i'm margaret brennan in washington. and today on "face the nation" -- as americans pause to reflect this christmas and hanukkah sunday, we will, too. what happened in 2022 is not likely to stay in 2022. as the biggest stories from the past year are poised to be front and center in 2023. we'll look to the new year in our annual correspondents' roundtable, a 72-year cbs news tradition. our washington beat reporters will weigh in on what's ahead with news, policy and politics they're expecting in the year

ahead. plus, what lessons were learned from the january 6th capitol attack investigation and what impact will they have in 2023 and beyond. we'll talk with one of the top house committee investigators, maryland democrat jamie raskin. it's all just ahead on "face the nation." ♪ good morning and welcome to "face the nation." we wish you a merry christmas and happy hanukkah. thank you for joining us this holiday sunday. the clock is still ticking on the final days of 2022, but there's a lot that's going to carry over to 2023. today we want to take a look at some of those stories. we're joined now by maryland democratic congressman jamie raskin, a member of the committee investigating the january 6th attack. good morning to you. >> hello, margaret. pleased to be with you. >> this is an incredible body of

work, all coming to this conclusion now. what do you think americans at home need to know? >> it's a story of some real villainy and danger to democrat and real heroism and commitment to american democratic freedom. and with democracy under attack all over the world, like with putin invading ukraine and the ukrainian people standing up for their democratic freedom and tyrants and autocrats on the march everywhere, it's good to know that we have a strong resurgent democratic spirit in america. >> the institutions held. but at the conclusion of this, because you've spent almost two years investigating, what happens next for you? are there pieces of this that in the new congress, even under republican control, need to be further investigated or somehow legislated around? >> well, when you say the institutions held, they did hold, just barely.

the truth is that we need to continually be renovating and improving our institutions. >> how so? what do you mean? >> well, i think that the electoral college now, which has given us five popular vote losers as president in our history twice in this century alone, has become a danger, not just to democracy but to american people. it was a danger on january 6th. there are so many curving by-ways and nooks and crannies in the electoral college there's a lot of opportunity for strategic mischief. we should elect presidents, whoever gets the most votes wins. >> so, you don't think that this reforming of the electoral count act, which is really just making clear that the vice president's role is just ceremonial with the electors, you don't think that solves the issue? >> it doesn't solve the fundamental problem. i'm for that.

that's the very least we can do and must do. it's necessary, but it's not remotely sufficient. you know, we spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year exporting american democracy to other countries. and the one thing they never come back to us with is the idea that, oh, that electoral college thing you have is so great. we think we'll adopt that, too. you know, thomas jefferson said he deplored the sanctimonious reverence that some people look at the original handi shortstop work of the framers. he said the framers were great, they were patriots but they don't have the benefit of the experience we've lived. the electoral college doesn't fit anymore which is why i'm a supporter o compact but5 o 16 states and e gog t cas our electors for the winner of the national vote. >> let's get back to the work you have just concluded because you did make the historic

decision to refer to the justice department for potential prosecution a former president of the united states. it's never been done before. but in doing so, it doesn't have the requirement that the justice department act. why did you think making that referral was necessary? why not just let your work stand on its own with the public hearings? >> well, because of the magnitude of the attack on democracy. you know, we don't have a formal statutory offense called crimes against democracy. but that's what everything was together. and then there were hundreds of actual statutory offenses under that. we identified four. there was a deliberate attempt by donald trump to interfere and obstruct and impede a federal proceeding. that was the whole plan. stop the steal meaning, go in there and blockade the house and the senate and the vice president from doing conspiracy

defraud the united states to exchange an honest to goodness presidential election for a counterfeit election complete with fake electors and forcible violence being used to overthrow the process. it involved the introduction of false statements, these fake electors that were put in. and finally, there was aiding and abetting and insurrection, giving aid and comfort to insurrectionists. that's an old crime in america. our constitution repeatedly opposes insurrection and condemns it. of course, we thought we solved that problem in the silver war. that statute we referred to there was passed after the civil war to make sure that people who incite insurrection and aid and abet and give comfort to insurrectionists by saying, i love you, you're very special, those people are guilty of an offense against the united states. even if you're president when

you do it. >> but don't you fear in some ways, because this referral you're making doesn't have the weight of prosecution add thin but do you fear that because it is a political body making this recommendation, that it makes it easier for people to brush away some of what you just laid out? that it makes it easier to characterize it or dismiss it as political in nature? >> loom look, in a democracy the people have a right to the truth. our bipartisan panel with overwhelmingly republican witnesses coming to testify, has laid out the truth, the best that we could find it. it's not been contradicted or undermined in any way, that i'm aware of. and we're turning it over to the people and we're turning it over to the department of justice. and at that point, your point is correct, it's up to them. and it should operate like that. if congress doesn't prosecute, but if we're aware of offenses, we have to turn that evidence

over to people who are prosecutors. >> you're in that process now of sharing with the justice department some of what you found. >> the department of justice has a far vaster panply of investigative resources available to them than we do. >> and a higher benchmark they have to meet in order to prosecute. one thing i've heard people often parse the language, coup, attempted coup. those skeptics you referred to earlier would argue that to substantiate a coup you would need to prove the president was cooking up this plan, directing people to do things, and that he had the support of the military in there, whereas some of what has been laid out is kind of this unwieldy, muddy plan. how do you actually, you know, assert that it was almost democracy that was lost at that moment? >> well, in our report we lay out every element of the plan, including going to the

legislatures to try to get them to nullify the popular vote and pass new statutes that would just appoint trump's electors. that failed. we lay out his plan of going to election officials like raffensperger in georgia. there were more than a dozen cases like that, trying to get them to cco nd t vote coit ection fnd ad.that wond trn conspiet it dy at 's vy ea this is t fut recently failed coup, where the coup plotters get to diagram the weaknesses in existing structure and they're emboldened if not held accountable for what they do. i know mike pence said it would be divisive for the government

to prosecute the case. that's not the test for whether or not prosecutors prosecute a case. the test is whether there was a crime committed. it's the facts and the law. i mean, you could just as well say it would be divisive not to hold a president accountable who's guilty for offenses. in any event, it's not part of the calculus. >> i want to address what you just said, a dress rehearsal for a coup. they are bolstering security for members of the senate when home and involved in the prosecution of those who carried out january 6th. are you fearful of your own security? i mean, what does this say about where we are now this far after january 6th? >> there's very dangerous rhetoric going on out there that's a real break in our lifetis. what itoe democracy with basic civic respect is that people can disagree without resorting to

violence.bu right, which now engages in very dangerous hyperbolic rhetoric that exposes people to danger. but democracy also requires courage. i'm so impressed by the elected officials around the country who stood up around all the threats and intimidation. those people don't get enough credit. >> we agree. congressman, thank you for your time. >> thank you for having me. >> we're going to take a quick break and be right back. stay with us.

we turn now to our annual cbs news correspondents' roundtable. joining us, chief legal correspondent jan crawford, national security correspondent david martin, chief white house correspondent nancy cordes, plus senior investigative correspondent kathy and chief national affairs and justice correspondent jeff pegese.

good morning. good to have you here on the holiday. david, i want to start with you because at this point last year, the world was watching vladimir putin build up his military forces around ukraine and wondering what he was going to do next. and then he did the unthinkable. what is happening on the ground? how is the cold affecting the combat now? >> right now the fighting has died down except in the center, but the important thing on the battlefield is whether when the ground freezes solid, ukraine can take back enough territory or russia lose enough territory so that both sides conclude, this is the best we can do and start negotiating. whether that happens remains to be seen. you know, it sounds counterintuitive, but the

ukrainians have not yet demonstrated the ability to conduct offensive operations. all these russian russians outrun their supply lines, bog down, pull back, and then the ukrainians rush in. whether ukraine can now, with american weapons, dislodge them over these winter months, remains to be seen. >> well, there's no sign that vladimir putin is interested in negotiating, according ko cia, according to the state department at this point. >> he's not given up on his original game, which was to take all of ukraine west to the mountains. >> and it's hard to overstate what a massive impact this invasion had on the world. nancy, it certainly pushed to the front burner for president biden rebuilding european alliance and really funding

ukraine to continue putting up this fight. it's been $68 billion worth of u.s. aid to date. they're asking congress for another $35 billion. how confident is the white house they can sustain this kind of support? >> well, it's very difficult for them to make any headway with kevin mccarthy right now, but he has said is congress is not going to write a blank check on ukraine or anything else. they want to see what the money is going to be used for. there are some republicans who have gone farther than that and said, we have a lot of priorities in the world. it's not just ukraine. they feel there's been more than enough money that has gone towards ukraine already. >> that's what putin is counting on, that donor fatigue and partisan politics undermine this consensus supporting ukraine with, as the words go, whatever it takes for as long as it takes. >> which is what president biden has vowed. jan, the unexpected can really

disrupt all, political plans. you correctly predicted that roe versus wade would be overturned in 2022. you did that on this panel. it was still a shock for the country, though. >> right. >> so, what's ahead for the court in 2023? what do you need to warn us about in terms of impact? >> well, i think that, you know, last term we got a pretty clear picture of what the supreme court is, six justices, largely psix conservative justices, willing to look at all swaths of the law, including abortion rights, gun rights, religion. we saw them, of course, overturn roe versus wade, expand gun rights, expand religious expression. normally when you cover the court, they'll have a big term and then they have a quiet term. that's not the case with this supreme court this year. they have several cases that stand to be very controversial, including affirmative action. i expect, and i guess i can just say my prediction now, i expect this court to overturn the use

of affirmative action in college admissions. that i think will have a significant impact on political discourse that we saw last year with women's rights. there's the case that gay rights groups are very interested in this year. that one, i think, is a tougher call for the court. you're seeing a court that is set on a solidly conservative path. how is that affecting the political process? this is the court we have. it's not going to change, for years. and how does that affect the political process? that means if you want something done and are looking to affect change and you're liberal, the supreme court is not going to be your best outlet. you're going to look to the political process. you have to look to your state legislatures. you're going to have to look to congress. and that, i think, is the message of this court. they're withdrawing from these social issues and saying, go take it up with your legislatures. >> student loan forgiveness hanging in the balance as well. >> in february. they just added that case. that, i think, is a hard case and one this court may agree

with some of the lower courts and say the white house went too far. >> 26 million americans have been more or less promised forgiveness by the biden administration. >> the question is, does he have the authority to do that? >> exactly. >> promises can be empty if they're not grounded in proper authority. >> is there a cost politically to making a promise you can't deliver on? >> sure. i mean, you know, this is something that was cheered by the left, had been pushed by -- certainly by progressives for a long time. republicans were outraged. they said he didn't have the authority. >> jeff and katherine, i want to get to you both because this is a very busy beat, the justice beat and it's going to get busier. jeff, what can you tell us about the timeline for the dual investigations being carried out by the special counsel? >> jack smith is special counsel. he's been sending out a flurry of subpoenas across the country. connected to this, fake elector scheme, this scheme to overturn the election results.

so, he's been moving fairly quickly, wouldn't you say? and he's -- clearly he has a plan in terms of how he wants to prosecute this case. where it ends up, we don't know yet. but he's covering some ground. the department of justice prior to h arrival hasn't covered. they're moving pretty swiftly. in that case, you know, we should probably take our vacation soon because i have a feeling after the new year, we're going to have to start running even faster. >> does it run right into the 2024 presidential race? >> i don't think so. do you? >> i think it wraps up before then. former senior justice department officials i've been speaking to when they look at this broad array of investigations, they believe if criminal charges are brought, they see the mar-a-lago case as one of the more likely options because it's a more discreet set of facts that's easier to wrangle, for lack of a better legal term. january 6th is a more challenging case, they say, because so many of the actions

were taken while he was the top executive within the u.s. government. so, there are all these questions of privilege. my question is, if there is a mar-a-lago prosecution, how does that go with the public sentiment? i mean, it's a records case, right? and is that going to have the same impact as a january 6th prosecution? especially when you're seeing people who are looking at multi-year prison sentences who say they went to capitol hill, if not but for the direction of that president. >> uh-huh. as a lawyer, do you want to weigh in? >> i think that analysis is exactly right. also how it might land with the public. kudos. >> i feel very -- thank you. >> we won't even get into the political part of it, but you rightly point out that that's also got to be a factor here. i do want to go to the other case that i know you've been tracking, catherine, and that is the one before the u.s. attorney

in delaware regarding the president's son, hunter biden. this case has been under way since 2018. when will it wrap up? >> b, ess woulstart the questi months now. see uptings in activity, we think there's going to be movement on that case and it recedes into the background again. my question is, when you look at the big picture of foreign money here, and we see this with republicans and democrats, what was it all about at the end of the day? was it about trying to enrich a family, buy influence or access? if that is not the case here, as the white house says, then it should be put to rest. that's the big question. what will the u.s. attorney in delaware do now that a special counsel was appointed in the trump investigation? i think there's generally a feeling that there's more pressure for the appointment of a special counsel or some kind of adjudication of the indication. will there be indictment or no

indictment? >> the u.s. attorney of delaware was a trump appointee and that it will ultimately, though, still go to attorney general merrick garland. how is this factoring in at all to the thinking at the white house? as we know, the president is making a decision about whether to run for re-electio's talng ae holida, as he't say that his ow and what happens next isn't part of some conversation here. >> sure. although he knew that his son would be a likely target, even before he ran the first time. so, you could argue that that was sort of baked into the equ equation. i think they're preparing for not just that but also the likelihood that congressional republicans are going to start investigating that laptop and -- >> that's a certainty. >> and that hunter biden has ever done once they take control. and the white house is beefing up their counsel's office for that very reason and their position right now is when they think the investigation is legitimate, they'll cooperate.

they clearly don't believe that the hunter biden investigation on capitol hill is legitimate. but, you know, they're going to have to respond to it in some way when it happens. >> i think one of the wild cards here, and it's a big if, but if there is an indictment of hunter biden, that i wouldrgueld frustrate the republican house investigations because it would put him and his legal team in a position to say, listen, we're facing a criminal indictment. we're not really in a position to cooperate with congress because it creates more legal exposure. to me that's always sort of in the back of my mind because it brings a sort of certainty to the situation. a sort of resolution in some respects. >> i wonder if there's going to be some sort of plea deal. because i just don't -- the people i've talked to on this case, they are sort of curious about whether at the end of the day this is going to be something that, you know, the biden family even wants to go away. let's agree to a plea deal and move on. >> and we're going to move on and take a short break. we'll be right back.

the world is full of make or break moments. especially if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture, it's time to make your move to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia. only prolia is proven to help strengthen and protect bones ra ure with one shoery nt do ne to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia. low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva. serious allergic reactions like low blood pressure trouble breathing, throat tightness, face, lip, or tongue swelling, rash, itching, or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems, as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip, groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping, skipping, or delaying prolia, as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. ♪ don't wait for a break. call your doctor now and ask how prolia can help you.

♪ what will you do? ♪ what will you change? ♪ will you make something better? ♪ will you create something entirely new? ♪ our dell technologies advisors provide you with the tools and expertise you need to do incredible things. because we believe there's an innovator in all of us. as someone living with type 2 diabetes, i want to keep it real and talk about some risks. with type 2 diabetes you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. even at your a1c goal, you're still at risk ...which if ignored could bring you here... ...may put you in one of those... ...or even worse. too much? that's the point. get real about your risks and do something about it. talk to your health care provider about ways to lower your risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. learn more at getrealaboutdiabetes.com

if you can't watch the full "face the nation," can you set your dvr or we're available on demand. plus you can watch us through our cbs or paramount app, and replayed on our cbs news streaming network throughout the day sundays. a pfizer vaccine! so am i. because i'm at risk for pneumococcal pneumonia. i'm asking about prevnar 20® because there's a chance pneumococcal pneumonia could put me in the hospital. if you're 19 or older, with certain chronic conditions like copd, asthma, diabetes, or heart disease or are 65 or older, you may be at increased risk for pneumococcal pneumonia. prevnar 20® is approved in adults to help prevent infections from 20 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. in just one dose. don't get prevnar 20® if you've had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. adults with weakened immune systems may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain and swelling at the injection site,

muscle pain, fatigue, headache, and joint pain. i want to be able to keep my plans. that's why i chose to get vaccinated with prevnar 20®. because just one dose can help protect me from pneumococcal pneumonia. ask your doctor or pharmacist about getting vaccinated with prevnar 20® today.

we'll be right back with a lot more "face the nation." stay with us.

♪ we are back with our cbs news year-end roundtable. i'll start with you, jeff. drug issues, fentanyl, crime. this is a continued story since 2020. when do we see improvement in some of these issues? >> it's going to be a while. itsloun n matter where you wnt o t, i talked to families there who have lost loved ones. it's almost as if the american public doesn't get how deadly and potent fentanyl, the synthetic drug, they make it in a lab, they ship it.

it's hard to catch coming across the