownership of their body and sexual agency and leading a change in social and cultural of black women will not stand for the degradation of one of their own. even though it sets a dangerous precedent and have, all that shows the power of consumers, the power of the, youth and the ways in which they are no longer adhering to an old guard, but a new generation where women like megan thee stallion can be relieved and heard and it does not matter whether her sexual prowess needs to be a topic of discussion, just that she is a human being worthy of respect is what they're trying to tell us. >> taylor compton, dr. sarah little, i'm so happy that we all had this conversation today

and the both of you joined, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> promising news tonight on the health front, today clinical trial results shows go the actually cuts the risk of heart attack, stroke,nd heart-related death by about 20%. that is the first trial to show a weight loss drug alone yielding such, well, productive effects. nearly 18,000 adults with heart disease and obesity were studied over five your trial. but, despite these results, my next guest is urging people to think twice before turning to things like wegovy or other weight loss drugs. joining me now is health and wellness expert, jillian michaels, who used to star in the biggest loser. we all know jillian michaels, good evening, how are you? >> i'm well, thank you so much for having me. >> i'm glad that you're here as you can imagine, everyone has been talking about this type of drug this category of drugs. you have been skeptical, as others have been as well. if this new trial is accurate,

hasn't changed what you now think about them? >> not even remotely. if you go to the website, though, for ozempic and wegovy and ozempic are the same drug. you will see host of other side effects ranging from thyroid tumors, gallbladder issues, pancreatitis, vision loss, nausea, heart palpitations, and the list goes on. so pretty significant side effects, in fact. you might want to say, in the cost-benefit analysis, if i am losing weight isn't this a great thing? i mean it is lowering my risk of heart disease. but the answer is that you have to stay on it to keep the weight off and we really don't know the impact of being on these drugs indefinitely. and i would pause it to say, given the side effects listed on the website, i imagine that it can't be that good. and the other side of this is

that you can lose the weight with no negative side effects, eating better and moving more. it is just, that is the case. >> somehow i knew you're going to say that and i'm flashing back to having watched you train people and i'm going okay, that is true jillian michaels. however, for many people that cost-benefit analysis, they're saying to themselves maybe it's a temporary solution and you've noted before that there can be a rebounding effect of the weight gain and sometimes it can even increase. but if somebody's doctor recommends drugs, it's under medical supervision, given their specific and perhaps circumstances, would then be okay for that person to be taking it under, of course, a medical advice? >> you have to make this decision for yourselves because, unfortunately, the system is rigged in many cases and that is just the bottom line. health care is one of 500 billion dollar year business,

arguably one of the biggest businesses in the country. ozempic is one of the most profitable drugs in history and the reality is that from wall street to your neighborhood -- people are invested in profiteering off of other peoples illness. for i am simply going to say to you to do your own homework on this drug and listen to some very irresponsible experts out there. i would say doctors who specialize in -- disease, and see what they have to say about it without being on the payroll four -- i'm sorry, that's just the bottom line. >> i recognize that every question i'm asking you is going to prompt 17 blogs to things on defense of something. i'm not, i'm really asking

questions. blogs, you can stand down, i'm doing my job here. but you mention the notion of people taking, it you can take statin to lower classed, roll or blood pressure medication for high blood pressure indefinitely, why is a drug for chronic weight management any different? >> not necessarily saying that it is. to be dead honest with, you there are side effects with every drug and my answer is always going to be if you are eating better and we are moving more, it is likely that you can get off of most of these medications. i have been doing this for very long time and i have exact experience in the specific area taking people from unhealthy to healthy and, in turn, decide effect is that they get off of the 12 medications and the medicine cabinet. these drugs become like whack-a-mole, one begets another health problem, everyone has side effects.

if you have a genetic predisposition to heart disease, and it does exist, or to high blood pressure, then yes, of course, you will look at your blood work, your fasting glucose test with your doctors and all the tests that your cardiologist is going to know how to run and then they will recommend, i, given your genetics and the result of all these tests i recommend a statins. but you also have to look at how significant are the side effects of each and every drug. that's the other part. a blood pressure medication is not quite as nefarious as the side effects of something like ozempic. so each and everything needs to be analyzed individually, but i would also hope that we can manage these conditions with a healthier lifestyle. >> jillian michaels, thank you so much. it's nice speaking with. you >> thank you so much, i appreciated. >> well, that's that everyone

for cnn prime time i am laura coates. sara sidner and her wonderful self picks it up right now with cnn tonight. >> that was a really interesting interview, i'm going to go back and watch that so i can really pay attention. thank you so much, laura. >> thank you. >> good evening to you, i'm sara sidner and this is cnn tonight. we begin with breaking news, victory for supporters of abortion rights in a key battle state that trends red. this stunning numbers out of ohio and what we are learning for a brand-new cnn poll that shows many months after the supreme court overturned roe v. wade, the issue is continuing to fire up voters. also tonight a major development in the georgia election investigation. the attempt by former president donald trump and his allies to overturn the election results, the atlanta district attorney is likely to present her case to the grand jury next week, we are learning. and, that montgomery alabama police department and dignified suspects in that cic