i've worked for. >> me, too. >> be in that condition. i'll also say i saw the president a month ago and he's like, where you been. >> good days and bad days. >> yeah, right. so, i'm not saying i'm not giving anybody permission structure. i'm not going to call anybody a liar. i wasn't there. i wasn't in close proximity with the president. but the debate was telling and i think he did the right thing. >> schumer could have acknowledged that in that answer by saying i didn't realize it was quite that bad. but once we saw what we saw, decision had to be made. >> yeah. >> you can admit some stuff without saying, well, we're just a bunch of liars. listen, we saw him have good days. we saw him have bad days. we were promised that he was in good condition and we wanted him to win. we would understand that. >> i think the tell was not putting him out there very much. so it was like, when he wasn't being put out there very much, that was the tell. >> more than the debate. a number of moments that were not good. >> everyone, thank you very much. thank you for watching news

night. laura coates live starts right now. they were able to look at the draft report against the president-elect. smith dropped both the classified documents case and election subversion case he was planning release a report. now the team is urging garland to stop the release calling it a politically motivated attack and cause prejudice against the two trump co-defendants who are still facing charges. those co-defendants made a filing of their own trying to get the judge to block the doj from releasing any report. they argue smith does not have the

authority to release it since cannon ruled his opponent to special council was unlawful. garland fired smith as well and they want a decision before they leave the administration. let me break down a little more. what they will get is number one they fear that this will be released immediately. as has been the case and two other special counsel reports filed. one of the reasons they say so they believe it will prejudice the remaining defendants. it will be kind of a huge media frenzy which likely it will be and the public will consume it in a way that will give them a difficult time of trying to get a jury pool that is not in some way well versed in the accusations that have been given. they are claiming, of course, look,

special counsel smith can not do any of this. if you are not qualified to actually be amounted then you can not use what you learned while you were actually the special counsel then put it out into the public square as if you had every right to put it out there in the first incidence. finally, arguing this would undermind the ability to have a peaceful transition and easy time for trump to be able to govern over the country. why? because they believe that it will cause a program. they believe it will cause a stigma. they believe he will have this weight of the allegations contained in the special counsel report used against him in a way that it is a distraction to otherwise being able to govern the country. it all kind of flows together. the arguments of todd blanche on behalf of donald trump, president-elect and of course counsel for the two remaining codefendants who argue that because of their

title as a cospirittor co-conspirator can not have it taken away from trump and have a fair trial. they believe, finally, the special counsel report is only to be issued once there is the conclusion of the work of the special counsel. because they are still appealing the matter it can not possibly be noted as concluding. they think that he is trying to work around that and get it out nonetheless. joining me now, the legal office council committee. the author of the new book. rising threats to american democracy. so glad to have it here. first of all, i mean, this report we knew it was going to be forth coming when it came to jack smith. expected to have a decision to not let it get released. what do you make of their attempt to say it never

should go out. he can not use any aspect of what he learned while he was, they say inappropriate special counsel. >> reporter: thanks for having me. the logical extension. it ignores decades of precedent that special counsel is, this is in the code of federal regulations are duty bound to explain their decisions, their decisions to proceed or not proceed in criminal cases by filing reports. we have seen special council file reports recently with mueller and the russia investigations and special counsel in the biden investigation. so, it is routine and contemplated by federal law, special counsel will explain their decisions in reports. so not a surprise that the president's team would try to delay that. they have

continued to try to delay and stall and have these facts aired to the public. >> you know, interestingly enough when you talk about delay. that was the strategy and continues to be they fear merrick garland will not be delayed in anyway of releasing the report. he will release it immediately to silence the issue, make it mute. i wonder if garland were to release this is a tomorrow, has the report would they bible to do anything about it? no.. >> no. once it is out it is out. he immediately, could hit send or print that report, those reports, i think there are two or two volumes of the special counsel's final report about each of the criminal cases that were brought. the codefendants in the florida case asked the judge, judge

cannon to step in and do that. order that the portion dealing with the mar-a-lago documents matter not be released. there is no case pending in the district of columbia any longer and therefore no logical place for that motion to be filed. i don't think it will be successful. i think garland will release the report before january 20th. >> where would be the authority for cannon to tell garland he can not release the report? >> i am not sure i am not sure it exists. i have not read the florida pleading. only seen the letter that trump's lawyer sent to garland. i think they are alleging since judge cannon found, again, anonymous low from every other federal judge that considered this question, she found that the special counsel was inappropriately appointed and he does not have jurisdiction. different from every other judge in dc found. because of that he has no authority to issue this report.

this is essentially the act of a private citizen. i am not really sure what basis she could then use to grant that motion and prevent the attorney general from exercising and release his report. >> he gone rogue and try to be a special counsel to have the authority to release the report and give it to garland. i wonder if you feel the same way, garland has been criticized for being too slow, almost to the point of paralysis when it comes to prosecuting trump. one former doj official telling evan perez they wasted time, they were not strategic. it was a year of nothing. now, of course, you got this filing saying that he will be too hasty. trying to release the information. who is right? >> the allegation that merrick garland is a partisan bent on politicalization or weaponization of the department

it is ludicrous. he is some of his own internal doj lawyers said, arguably resistant to pursue this case in the first place given its political nature. garland is a cautious, by the book lawyer. since here, the book, the federal statue which authorizes special counsel calls for a report, i don't see him varying from that clear standard of law. >> don't forget he was an appellate judge, an eye towards those issues they are trying to raise and contemplated at least that. >> that is right >> tim, thank you and stand by. we will talk about pardon news and your new book later in the show. as well as i want to bring in jeremy, a manhattan prosecutor and criminal defense attorney as well. jeremy, look, trump does not want it out. he wants the report never released. he wants garland to remove him from his job. i want to read for people just one line from what the letter that todd blanche sent to garland.

telling as to what he wants. he says that no report should be prepared or released and smith should be removed including for even suggesting that course of action given his obvious political motivations and desire to lawlessly undermined the transition. they are clear they don't want it out. they have a reason. what is the actual right decision to make? >> reporter: the right decision is to allow smith to do his job which was to compile this report. it went from part of it january 6th committee up in washington, down to florida and allowed to proceed. it is an anomaly to dismiss the case. he has every right and should release the report. if it causes stigma after the fact when he becomes president that is neither here nor there. it is what it is not to be quick but i understand why trump

wants to avoid this but it does not change the fact that those codefendants are not going to trial and not going to be prejudice under trump's doj and possible future case. >> right, they referred the matter to a different court in florida as well. i would note it is fascinating to me because you will hear time and time again that the american public and the voters gave a mandate. now they are arguing this same continuation of conversations about it would be absolutely detrimental to his ability to govern. does not ring true in that phrase. also on this point, they argued. that this case is not done yet. not final. therefore there is no reason or regulation that would allow even if he were an appropriate special counsel for him to hand over a final special report. what do you make of that? >> i make the same thing that i

made of many of trump's filings. misinformation, dishonest or manipulation of the truth. this is final. what i mean by that, there is no more case going on. you just discussed it or mentioned it was referred to another court as a possible prosecution. this is over, it is done. in a matter of days it is off of the books and forever gone. there is final. it is kind of rich that we had heard republicans calling for the release of audiotapes of president biden then, about him being sort of an older guy and having issues. so, it is really what is good for me is good for donald trump in that moment. >> interesting point. going back to another report released quickly by garland. they wanted to see jeremy another issue on top of the breaking news tonight. earlier today the judge in new york denied trump's request to delay his sentencing for the hush money trial. do you think he will be sentenced on friday as planned or are there other

opportunities that you might see him trying to delay or stall? >> reporter: so, what they have done is filed an article 78. basically it is another means, preappeal, not post appeal. we will call it that. to delay the case. what the thrust is. should president-elect be treated in the same capacity and have immunity as the court and sitting president. if it gets delayed. it could again. another win by donald trump. potentially in this case never gets to seconds. we get finality in the decision prior to the 20th of january. could get delayed easily. >> by the way, no indication that the judge is going to have jail time or a fine. and, the conviction presently stands. the idea of picking that down the road is head scratching. jeremy, thank you very much.

>> my pleasure. >> still ahead tonight, donald trump nears his pardon decision on the january s 6th writers. plus, the lingering question for president biden. might he be considering pardons for january 6th committee. do they even want one?

. we have seen biden use it more broodily than any president in history. it will be a call to hear it. my assumption is they will look at these on a case by case basis.

♪ ♪ with so much great entertainment out there... wouldn't it be easier if you could find what you want, all in one place? my favorites. get xfinity streamsaver with netflix, apple tv+, and peacock included, for only $15 a month.

. so, about those january 6th pardons. we are 14 days away from the first chance that trump will have to really issue any pardons. he showed his hand on the category of people he thinks deserve one. trump committed, of course, to using his power to free the peoples he calls hostages. got to be more specific, right? who are we talking about? is it everyone with a misdemeanor charge like trespass? those accused of violent crimes against officers or not go down the blanket route instead as he suggested figure it out case by case? >> we are looking at it right now. most likely. >> well, you know.

>> those people suffered, long, hard and they may be some exceptions to it. i have to look. >> what about the defendants not accused of committing violence but serious crimes like conspiracy as was the case for stewart rhodes who got 18 years or this man, leader of the proud boys currently serving a 22 year sentence, the longest of all of the january 6th defendants for that charge for his role in organizing the attack. tarrio was not there on january 6th. he was arrested days earlier for burning a black lives matter banner in an unrelated manner. prosecutors said that he organized the breech in part and the judge who sentenced him even called him the ultimate leader. today, tarrio's attorney does not want to wait and see what trump might do in a few weeks he wanted his request on the record. writing a letter to

trump asking specifically for a pardon. saying, quote, henry is nothing more than a proud american that believes in true conservative values. so, will trump do it? we will have to see of course. senator and minority leader chuck schumer skeptical about all of it. >> it is shamefully, utterly, outrageous that the president is considering pardons of these rioters who broke the law, attacked our police officers on january 6th. it would send a message to the country and to the world, those that use force to get their way will not be punished. >> now, again, tarrio never attacked an officer, he himself was not there. but many were, many did. 379 people charged with assaulting the police were

members of the press. at least 287 people charged with less violent or nonviolent felonies. overall, more than half of the 1500 people charged in total have faced misdemeanor counts like trespassing or disorderly conduct. so, where do republicans generally stand on all of this? will they be okay trump pardoning all or some or those accused of violence? or those not accused of violence but breaching the capitol nonetheless? >> well, again, the pardon authority is one that the president exercises and we have seen president biden, obviously do it more broodily than any president in history. so, it is going to be a call that the president has to make. my assumption is they will look at these on a case boy case basis. >> he did a lot of work answering that question. one he punted of course trump's discretion, of course it is, he

is the one with the party power. two, he appeared to lay the groundwork. did you catch this? for what the political argument might very well be from some republicans, and that is that biden's brood pardons including of his son, hunter, gives trump the cover he needs. if you buy it or not is up to you. as much of the focus on what trump will do with his first day with those pardon there is question for what biden might do. some suggested pardoning the january 6th committee. not everyone, not even some of those on the committee, are on board. >> the second you take a pardon it looks like you are guilty of something. i am guilty of nothing. in the process embarrassing trump for 187 minutes he sat there and did nothing and showed how weak and scared he was. no, i don't want it.

>> hmm. the committee chairman telling us today it might be worth considering under this scenario. >> if donald trump is hellbent on extracting retribution because members of congress, staff, and to some degree witnesses told the truth, did their work, i think if that pardon availability was there, it should be considered. >> so, what is it going to be? to pardon or not to pardon? four years later and that is still the question. >> chief legal council for the committee is back with me now. tim, trump has threatened retribution and jail time for those on the committee. you said you are not concerned would you want a pardon? >> clearly, it takes facts and

evidence to have a legal consequence. there may be questions asked by congressional committees or by the new department of justice about the investigation that will require people like me or members of the committee to provide information. i am not worried at all about the possible or actual culpability. again, in this country it takes facts in order for there to be real exposure. he can create a lot of expense, disthraks is meant to intimidate or be a political sabre rattle and the rhetoric he put forth. but, ultpat low legal cons queenses ultimately, it is not. >> that is one way that a pardon could be something useful to avoid having to dole out what it will take to defend

one's self-even that will not result in culpability. in your book you write the prosecutions of more than 1500 capitol rioters quote have a deterrent effect as they persuade future rioters, fake electors or others engaging in similar conduct. but, if there is, if there is some kind of mas pardoning of rioters what is the message it might send? >> if you accept the premise that i put forth in the book, criminal consequences detour conduct than the removal of the criminal consequences also motivates conduct. might make it more likely for people to engage in similar conduct in the future. i want to make one point clearly here about who has been charged with respect to crimes on january 6th. every single one of them crossed the line from speech to conduct. no one has been prosecuted simply

for believing the election was stolen. simply for exercising their first amenitiment right. every person was beyond speech into conduct. conduct that a judge or a jury or they themselves through guilty pleas admitted was criminal. the there is a range. the least, stepping over broken glass and through broken windows and over the bloody steps on the front of the capitol to go inside knowing that they were unauthorized. that is trespass or disorderly conduct to the more serious end, which is the co-conspirators that used force to overthrow the functioning of government. that is the tarrio line. like you said before, we will have to see. to be clear, everybody, regardless of where the line is drawn engaged in conduct is not prosecuted

simply for public beliefs. that narrative that i heard it is just false. >> well, the category by category maybe instead of case by case. >> up next. it only took 30 minutes this time compared to the 15 hours it took back in 2021. congress certified as no drama as vice president harris oversees it all. that and more, next

(vo) with fargo, your virtual assistant from wells fargo, you can access your fico® score in a snap. (daughter) what i would give to be able to make art on this scale! (dad) you will one day. but it's equally important for you to be thinking about your future... building credit—

(daughter) dad... fargo, what's my fico® score? (dad) wow... it's a work of art. (vo) do you fargo? (daughter) that was corny, but i'll take it. (vo) you can. visit wellsfargo.com/getfargo. ah. behold, a glorious round table pepperoni pizza. huh ? hah ! well, behold ! the pepperoni and grilled chicken..... what the...?? mm hmm. behold, the pepperoni, grilled chicken and bacon pizza from round table. three magnificent toppings. grilled chicken, pepperoni and sizzling bacon. try it at round table pizza. . some would say it say good

day for democracy. kamala harris overseeing the certification of trump's election victory. today's peaceful proceeding a far cry from the violence and chaos from four years ago. >> it was about what should be the norm and what the american people should be able to take for granted which is that one of the most important pillars of our democracy is that there will be a peaceful transfer of power. america's democracy is only as strong as our willingness to fight for it. today, america's democracy stood. >> joining me now democratic congressman from california and close ally of vice president harris. good to have you here congresswoman, what a far cry it was from four years ago. it had to be a challenging day to watch as a member of congress but also specifically vice president harris presiding over

the certification of her own loss. how do you think she handled that moment? >> she was dignified, professional, brilliant, stowic, she did what she was supposed to. ultimately, expensive, quick, uneventful peaceful transfer of power. just like it should be without costing taxpayers $1 million which is what the 35 minutes cost us. >> tell me what it was like in the room. what is the emotions? it must be as one of our colleagues described a bitter pill to swallow. this was jim himes. >> that day was traumatic fluff that even those of us that like to keep calm and carry on it is causing an up welling of emotion. i can feel the anger and resentment which i do not, by the way, celebrate. >> how did you feel?

>> i was not there. january 6th, 2021. i can tell you it was inspiring and heartbreaking. to see this poised qualified vice president who also happens to be the vice president of the united states preside over a romper room of republicans more interested in being chaos agents than governing. that was heartbreaking. but to see her poise and her dignity shine through for those 35 minutes was inspiring. >> do you feel optimistic about the prospects of working together with republicans over the next several years to, if not, for? >> well, democrats always had our stuff together. we come in and we are ready to work. we don't always agree with them but you are trying to negotiate for policies best for american people. why are eggs costing $9 they should cost $2. republicans have to work with each other. not my scrob to help them figure out how to do

that. o not my job to help them figure out how to do that. >> republicans say they are not the only ones with chaos in their ranks, requiring their assistant during the next congress because the margin is so narrow. it is going to be a challenge. on the one hand, not to do their job for them. and also do the job that you came to office to do. well, there is a responsibility to govern. they have the technical majority. of course, wherever things gotten done over two years it is because democrats stepped up. but, this republican conference does not have a plan. their plan is to call donald trump and figure out what the bros have been talking about over the weekend at mar-a-lago and figuring out how to decipher these concepts how they are supposed to govern. >> what is the climate like hearing and believing that it is not trump who will govern but it will be the so-called

bros? what are democrats saying behind-the-scenes? >> reporter: well, that we are fighting against this country turning into an oligarchy with billionaires controlling trump. he was purchased for $275 million but the people were not. democrats have to convey it to the american people. demand that republicans step up and listen to the concerns. what i heard this past election is that the cost of living is too high. people want to afford a house. need caregiver assistance they can afford and childcare. talk about that. not extending tax breaks, trump tax breaks that only help the wealthiest of the wealthy. >> how do you overcome the assumption that the trump mandate was cart blanche. >> it might be a trifecta, not a landslide. we saw with the drama in just electing a speaker when they had no other option that they can not get it together. we are going to continue to talk about, do you

want there reconciliation bill that is supposed to be all things? when you all can not get your act together to decide what tax cuts you want to support or how you want to help veterans or how you want to support seniors or cut social security or medicare and medicaid, talk about those things. >> is $any prospect that trump gets his way for the agenda in that bill? >> no. energy, permitting, tax cuts, boarder, republicans can not agree on those things and they have to work it out >> they will try to do it without support from democrats. they will not get it. >> congresswoman always a pleasure to have you onset. thank you very much. >> let's continue our communication now with aid to lindsey graham and former spokesperson for hillary clinton's presidential campaign with us as well. good

to see you too. former vice president mike pence welcoming, saying and quote, the return of order and civility while calling vp harris admirable for certifying her own loss. is that how republicans at large see it? >> yeah, i think the election results spoke for themselves. i saw david tweet out something fascinating today. there is the first time an election was certified without a republican or with the republican winning without one democrat descenting since 1988. that is kind of wild. i think it is because we got the trifecta. it is a good thing that today went smoothly. i hope that continues. >> so, karen, how do you see the absence of objections? is that an indication one way with the trifecta? or, because

leader jeffries once said no election deniers on their side of the aisle? >> i am with leader jeffries on that. look, again, as sydney was saying, vice president harris was graceful, gracious, did her job. i think it is important for the american people that we have this demarcation. but i also agree with president biden that we should never forget what happened four years ago. we owe it to the people who lost their lives, we owe it to the people who were injured on that day, who were harmed, still traumatized and what it meant for our country. and, i think, in that context we really need to see the final report of jack smith submits to merrick garland, the attorney general and we need it for the full accounting of history so that everyone can have the same set of facts and the same set of information. an election is not

the same thing, as you know, as a jury verdict. so, we need to see it, we paid for it as the american people as taxpayers, we deserve to see it >> tw should we see that report? >> look, i think january 6th which was a tragic day in our nation's history. i knew so many friends who were on the hill, staff members, former bosses, members of the press. i was worried six watching from south carolina but look, let's make no mistake. january 6th was litigated to the hilt. the committee, the impeachment, if you want a jury of your peers you had tens of millions, 70 something voted for trump, many of them very much disgusted with what they saw on january 6th, still voted for trump. i think this is litigated heavily. and politically charged committee. my old boss banks was refused to be seated

on that committee. people are aware of what happened on january 6th. well aware of what was at stake. they voted for trump. >>. >> but on that point, if that is the case releasing the report would just be something that would just be par for the course and not a problem. you don't tee it that way which begs the question as to why. let me ask another point, i want your response on this, tw to stick with you, one thing that the congresswoman mentioned was the idea and role and influence of billionaires, i should not say so-called, billionaires, and maggie reported trump privately complained about musk being around a lot. this as the white house chief of staff saying i don't welcome people who want to work solo or be a star. how do you interpret of this role of first buddy? >> i think those are two sort

of different things. susie wiles ran a tremendous campaign. tight knit, efficient operation. she will bring it to the white house. she is simply spelling it out on running an organization. musk and trump have their own relationship that they are going to have to work out as they go along. how is doge going to interact, inviting musk to talk to world leaders we seen reports on. is that going to continue or change? that is all thing between them. in terms of oligarch and stuff, how many da's in this country received money from george sorros. a lot. >> come on. >> how much money has he spent on democratic politicians over his career? the man is ancient

it is probably a ton. now, let's focus on the question. one point he raised was based on the personal relationship of trump and elon musk. paraphrasing here of course. he needs to meet with world leaders. that is the opposite of what is supposed to happen for elected official from the billionaire perspective. i am not a billionaire but i would assume they have a professional view of what should meet with world leaders. well, look. the best $260 million musk ever spent. he got a president for that money. he is now, we have seen over the weekend, we see him attacking the u.k. with misinformation and disinformation, we, you know, we see him deciding that he is going to, you know, support the

far right leader in germany. that is very dangerous. someone who is known to be a buddy of the president to the president-elect to sort of be trying to impose himself into the governments of other countries. countries who are our allies. countries of whom, to your point, we have a national interest. if it is national security interests, if it is our diplomatic interest, if it is our economic interest. so, those are the things on which president-elect trump should be trying to make those decisions. not based on, by the way the question we would be asking for ourselves is, what is in it for elon musk? what are the things that elon musk as a billionaire, as someone who has government contracts, as someone who does business in a number of these countries, what is in it for him in that he is trying to influence the united states of america to

basically continue to line his pockets? >> tw, karen, i have to tell you, if i am president-elect trump i am furious to suggest i was bought or not the one running the country. nice to see both of you. thank you very much. >> thank you for having me. still ahead tonight, you notice anything different last night from the golden globes? how about a lot less politics and no mention of trump. is this the new normal for hollywood? we are live on that next

. hollywood awards season kicking off with the golden globes. and blazers at the helm. missing from the evening, politics, the golden globe is known for the most relaxed ceremony for the season with a

dinner table set up and drinks flowing, makes for a loser vibe that usually comes with not so subtle commentary from the host and of course from the stars. glaser only had one political dig. >> some of you may know me as a stand up comedian and roasts, i am not here to roast you, how could, so famous, powerful, you can really do anything but tell the country who to vote for, it is okay. you will get them next time. [ laughter ] if there is one. [ laughter ] i am scared. ariana, hold my finger. >> as for the stars, zip, nothing. makes for a change for the past several years like in 2018. the golden globes were

the season two premere of hollywood antitrump resistance or in 2017. this headline from cnn. meryl streep attacking trump. this one, mocking trump during golden globes speech or 2020 with this headline from vanity fair. williams delivers powerful golden globes speech about women's rights. maybe the lack of politics this year it is the first awards show on an election that will return trump to office. the "new york times" making the point today that the movies that won awards speak for themselves. quote, brutalist, wicked, given an award for best blockbuster is about prejudices and corruption of power. holly wad change of

tune can not be explained away that easily. good to see you both. let me start with you. why, why the change of tone? is this a return to the don't upset a potential ticket buyer era of hollywood? >> well, i know that there are some entertainment critics, there are some media folks out there that are concerned about this, a chilling effect of this. those in hollywood hurting hollywood for a lack of support for the movie "the apprentice" which is fictional portrayal in trump. that is concerning in some studios. not interested in the film. most of what is going on is what you just said. entertainers, artists, thinking about consumers, trying to put them

front and center. especially the second term. and the actresses and the actors and some of the stars. just like a lot of americans. and by all means they will hear anymore. wait to see what happens. we will see if that is the case. and what is for harris on the campaign trail. celebrity political commentary in general. is this hollywood in a wait and see mode. and adopting that kind of thing. was that michael jordan mind set. and the alibi? >> they said republicans buy my shoes, too. he did not want to alienate buyers, i don't think we need to take our political queues from actors, why are they smarter than anybody else? but, i think, they have huge

platforms, i have been supportive of it. and a huge platform. and at the end, don't go with our enemies but the silence of our friends. there is this wait and see. and if families are being destroyed and torn apart immigrant families, family separation i think you will have a meryl streep and others, the new studios would love to know what they think. amazon and apple. those are the new studios. they are cozying up to trump as are some of the rest. those are the new kings in town. those tech pros >> i wonder what you take, brian, and the idea of the content of that which is awarded speaking for themselves. transidentity. >> yes. the interesting thing of the last two, amazon announced they are licensing a

documentary. i don't think there say lot of demand for her documentary but amazon is sending a signal it does not want content for half of the country wants to appeal to the entire country. >> apple is producing a peter nevaro cooking show. i'm kidding, i'm kidding. but, hey. [ laughter ] >> i, kind of want to watch it, though. let's listen to the highlights by the way from last night's slow who may have been watching the vikings and detroit lions game. listen. >> i like did not know much about wicked going into this year because i had friends in high school. but i loved it. >> the bear, the penguin, baby reindeer they are not just things found in rfk's freezer these are tv shows nominated tonight. if you do lose tonight, please just keep in mind that the point of making art is not to win an award. the point of making art is to start

a tech brand so popular that you never have to make art again. >> will she be back? yes or no. >> yes. absolutely. ratings up from last year. that is san amazing accomplishment. >> should she come back? >> she a friend, pitch perfect. it will be hers to turn down. >> i love it. thanks both of you for being here tonight. and hey, everyone out there, thank you very much for watching. anderson cooper 360 is next

. . . .

. .

what if your mobile network wasn't just built to work out here... ...but was designed differently to also give you blazing fast wifi where you are most of the time? reliable 5g, plus wifi speeds up to a gig where you need it most. xfinity mobile. xfinity internet customers, ask how to get a free 5g phone and a second unlimited line free for a year.