brand, kash patel. stephen chung, his campaign spokesman has been named assistant to the president and director of communications. those names emerging as troubling new details are searching about trump's defense secretary pick. former fox a host pete hegseth was involved in a police investigation of a sexual assault allegation in 2017. and, trump's pick for attorney general, facing growing skepticism and some doubts that he may be able to be confirmed. lawmakers in both parties are demanding to see the findings of the house ethics investigation of former congressman matt gaetz for allegations of sexual misconduct and illegal drug use. kristen holmes is joining us now. bring us up to speed on these names that are emerging as possible new members of the trump administration. >> reporter: we can start with kash patel, as this is something that his maga allies are pushing. tran20 is

considered a maga loyalist, and has said time and time again that he would work to further donald trump's agenda, in terms of dismantling the doj, as well as the fbi. essentially, wanting to get the entire system and rebuild it. that is something donald trump cares deeply about. the one thing about kash patel, he is still very controversial even within trump's orbit. there are a lot of people that don't believe he should be given that kind of position of power, but obviously, we will see how that plays out. there are also a lot of people that did nothing donald trump should nominate matt gaetz to be attorney general, but lo and behold, we saw that unfold. the big question, of course, is whether or not these people can, ultimately, be confirmed. i just got off the phone with a senior adviser, who said, being confirmable is something they want. they want these individuals to be confirmed through congress, but they also know that they might not. some of these people are incredibly controversial and they have not

cared at all about the backlash, essentially, saying, these are the people donald trump is putting forward. we stand by those decisions. we knew there was likely to be blowback, and we don't care, at this point. we are going to see how this process plays out. the one thing he did not mention was the naming of the head of personnel department, who will also be an assistant to the president, which is sergio gore. the reason this job is so critical, it seems like a lower-level administration job, but it's likely to wield an enormous amount of power. it is going to be the person, who implements the hiring of loyalist across the administration. it's not just these big, high-profile jobs like the cabinet secretary. there are thousands of people, who work in the administration. remember, one of donald trump's goals is to root out the people, who are going to be disloyal to him. root out the career officials and replace them with trump loyalists. sergio, who is a trump loyalist, is going to be in charge of that. it is definitely a space to watch as we move forward and the administration begins filling out.

>> kristen holmes, thank you so much. let's talk more with former fbi deputy director andrew mccabe. andy, kash patel has accused law enforcement and intelligence agencies, without substantial evidence, of running an unlawful vengeance campaign against trump. do you have concerns about potential fbi director, kash patel? i suspect you do. >> i have a few , as you correctly suspect. his many false statements about the fbi, his numerous conspiracy theories about fbi employees, who he has routinely denigrated as members of the deep state, or pursuing some unlawful agenda against donald trump. all of that stuff, together, makes him -- should disqualify him from the position. he is wholly unqualified for it. he has zero significant leadership experience. i'm talking about, none whatsoever. he served, maybe, two or three years as a

line attorney in the department of justice headquarters , probably, supervising no one. the takeover of a law enforcement agency, 37,000 employees, about 12,000 of them sworn law enforcement officers , the nation's premier law enforcement agency, that is a massive responsibility. and, that's why when you look back over the fbi's history, that job traditionally goes to people, where proven themselves through numerous high-level leadership jobs. u.s. attorneys, high-level doj people, former judges, things of that nature. kash patel could not carry the suitcases of any of those people. i think it's a very challenging, potential pick. >> let's talk about christopher wray, the current fbi director. appointing any new fbi director would first require firing chris ray. of course, trump appointed them in 2017 after appointing james comey. do you expect that to have any effect on agency

morale? what is the day today in a situation like that? >> so, historically, -- the fbi has always seen itself as different than every other government agency, partially, because of this history that our directors typically bridge from one of ministries into the next, regardless of political party. that history, that assumption on the part of fbi employees was really shattered by the way that jim comey was treated by donald trump in his first administration. nevertheless, the president has the authority to terminate the fbi director anytime he wants, despite the 10 year term that the fbi director serves four. i am one of these people , i always try to take donald trump as his word, and he has said repeatedly, terrible things about chris ray. i think it is entirely likely that he will eliminate or fire chris wray if

chris is still on the job when donald trump becomes president. i think it is unlikely that director wray will get to finish out the rest of his term, and then, it is donald trump's prerogative to appoint whoever he wishes to fill that job. >> andy, i suspect you have thought about this, but the point of who he is putting in place , whether it is fbi director, and we are still waiting to see who that is, or ag, is to take off someone exactly like yourself. the point is, someone like you will not like someone like he is appointing. >> i think that is really accurate. there are couple of dimensions of that. first, let's remember, baseline, donald trump is not looking for public servants. he is looking for trump servants. he is looking for people, who will do what he wants when he wants it done, regardless of the legality, ethics , whether

it's a good idea or bad idea, he just wants people to execute his well. kash patel, certainly, check that box. secondly, i do think that donald trump and the people around him love this. they love the fact that we are talking about it. they think -- this is a group of people that see experience in government as a detriment. that excludes you from their consideration. they want to put people into positions, just to be disruptors and tear things apart. the difference between that perspective and the one that i hold is, i believe that government serves a purpose. it exists for a purpose and that is to serve the american people. many people who have rallied around this idea of, burn it all down, because everyone has frustrations with government, myself included, they don't really understand the impact that will have on their lives when these institutions that do essential work for everyone, quietly, outside of the headlines every day, are eviscerated from

experienced employees, disrupted , infected, really, with politics in a way they are not currently driven. i think people are going to get something, get a negative result that they really didn't think much about. >> we are still waiting on any potential officialutlso, the non supper ball game. maybe. s. and appreciate you being here. we are following divisions that have been growing between some house and senate republicans on releasing the house ethics committee report on former congressman matt gaetz. >> today, house speaker mike johnson said he would ask the committee not to release the report covering allegations of sexual misconduct and illegal drug use, but when speaking to cnn today, he said he wants the report made available. >> we should be able to get a hold of it and we should have access to it one way or

another, based on the way that we do all of these nominations. >> joining us now to discuss is cnn senior political commentator van jones. do you think this report should come out, considering there is, actually, precedent for it to come out? >> look, i think the senate and the house are going to have to negotiate on this. we are seeing a significant increase in republican senators. we want to see more details before we can make a determination, if this person should make it out of committee, let alone go before the entire body of the senate. the question becomes, though, is the president-elect willing to expend political capital to get matt gaetz across the finish line? i'm not sure yet. he has selected some good individuals, some individuals that a bit a bit controversial, but i think, for the most part, the senate is likely to pass and confirm most of them. gaetz is a bit controversial, so my question for the president elect is, do

you want to expend political capital this early on? do you want to have a solid relationship with the senate to focus on fundamental things you want to get across in the first 90 to 100 days? or, do you want to say, this isn't worth it. there are more priorities the senate will stand with me by. that the question he will have to figure out. >> we have seen in cases before in history were nominees were pulled beforehand. no indication that will happen yet, but if there is indication that there aren't the votes there, we have seen that. >> they can only lose four. >> van, what is your read on speaker mike johnson saying that he's asking the house ethics committee not to release the report? >> i think it is inexcusable. you are talking about someone, who stomachis going to have tremendous powers, almost impossible to describe the amount of power that will be handed to gaetz. you want to know everything about him. if it turns out this report has mostly good stuff and a few

mistakes he has made, i think the american people can be quite forgiving, but if it turns out he has a drug problem, a prostitute problem, that he is a child molestation problem, these are things that should be known, because those things could be used to bribe him, to extort him. those are the things i think the american people need to have access to. who is speaker johnson protecting? he is not protecting the american people by keeping this information away from the lawmakers that have to make a very tough decision in a few weeks. >> van, your thoughts on kash patel being considered for fbi director. >> i mean, it's a joke. it's just a joke. where are the patriots? where are america's patriots? you are now talking about people, who are completely incompetent , who most americans , who business owners would not hire to run a taco stand , being put in

charge of the fbi. america's government works . what problem are we trying to solve your? go to any other country. you go anywhere and you are glad to be here, because so much of what her parents put in place, her grandparents put in place works. you have to believe something is not true, but somehow, america is falling apart and all these terrible people are doing terrible things. what problem can you possibly solve by putting kash patel in charge of, literally, anything? this is a joke. this is an insult. even republican voters should be insulted. america's government should be respected. it should be populated by people, who respect america's government, and who are competent. kash patel fails that test and would fail that test for almost any job in america. >> i agree with van. the government should be respected. let's go over the history of the fbi, shall we? the fbi investigated dr. king for

frivolous nonsense. the fbi even investigated the late singer, aretha franklin. the fbi targeted members of blm. the fbi, in my opinion, does not have a great record in history of serving all of the american people. as far as i'm concerned, if you want to send someone into shake that place up and be a disruptor, i am not necessarily against that. i agree with van, in terms of wanting to leave the agency well, but the fbi does not have the greatest record in the world of representing and protecting all americans. maybe, some americans, but not americans that look like van and i. if you want to bring someone to challenge and get this place an order, again, i would support that. even if it is kash patel. i would say, if kash patel is going to go in and shake that place up and say, you guys have not necessarily done a fine job , again, i think you would find a lot of americans who would say, the fbi is not a perfect organization. why not? >> you are shaking your head,

van. what's up? >> i'm appalled to hear my brother saying this. yes, the fbi has done some bad things. there is not a single bad thing the fbi has done that kash patel would represent a great advance over, and let's not forget. we know we are in bad shape when van jones, liberal democrat, is defending the fbi. let's not forget , drug cartels -- the fbi solves crime before you and i get out of bed in the morning. if you put a completely unqualified person in charge, you cannot say you are for law and order. you can't say that you are for peaceful and safe streets, with the people in charge of that are going to be incompetent. kash patel is incompetent. you would not hire kash patel to do anything in your company. at a certain point, yes, we want change, but change has to be done in a good way by responsible people, not in a bad way by incompetent people.

>> van is right, we do care about law and order, and it should be led by responsible people, but the responsible people have not addressed some of the issues i have raised. investigating and illegally targeting and spying on activists that were part of blm -- >> -- we are not talking about that. that's not the conversation we are even having. it's like we are talking about something else and you are going in a different direction. >> no, it's very relevant. the relevancy here is, if you're going to say the fbi should be led by these great, responsible people, my critique is, these great and responsible people have had a whole lot of faults that a lot of people would say, i don't think they are great. i don't think they are very responsible. >> but, kash patel would be more likely to investigate black lives matter than anybody else. kash patel is more likely to be an enemy of dr. king than anybody else. kash patel is not some great civil rights champion. you are not talking about john lewis. if you want

to dig up john lewis and put them in there, i would be for it. kash patel has no record on the stuff you're talking about. you are trying to dig up excuses for something inexcusable. this dude should not be in charge of the fbi. you know it as well as anybody else. this is donald trump risking americans safety. >> the rebuttal you just made to my argument -- >> yes, absolutely, you act like christopher wray is ronald mcdonald. he is a serious guy. kash patel is not. >> a serious guy, who also had his agents investigate activists that were members of blm, illegally. >> we could go on with this for a while, especially, when it comes to reform of the fbi, but there are many agents that are doing good work, assisting local and state law enforcement in many operations they have going on. the question is, would this new era of leadership fix some of the very real issues we have talked about. shermichael singleton,

good to see you. van jones, you the same. come in person next time. >> that was pretty lively. we've got a lot to cover here. still to come, as he prepares to depart office in a couple of months, president biden is attending the last apec summit of his presidency. plus, a new texas supreme court ruling clears the way for a new execution date for the man convicted of killing his two-year-old daughter in a so-called, shaken baby case. stay with cnn news central.

storming a late arrival earlier today for president biden at his last apec summit in peru.

it is likely his last major world trip as american president. it's a group of 21 economies that make up roughly 60% of global gdp. on the sidelines of the summit, president biden will have his final face-to-face with chinese president xi jinping. kayla tashi is in peru following president biden. can you give us the latest on president biden's agenda here? >> reporter: omar, president biden is meeting with the leaders of japan and south korea to, a partnership that is one of the hallmarks of his foreign policy. it began last year at a summit at camp david were president biden gathered these two countries, who have a rather acrimonious history together, for what the biden administration now hopes will be an institutionalized relationship that will outlast president biden after he leaves office. they are discussing matters of regional security and stability in the south china sea, the taiwan strait and the broader indo pacific,

but one of the most highly watched meetings over the course of the next week is his meeting tomorrow with chinese president xi jinping. we understand they will be discussing regulation of artificial intelligence, efforts to curb illicit sentinel, and military level communication they sought to put in place at the bilateral meeting they held last year. we expect that it will be more of a reflection on the u.s. china relationship, and the efforts that both countries took over the last four years to try to keep competition from spilling over into conflict. of course, the backdrop to this is potential conflict awaits with president-elect donald trump threatening widespread tariffs of up to 60% on all goods that china imports into the united states. the expectation is that could come early in trump's term. we expect the interaction between biden and xi jingping will be cordial, high-level, even if the deliverables will be scant. it's a rather quiet

trip for biden on the world stage. traditionally, his schedule is packed with these meetings, with press conferences, speeches, and it's quite different this time, now, that he is going out of office. we expect that he will be delivering a speech in the amazon rain forest on planet conservation, but it's about garnering his legacy, even it as that legacy is about to be impacted by his successor. >> thank you so much. let's talk now with congressman roger chris murphy of illinois. he is a top democrat and he is also on the oversight, and very portly, the intelligence committee. congressman, to be clear, i want to give people a sense of where you have been on some of these picks by the president-elect. you called mike waltz and marco rubio credible picks for the positions they have been nominated for, but as a member of the intelligence community, what is your concern about tulsi gabbard as the pick for

director of national intelligence? >> i think the issue is this, to the extent there is information of a negative kind of past conduct , or negative information or derogatory information that has been denied by any of these picks, whether it's matt gaetz or anyone else , and a foreign adversary were to gain knowledge of it, which often happens through cyber hacking and surveillance, then those people could be subject to blackmail, and they could pose a counterintelligence risk for us. given that they have access to the crown jewels, in terms of exquisite information that our intelligence community gathers, that would be something that our foreign adversaries would very much want to get, and we would never want someone, who could come up potentially, be compromised in the positions, for which these folks are being nominated. >> you think tulsi gabbard is a

candidate to be compromised by a foreign country? >> i don't know, but i think that we are going to learn a lot during the confirmation hearings. she will be asked some very tough questions. matt gaetz, on the other hand, i absolutely think there is a lot of derogatory information out there, with regard to potential primes that he has committed, whether it's on the sex trafficking front, or the use of illicit narcotics and so forth. we have to think twice and three times about whether someone like that should never be nominated, let alone, confirmed to the position as the top law-enforcement official in our country. >> i do want to ask you more about tulsi gabbard, but on the gaetz point, do you think that the ethics committee report -- he did resign. do you think the report on allegations of sexual misconduct and drug use will

come out? >> i think, somehow, it will. i think this will be something that the senators, who are confirming him, will demand, and somehow receive. if, for some reason, they don't get it, they are going to assume the adverse inference, that the allegations are true, with regard to these issues. in which case, he should not be confirmed. i don't think he should have been nominated, but, certainly, he should not be confirmed. i know many republicans, who feel the exact same way i do. >> i just asked you if you thought tulsi gabbard was at risk of being compromised by a foreign country. you said, you don't know. in 2019, as gabbard was running for the democratic nomination, hillary clinton went so far as to say that the russians were grooming her. i want to play what she said. >> i'm not making any predictions, but i think they

have their eye on someone currently in the democratic primary, and they are grooming her to be the third party candidate. she is the favorite of the russians. they have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her, so far, and that is assuming jill stein will give it up, which she might not. she is also a russian asset. >> clinton's spokesperson later confirmed she was talking about gabbard there. it is a serious charge. she is not the only one, who has made it. we had tammy duckworth on yesterday. she said that gabbard was someone that had been compromised. why are we hearing this from democrats? >> i would like to look at the information a little more. i think there are various charges, but on the other hand, i also think that there is a chance to respond, and i have not heard her responses. what i

am most concerned about, however, is that there may not even be a confirmation hearing, if the majority leader -- >> -- i just want to go back to this, as i think this is really important, congressman. we have heard many people say this is true. you say you are not sure. just to be clear, do you believe , even if you can't disclose it, do you believe there is information? is this what people are talking about on the hill? that there is information indicating this thing ? clewiston, the american people deserve to know. >> i think there is a lot of speculation right now, and i think this is one of those things where we need to have some answers. we need to know exactly what is going on, but i'm very concerned about some of her statements that she has made, especially, with regard to asad and other rulers abroad, and her trip to syria. i think she needs to answer

these questions. >> okay, let's go through those, she blamed the biden administration for provoking russia into invading ukraine. she said they wanted russia to invade ukraine. then, she called u.s. sanctions against russia a modern-day siege against russia and the russian people. in 2017, there was a house about to hold assad accountable for war crimes. she went and visited with him, she visited with him twice on that trip. she did not disclose who paid for the trip. our those things what have you posing those questions? >> look, there is one possibility that she is expressing an opinion about various things, and they are kind of crazy opinions. it's another that, somehow, there is a reason why she is expressing those opinions. and, we need to understand what is what. i, personally, don't think that is a wise choice for dni, but

on the other hand, with regard to the allegation that she is compromised, we need to know more information underlying the concern about why she is making the statements she does. in the gaetz context, that is a totally separate issue, which is that we know there is derogatory information about him , and my colleagues are widely talking about it , at this point, and not a single person would ever put them on the short list to be attorney general. >> that is the kind of information that makes him vulnerable, but i do just want to be clear. the things she has said is making democrats like yourself wonder if she is some kind of manchurian candidate? >> well, i think that when you, for instance, praise a dictator, and you are not

willing to own up to his human rights abuses, his murder, all the other things, why would you do that? that is the question? some people, as you know, say the reason why she is doing that is, potentially, because there was some financial arrangement. i don't know, but these are the types of questions that need to be answered before someone like that is put in such a -- in my opinion, before they are even nominated. now that she is nominated, going through the confirmation process. >> it is an incredibly important position. these are incredibly import questions. conversely, thank you for being with us. >> thank you so much. up next, disturbing new details in the trial of the undocumented migrant accused of murdering georgia college student, laken riley. including, audio from the desperate 911 call that she made for help. we will have that next.

♪ ♪ ♪ something has changed within me ♪ ♪ it's time to try defying gravity ♪ ♪ ♪

a day of gruesome and heartbreaking testimony wraps up soon in the trial for the man accused of killing laken riley. the 22-year-old nursing student was brutally attacked while she was jogging at the university of georgia back in february. prosecutors say the smart watch that she was wearing captured her 17 minute struggle for her life against her killer. >> the evidence will show that laken riley fought. she fought for her life. she fought for her dignity , and in that fight

, she caused this defendant to leave forensic evidence behind. >> the suspect here is an undocumented migrant, who waived his right to a jury trial, which means it's up to a judge to decide his fate. the case has become a lightning rod over crime and illegal immigration. cnn legal analyst joey jackson is here with us now. obviously, we are very early on in the trial, but what stands out to you, so far, on day one? >> it all does, omar. when i say that, from the beginning of the opening statement, you have two conflicting narratives, as in any case. however, in this case, the prosecutor is saying they have specific evidence, which may be circumstantial. what is it mean? it means, sometimes you see what happens. that's direct evidence. sometimes it circumstantial, but the circumstances suggest that it is. here, the

suggestions are compelling could the fact you have dna that happens to be underneath his fingernails. her dna being there, that is highly problematic. the thumbprint on the phone, how did it get there? dna has limitations with respect to when it got there or how, but how do you explain that? of course, you have the victim, as you are looking at it there, the blood on the defendant had, in addition to disposing of evidence, suggesting the jacket was disposed. that has evidence in terms of his blood in her blood, so it's a lot for the defense to overcome. it is the beginning, as you noted, but boy, it has started out in a way that is highly compelling, including the smart watch, which would suggest she struggled for her life for up to 18 minutes. we will see. a judge is making a decision as it relates to this case. it's not a jury trial. that is called the bench trial. he will have his fair trial. after that, a judge will make a conclusion based on the law, the facts and the evidence.

>> the jacket is thrown away, get, there are snapchatted pictures of him wearing a jacket that looks like the jacket that was thrown away. i'm assuming this is a really tough case to defend. you have the defense saying, look at these gloves. there are holes in them, to be clear, so i wonder what you thought about this particular argument. you could not have left the thumbprint like what is left, but these are stretchy gloves. these are medical grade gloves. if there is a hole, you can see how it would come over a thumb and you could easily leave a thumbprint. what kind of argument is that? >> it's a lot to overcome. i think we see that, in terms of the evidence, as to why they went -- that is, the defense team, to a judge. perhaps, feeling it's giving them more of an ability to make their case as a defense. judges are generally not emotional. they will evaluate the facts and the evidence. they are not inclined to listen to anything about the publicity or anything else. it

is about, what do the facts suggest? what does the evidence show? ultimately, render a conclusion. yes, we have seen that in terms of the defense making this decision of how compelling this evidence is by leaving it outside the hands of a jury. notwithstanding that, it's just a lot to argue. again, there are a lot of crimes that happen, or you are not going to have a person, who can eyeball it, who can directly and specifically say, this person did it at this time, this was the smoking gun. what you have to do is piece together the evidence, and when you find a jacket in a dumpster by his home, that is, the accused, when you find other evidence, in terms of dna evidence and that type of thing, that sort of matches. how else are you going to establish that it got there, and by the way, it happens to be yours? is there an innocent explanation? everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty, but in this case, certainly, from the defense perspective, it's not a good position to be in at this point.

>> obviously, a lot of people are looking at this case. it became a flashpoint because the suspect is an undocumented immigrant. people said this was an example of open borders leading to real harm happening. obviously, a lot of political end -- while we have the granular workings of the case, one, very tragic, were someone is lost their life. joey jackson, we appreciate you being here. we are also following the texas supreme court, which is clearing the path for a new execution date for a man convicted of murder in the death of his two-year-old daughter in a so-called, shaken baby case. we have the very latest after a quick break.

new today, the texas supreme court has cleared the

way for robert roberson's execution to move forward. he is the man convicted of murdering his two-year-old daughter, a conviction that relied on evidence of shaken baby syndrome, a diagnosis his attorney say is wrong. ed, i know you've spoken with him in the past, but can you tell us more about this ruling and what happens now? >> reporter: if you remember back in october, a day before robert roberson was scheduled to be executed, a state house committee issued a subpoena for him to testify in his case, and the underlying medical evidence in the testimony that led to his scheduled execution hearing in the state, that subpoena and appearance before the state house committee was set for after the execution date. that derailed the execution in a dramatic -- moments before he was scheduled to be executed, all of that was halted, and this has triggered a legal fight between the state legislature and members of this committee and the executive

branch in texas, but the supreme court has, essentially, ruled that the scheduled execution can continue. what does that me now? the state house committee is still trying to get the testimony for robert roberson before the committee, which would be dramatic in and of itself, omar, but the district attorney in palestine, texas, where roberson was convicted more than 20 years ago, can now set a new execution date. that can't happen for, at least, 90 days. we still don't have word on if she is going to proceed. we have reached out to the district attorney and have not heard back. we are waiting to see when the request for the new execution date would be set, but members of the state house committee do say that the supreme court's ruling today does not block them from continuing the efforts to get robert roberson's testimony before the committee, which would be dramatic in and of itself, as i mentioned. >> we really appreciate the reporting period coming up, mike tyson is returning to the ring. yes, you

heard that correctly. the heavyweight icon is set to slug it out with youtube star, turned boxer, jake paul. we will explain, coming up.

right now, one of the great heavyweight champs of all time is getting ready to rumble with a fighter that was not even born when he ruled the ring. 58-year-old mike tyson will face off against 27-year-old social media star, jake paul. tyson was once known as iron mike, but that was then and everyone is wondering, can the former champ live up to his old nickname one last time? there were fireworks at the pre-match way in. tyson took a swipe at paul as the cameras were rolling. andy scholes is joining us now on this. there is definitely going to be drama. i wonder what the concern is about the age difference, andy. >> reporter: there should be a little bit of a concern, at least. a 31 year age difference

for a fight with this much interest, i'm never sure we have ever seen that, but that slap at the weigh-in , it was just a lot of drama to drum up interest for the fight. i for one want to watch to see how mike tyson looks, but you have to remember, come into this with low expectations. 20 years ago, the last time tyson fought in a real boxing match, he did not look good back then, 20 years ago, and now he is fighting a guy 27 years old. like i mentioned, a full sanctioned fight, but there are some different rules. it's not going to be a normal heavyweight belt. it's only eight rounds, and the rounds are only going to be two minutes, instead of three. they are doing all of that to try to give some grace to mike tyson, who is 50 years old. hopefully, he can last through all of those rounds. it will cushion the blow, a little bit. come into this with low expectations. jake paul is the

favorite. he is 10-1 in his boxing career. he started as a boxer in 2020, professionally. he has not fought a lot of pro boxers, but he looks pretty good when he's in the ring. we will see. he is a 2-1 favorite for this. the event starts at 8:00 on netflix, but don't expect this match between these two guys to start before 11:00. >> what if mike makes everyone eat their words? that can happen, right? >> reporter: it could, but you have to remember, this fight was supposed to be in july and it had to get moved because he had a serious ulcer where he lost 26 pounds, so he is battling that on top of being 50 years old. >> more time to get ready. different ways to look at it. andy scholes, thank you so much. when we come back, help wanted to catch one of the world most dangerous animals. why an australian zoo is asking amateurs to help them catch deadly spiders, next.

let's go boys. the way that i approach work, post fatherhood, has really been trying to understand the generation that we're building devices for. here in the comcast family, we're building an integrated in-home wifi solution for millions of families, like my own. connectivity is a big part of my boys' lives. it brings people together in meaningful ways.

♪ ♪ my spidey senses were tingling and i don't know if this is a spidey sense motion

but is because we are talking about spiders and close-up pictures and especially down under in australia and rangers at a zoo in australia requesting people capture the world's deadliest spider the funnel web spider along with their egg facts. >> they say they desperately need these and they need the spiders and the egg sacs to make the powerful antivenom her when people get bitten at save their lives. they make the call for this deadly catch every year with the breeding season begins and they even have a video on how to safely capture funnel web spiders. if i am doing that, i am going for the egg sac and get a little web of babies that have not hatched. >> okay. the egg sacs are better than whatever is out there. >> it could crawl into your boot and you don't want that. >> i am od