all on the most reliable network. so choose a data option that's right for you. get nationwide 5g included and save up to $300 a year on the network rated #1 in customer satisfaction. it's your wireless. your rules. only with xfinity mobile. hi. today the fog of chaos that's surrounded the insurrection last week is lifting. it's becoming clearer today what the capitol was and was not. what it was, a trump-incited attack on a coequal branch of government, one trump initiated and, and one trump inspired in remarks he made to his supporters immediately before the insurrection commenced, one he committed to joining in when he said he would walk with the across the board to the capitol,

and one he may have very well made worse by refusing to -- it may illustrately expos him to conviction in the senate and criminal charges. this was last night with my colleague. >> what was shocking, as you mentioned, visitors aren't allowed in the capitol complex. since march, since the start of covid that's been shut down. all tours are shut down. the only reason you have a visitor is on official visit, so to see these groups around the capitol complex was really striking. my chief of staff called the sergeant-at-arms to say what is going on, and he reiterated the

only way they could have gotten sweet the complex with a member or that member's it was. we now know the violent groups had inside knowledge of the capitol grounds. >> the plot thickens. there's also new reporting today on what the attack was not. it was not an intelligence failure. law enforcement knew exactly what was planned and where. the top intelligence official inside the new york city police department says so, and says his department shared specific intelligence with capitol police, adding, quote, it was not an intelligence failure. the intelligence was there. what we passed on to capitol police was largely tracking with what the capitol police and d.c. police were seeing. it blatantly contradicts the claim from the d.c. police chief, that there was there was no intelligence. this comes as the fbi races to

push out intelligence ahead of the inauguration next week. the numbs reporting on this, quote -- the nib urged police chiefs to be on high alert for extremist activity, and to share intelligence on any threats they encounter. as the u.s. government issued a dire intelligence bulletin, warning of potential violence ahead of the inauguration, the call with police chiefs, christopher wray, and ken cuccinelli warned about potentially attacks on state cap tolls, on federal buildings, on the homes of congressional members and on businesses. the ongoing threat posed by donald trump and the state of the investigation is where we start this hour. joining our conversation, elizabeth newman, former assistant secretary of counter terrorism and threat prevention at the department of homeland security, now an adviser to the group defending democracy together, is back. plus anna palmer, ceo of

punchbowl news, and peet strucker is back. pete, i want to start with you. it has been opaqueopaque, and t the nicee way to put it, on exactly what is going on, and the feeling of the first impression where law enforcement stood around, the insurrectionists were standing around like they were at a tailgate. they weren't hiding their faces or running from the scene of the crime. that impression hasn't changed much. can you tell us what is going on, that we might not be able to see from where we sit? >> thanks for having me, nicolle. first they're trying to understand what occurred in terms of breaking the law, and the second bigger question is, why this happened? i and a lot of my colleagues, both retired and some within the bureau, looked with both

frustration and anger. i tallied it um, five state of the union addresses and two gnaw raise. when the government wants to secure the capitol, it can do it very well. it clearly didn't happen here, and for that to happen, a lot of different systems had to fail. there's a time to look into figuring out exactly the nuts and bolts of why that occurred. the primary issue is whysh is secures the capitol, and getting a handle on all the law breakers who intruded and attacked or nation's capitol. >> what is the impact to anyone who is undetectible who hasn't been in the position, of a president inspiring an act that became violent. is there pot tur to be back on their heels? is that part of why this looked like such a mismatch, the president's supporters and

insurrectionists didn't look like they he met resistance at all. >> i suspect a variety of factors went into the response last week. when the president of the united states actively encourages and incites protesters to storm the capitol, that has an impact, not only on the protesters, but certainly -- when we look at how aggressively we look -- i started in the fbi as a domestic terrorism analyst when we created the first analysis unit. there was always a immediate problem, that's politically sensitive. if you're asking agents and investigators to stick their neck out to look into people who are breaking the law, but that also the president is defending, that will be a problematic area for any investigative agency to really robustly pursue. i think we're going to find not only that, but a lot of things

that went into the breakdown leading up to next week. >> when you hear congresswoman sherrill say on rachel maddow's show, and other members have confirmed that something that people were aware of the day before the riots, that these groups were there on tours with members, and perhaps staff, what does that investigation look like? >> well, it's going to be interesting. these allegedly are members of congress. what i have seen in the media reporting, who are bringing in groups of people under their imprimatur. -- members of congress who may other may not have been doing anything but legitimate activity. it's tricky, but it's something

that needs to be looked into. from what i've heard out of the congressional leadership, there is some understanding of the need to get to the bottom of exactly what happened. >> i want to bring one other piece of reporting, and i want to bring this to you, elizabeth. "the washington post" is reporting that dozens of people were on the terrorist watchlist and came to d.c. on the day of the riot. you or pete, correct me if i'm long here, the no-fly list is separate from the watchlist. i understand the watch list is a bigger list and people get -- the majority of the watchlist individuals in washington that day are suspected white supremacists whose past conduct alarmed oinvestigators. i imagine, elizabeth, you came across facts like these, and we have talked a bit on the air about what it was like to take threats, especially domestic

terrorism threats to the white house, you met resistance, but tell me what you make of this reporting. >> actually somewhat heartened, that means they have made progress in tackling domestic terrorism and treating it with the same level of concern that we have treated foreign terrorist threats, that they are starting to add people that immediate the criteria to the tsbd. i think the article i read it, accurate depicts while that watchlist is helpful for some purposes, its not designed and there are not tools in place to give you early warning, if you will, if a group of individuals that are watchlisted decide to show uperin location. the primary uses that we have for watchlisting is for screening at the border, and for other investigate purposes.

there's a system in place to run a query against appropriate database, to be able to detect if the person you pulled over might be watchlisted. while it's intriguing that they were watchlisted i don't think that means there was a security failure just based on that alone. the system for watchlisting is not designed to give you that foreknowledge that they're all huddling at the same place together, so therefore something might be planned. >> so it sort of goes to john miller's point, that this wasn't an intelligence failie. the intelligence was widely available. it was gathered, noted, and according to the new york police department's intelligence unit, it was passed along to the law enforcement agencies responsible for protecting the capitol on wednesday. if you were looking at all these pieces of intelligence, elizabeth, what would your preparation recommendation for last wednesday?

>> i am still puzzled, even as information is coming out. it is still an utter security failure in my mind. i've been saying that since last wednesday. there's no excuse for the lack of preparation we saw. the information was there. we floe that there was, for example, a call among fusion senators on monday, where they were comparing notes and expressing concern that violence was likely planned for january 6th. fbi and dhs were on those calls. clearly from nypd's reporting, they gave the information to capitol police. while he know less than capitol police, and as peter mentioned, it's a coequal branch, so the executive branch tries not to tell the legislative break what they should do. at the very least fbi and dhs should have put out a joint bulletin, much like yesterday -- >> yeah. >> that is a standard protocol. we always have a duty to warn,

even if we're not sure what we're looking at. we've also erred in the past and warned, and that didn't occur i don't know if it was attempted and perhaps squashed by political leadership, or at least from talking to people on, former colleagues, colleagues still on the inside, it is my sense that they knew something was up. maybe they didn't fully understand the picture of a specific attack on the capitol, but they knew bad actors was coming, they knew violence was planned. they should have had riot gear, a much stronger perimeter, should have had national guard available. you always prepare for the worst and hope that the worst doesn't happen.

>> pete, do you have any visibility as to why that wouldn't have happened. i spoke to two members of congress who told their staff to stay home. one told her husband where her will was. we saw from the norfolk office of the fbi, a memo was sent with haunting echos to the field memo before 9/11 about some of hijackers taking flight training. was it a failure to commune indicate? was a a failure to react? where do you think the breakdown was from where you sit? >> well, it is confounding. i absolutely agree there is some question that we need to ask about whether or not the fbi or any other federal agency attempted to do things and were directed or otherwise forced in and out to do them. i am curious and disappointed frankly we haven't heard from

fbi director wray, we haven't heard from the acting attorney general. i don't know why that . wray wants to speak or has been discouraged or prevented from speaking, but the nation needs to hear from these forbes. the workforces need to know their organizations are behind them, and that comes from both positions that carry a great deal of moral weight. when the american population hearing they wrong and serious, they're heartened by that. when the participants, the people who broke the law, hear that, they understand this is not right, that this is against not only the law, but also the values that america holds dear. i would hope that the explanations we have seen and increasing detail about what we didn't see will become increasingly clear. we've got to get through the inauguration. once we get a handled on all protesters, charge them, and get

them convicted, then we can understand what happened and make bigger changes, if needed. >> one of the ways the american public are understanding are from videos, one that's circulating widely on social media. we'll talk about it on the other side. >> on the other room, right where you're standing, glass is broken, and it's a dropdown, there's a room underneath it. there's also two doors in the other room. one to the right, you can go in. so people should probably coordinate teague and get their -- the building. >> she was participating in the insurrection, and she says, quote, people should probably coordinate together if you're going to take down the building. if you recognize her, please call the fbi. what do you make of the stark

nature of the video evidence that's existing and what still is a vacuum and a real lack of vocal condemnation from the executive branch or any efforts to reassure what pete ands elizabeth are talking about, that everybody that was there will be caught, prosecuted and sentenced. >> a couple things. i've worked out of the capitol for more than a decade. to congresswoman sherrill's point it's been a ghost town since covid. very few members in town, a few of us reporters who are up there most of the time. so this concept that there were tours happening is totally flabbergasting. to me i'm flabbergasted hearing that. we haven't seen that for months. it is typically a very locked-down building. i have to wear a badge, go

through a metal detector to even get in. you have to flash your badge several times. when you look at the earlier protests around black lives matter, even around some of the supreme court hearings, they had cop out in force. they had barricades up. they were prepared in a way that they clearly were not last week. so the issue really is the opaqueness of the capitol police force. you cannot -- members of congress have been stonewalled. congress funds the capitol police, and there's a lot of members of congress, both republicans and democrats, were frustrated, because they can't get their questions answered. so as much as we're all concerned about what's going to happen this yex week, of course, with security. right now it feels like you're living in a war zones in washington, d.c. i've never seen it quite as is the amount of metal, national

guardsmen every ten feet. they're sleeping in the capitol. it feels like the city is in lockdown and kind of on age, just waiting for next week to happen. there needs to be a step back, a look at what happened, what a complete fail letter -- clearly that woman in that video, knowing where the different areas of the capitol would be able to be infiltrated in a serious way, that's just not somebody who's gone through statutory hall. >> i can't find mea way through the cap tool s. and though those are questions, there's no one to whom to present those questions. yesterday donald trump impeached a second time, the difference,

though, it would appear in terms of steaming into a senate trial is that ten republicans offered some of the most brutal indictments of donald trump's conduct and lack of fitness. i want to real a new statement from lisa mur cows kiss -- his words incited violence which led to the deaths and injuries of americans. the desecration of the capitol and briefly interfered with the government's ability to ensure a peaceful transfer of power. such unlawful actions cannot go without consequence. the house taos responded swiftly and i believe appropriately with impeachment. this feels like it's on very sort of shaky foundation, in the ways the last impeachment wasn't, in that senators don't know what they don't know was it

denied, what is your sense of where there sort of feeling is, because with republicans, i think it's fair to say there's always a calculation except with mitt romney. where do you feel like that calculation stands today? >> i think we are in a total different ball game when it comes to impeachment this time in the senate. first of all mitch mcconnell for a few more days, leading open for the fact he could be open for impeachment. he says he wants to see where the facts are, but the fact that the leader of senate republicans is leaving it open to hearing the case is a very different posture for republicans. you also have a lot of republicans who i think, one, their over safety and security was put at risk. they're feeling the impacts of the president's words, of him inciting this mob in a very personal way. i actually think the longer they've had to reflect on it and their own security, the fact now they're being told in some cases

they should be wearing flack jackets and bulletproof vests is a very different intensity with which they're going to view this impeachment case, and this lands on the fact that i think the longer it goes, they're not trying to rush this, they think it could be a couple weeks, if not longer, that only leaves more time for more stories that are coming out, more video coming out to show how calculated this was, it wasn't just a fever dream that happened, that there was people planning this, executing it, and were helped and incited by the president. >> just as the words come out of all of our mouths as i hear you speak is otherworldly. for that reason we will continue to call on all of you. and peter strzok's book "compromised" is helpful in

figuring this out. the minuscule group of staff had to force a cya/hostage video from trump yesterday, it was an attempt to show that he lost fair and square in the most secure election in history. we're still waiting. while the president huffs and puffs, outside this is happening. biden/harris signs being put up directly in view of the current president. the very latest from biden world today. plus vaccine distribution in this country still way below expectations, as the country sets record after record. long lines, short supplies, the battle to get a hold of the coronavirus rages on, all of that and more why "deadline: white house" continues. e why "deadline: white house" continues.

my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my a1c. because my body can still make its own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it, lowering my blood sugar from the first dose. once-weekly trulicity responds when my body needs it, 24/7. trulicity is for type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. it isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, changes in vision, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. side effects include indigestion, fatigue, belly pain, decreased appetite, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting which can lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems.

i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. ♪ ♪ we made usaa insurance for veterans like martin. when a hailstorm hit, he needed his insurance to get it done right, right away. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa

republicans, let's face it, damaged themselves in front of the nation by not going ahead and declaring that the election had been won by president-elect biden. they've had to deal with a president that is volatile and unstable, and certainly appeals to the darkest of americans' emotions, hopefully to make it through. now obviously they're extremely disappointed, i'm sure, with where they've had to be or felt like they had to be during this period of time and what it's done to our country. certain not the most important, what it's done to our country and democracy all around the

world, but it's what it's done to the republican brand. >> that was former gop senator bob corker on the price republicans are paying to stay with donald trump. he was first notably the first to say he doesn't have the competency to be held. think hi's's also -- and with just six days left in hi term, ten republicans voting to impeach him for inciting last week's insurrection, his hold on his party is now weaker than at any point in his presidency. "new york times" feels that he feels blindside i by mitch mcconnell for his decision to leave the door open on conviction, and furious how kevin mccarthy -- condemning any. and advisers said he had to be persuaded from going to the

house floor to defend himself. nick is also an msnbc contributor. let me read some more from the great "new york times" reporting. they write, quote -- mr. trump did not mention the name of joe biden in that video. he did not concede the election. he did not talk about mr. biden's inauguration, which is to take place nest weeks under extraordinary security because of the -- he did, however, denounce what he called restrictions of free speech, referring not just to social media platforms that banned him, but alluding to the assertion that house members -- the video was a failure. the video make it worse. he has to say one sentence. he has to say i lost fair and square, all of this is a lie.

i really liked playing president but i lost. that it. he goes out to complain about tech policy? what? >> his video had one purpose, not to heal the breach and make us all feel better about things. the purpose of this video was to take him out of the liability for the violence, and to lessen his legal problems after he leaves office. in the past when the president has gotten into hot water, he does one thing for the advisers, one thing for himself. it's always a hostage type of video planned by the advisers, and after that, on twitter complaining what he actually thinking. he can't do that now, so we're not seeing the other half. it's meaningful from the reports from my colleagues, that he had lawyers working on it for him. he was trying to walk back hi incitement of the violence.

that was the purpose. it was not to make hunky-dory in the country. >> i bet with you that he will build a set that looks exactly same for his post presidency. i wonder -- there were more lawyers involved than speechwriters, but whether you think they are still reaches his desired aims, as nick said, which are to try to cleave him after from some potential legal culpability. >> this was a reverse of what we have seen throughout his presidency, right? how many times have we seen lindsey graham or brett kavanaugh saying something unbelievable, and stephen miller, he wasn't speaking to whoever he was talking to on tv. he was just talking to donald trump, because he knows

donald trump was watching. this whole video was an audience of one. whatever judge he thinking he'll be in front at some point down the road for inciting an attack, he's talking to the judge. that was the whole purpose of this. so, look, his lawyers may think that's going to help him out, but if there was ever a living human being who is the epitome of circumstance, it's donald trump, every tweet he wrote. so i don't know that the video helping him with any remotely competent judge. the best bet is maybe he gets a change in venue and ends up in front of a judge who he appointed. most competent judges won't let him off. >> watching hi future legal travails will be interesting. the way he in some ways successfully bullied the mueller

probe will be one of the most fascinating chapters. i want to turn with you, nick, though, to all the great reporting, a lot of this in your paper and my colleagues have a report that trump's concerned about the future of his personal fortune is among the reasons some of his ally versus suggested that he invite president-elect joe biden to the white house for a customary meeting. that's according to three people. it's why trump may deliver a farewell address, a tradition, to highlight his -- promonthents have said any way he can make good on the transition of power will be better for your brand in the long term. i think with that reporting in the record, we should ignore and discount anything he does, try to walk back his coup attempt. >> it's certainly true he's

walking into a very hard situation on january 21st. he's got $400 million in personally guaranteed loans coming due. he's lost a lot of business at his properties. the thing we saw after charlottesville, when people de-booked in protest, is nothing compared to what we'll see as the presidency ends. can you imagine being the mainstream bank that wants to lend him money, imagine being a trade group that wants to book the doral for a meeting? it's compounded politically. look, i think the incoming dnc chair if he could, he should pay trump to stay in the limelight as long as possible and float a run for 2024. what we have learned is the republicans can't win without him, but they also can't quite win with him. again, it's a hostage situation for the whole party. >> i mean, i think the dnc is

doing fine without any of mice advice, but i think setting up a camera to see who goes in and out. i think the taint, the stink, the stench is so -- it is like charlottesville every single day. i mean, good people on both sides of the kkk is the natural precursor for sending your white supremacist mob to the capitol to carry out insurrection. i don't know who touching ivanka trump. i don't know who touches jared kushner. i don't know who walks into any meeting and sits down next to them. what do you think the lasting taint is on this family in a post presidency, jason? >> i think that they will all suffer financially in ways we can't even comprehend yet. we don't even know how many court cases they're going after, how many they will be faced with. look, they may be able to eke something out in the united states if they're able to stay

here, but think about all the foreign properties, all the foreign leaders thought they had to get properties in ireland, russia, to even get a phone call from this administration. he's not going to have national security that has to stay in his particular hotel. he's going to lose a tremendous amount of money, jared and ivanka, look -- not to attack any particular magazine, they'll go to some social magazine, what did we learn? we felt so bad. we complained about babies in cages. they're going to try to rehab themselves. that's what they're going to try to do, but it won't work. america will recognize they sat -- they could have left this administration if they wanted to. they didn't. they sat by and just as complicit in every terrible thing their father did as anybody else. i don't think there's going to be a sean spicer cleanup job for any of the people who stayed this late in the administration. if you're still here six days from now, you'll have to deal

with this taint six years from now. >> i would do anything to see jared on "dancing with the stars." thank you both. president trump is likely packing up. stacks every empty boxes were deliver to the white house grounds and a moving truck was supported a short time ago. we'll talk about the incoming biden administration, next. inc biden administration, next hold the phone in front of you. how's that? get...get mom. [ding] power e*trade gives you an award-winning app with 24/7 support when you need it the most. don't get mad. get e*trade and start trading today. ever wonder what retinol dermatologists use to fight wrinkles? it's what i use! neutrogena®. the #1 retinol brand used most by dermatologists. rapid wrinkle repair® visibly smooths fine lines in 1 week. deep wrinkles in 4. so you can kiss wrinkles...

and other wrinkle creams goodbye! rapid wrinkle repair®. pair with our most concentrated retinol ever for 2x the power. neutrogena®.

to defend against dark forces attacking your organization,

you need to see in the dark. to have the wisdom to understand multiple cyber threats. the precision focus to end attacks instantly. on computers, mobile devices, servers and the cloud. join the world's leading companies in our mission to defend. cybereason. end cyber attacks. from endpoints to everywhere.

in the weeks that the outgoing president incited an insurrection, and got himself impeached the second time, the incoming president has introduced any members of his cabinet and pledged new action on the raging coronavirus. "new york times" describes the strategy like this -- hi fellow democrats are red-hot with rage after the assault, but president-elect joe biden has maintained a steady cool, largely staying away from the debate that happened on wednesday. an immediate focus for team biden, getting the cabinet picks confirmed. the first will get a hearing tomorrow, with avril haines, is and with inauguration day just six days away, the physical symbol of the transfer of power popped out just outside president trump's windows today

at the white house. joining our conversation is elena taurean, and elena, take me through, which is in so many ways not an ordinary transition. it's a hot switch. one person will leave without handing over really any of the most sensitive or crucial inside information, as it's been reported in axios and the post, many places, and the other will step into a country in crisis. >> that's exactly right. also remember, the president-elect's transition was delayed for several weeks with some of the most crucial briefings he should have been receive. so he a specially after seeing what happened last week after the capitol, and just six days away from taking office, normally by this point you've had confirmation hearings,

already have vetted a lot of the nominees, particular the national security ones that are imperative to have in office on day one. they haven't had that opportunity because of the georgia senate races because of the capitol siege, now impeachment this week. there's been a lot of distractions, all with the president refusing to accept the election results. a lot of this is happens quickly, so it's crucial that republicans are finally heeding the concern of democrats and the biden transition to get people like avril haines and get her confirmation in before the inauguration, so they can be confirmed on day one. >> i think someone on my team told me former president obama i think had six members of his cabinet confirmed at this point. how does the biden team plan to make up time? >> i think it's extraordinary,

nicolle. if you look, too, the top three federal agencies responding for protecting the country, the depend of justice, department of defense, homeland security, all have acting officials in those positions currently. you have the potential that biden starts with acting people in those positions as well. i think biden is hoping -- they have been petsching especially for his department of homeland security nominee, and i think they are noticing what happened in the capitol last week. they're noticing the tensions, the ramp-up of security around inauguration, frankly they're really pressing members of the senate to move on these nominations. you're starting to see some signs of them moving, but really george h.w. bush in 1989 took office out of any of his

nominees confirmed. you have the potential that biden starts in that scenario as well. certainly he won't have the five that obama did. they're starting at a deficit, at a time with so many crises happening simultaneously. i think the biden people are getting worried and starting to put some political pressure on members of congress to act and act quickly. >> matt, what's your take on how they're sort of treating an impending impeachment trial? they seem so hands off, so focused on coronavirus, the sense of they don't know what they don't know when they take over the reins. and then i had some pratt reporting folks that biden is live individual, and really trying to check his emotion on seeing what happened at the capitol a week ago, and he's put down some important markers. i think he was the first to call

it domestic terrorism, the first to speak of sedition and insurrection, but there is a definite effort by his team to distance him from what's happen. >> i think he and his team were privately shaken, as most people were, by the scenes from last week. biden has spent more time in the senate, almost more than anyone in history. so i think he's particularly emotional about what transpired, but there's a remarkable difference between private emotions and what he is doing publicly. if you just look at the last 24 hours, yesterday you had the remarkable historic second impeachment of a president. biden released a statement on that, but tonight we're going to hear from him. he's going to be talking not about impeachment, not about what happened last week, but about stimulus, and about covid relief, and about how he wants

his administration to get started. so i do think they are worried about the dual tracks that things are heading in right now. they do see an important need to start off on a policy front, on a uniting front, and an impeachment does neither of those things. so i think they're trying to separate those two emotions. >> publicly and privately they seem to all be focused, regardless of where they've been appointed to serve in the government, on covid on president-elect ace biden's part with his own policy process. what is your sense -- do you share the sense there's a laser focus on the entire executive branch on covid? the coronavirus, and the

economic impacts are the two biggest challenges. but it's really difficult. honestly especially -- exactly why he's not talking about it. he doesn't -- which is distracting. i think everything he's trying to do and this massive -- -- so he need republicans in the house. he needs republicans in the senate to help him get these done. they have laser-thin minorities, so yes, better that they have a democratic senate, and that should help, but it's so tight they could afford these people through this -- trial that they're accepting. i think from my sources at least they're telling me they're expecting to shorten it and have this trial wrapped up as soon as possible so they can continue to laser in on what he plans to announce tonight, which will

have a huge price tag, i'm told. that was in the last package, so i think you should expect something there, and then also a lock about the vaccine. >> and the president-elect plans to put 100 million vaccinations in the first is 00 days. is that? >> yeah. yeah. we'll be hearing from president-elect biden who will deliver he remarks tonight. we will all keep our eyes on that. thank you both. matt and alayna, no bringing us up to speed. um next for us, some good news in vaccine development. a new one-shot vaccine is proving safe and very, very promising in some early trials. we'll tell you all about it, next. e early trials we'll tell you all about it, next

♪ ♪ 2020's done a new era has begun

so keep pushing forward... because this is twenty twenty won make a different future start different at godaddy.com

the united states is enduring its deadliest week of the pandemic since it began. nearly 4,000 people died yesterday, just yesterday. bringing the total number of american deaths up to 387,000. and while there is good news on the vaccine front, johnson & johnson's one-dose vaccine seems increasely promising for both young people and old, there's still big problems with vaccine distribution. all across the country, people are facing long lines, red tape, and short supply. compounding those problems, a

persistent hesitancy among some to get vaccinated at all. joining our conversation, epidemiologist dr. anne rimoin at ucla. it's becoming this not good news/bad news but searing, wrenching, heartbreaking toll that the pandemic is taking, and good news and good developments in the scientific community. when will they merge? >> that's a really good question, nicole. you know, here's the thing. we're starting to have really good news. we have vaccines that are available. they're getting in arms, albeit slowly, but they're getting into arms. we have a third vaccine candidate that's out there, could be some good news soon. but we are still in the thick of it. we had 4,000-plus deaths yesterday. we're having another terrible day today. the projection of the number of deaths that we're going to

potentially be seeing in the coming weeks is really dire so we have a long way to go before we start getting to that other side. several months. >> anne, why is it -- and this is anecdotal but it's the same for everyone i know. in april, even though i live in the epicenter, i didn't know a lot of people who had it. i knew a handful. now i know dozens. why does it feel like it's everywhere? are people giving up or is it the more contagious strains? >> it feels like it's everywhere because it is everywhere now. that's the difference between then and now. the number of cases that we're seeing daily is just staggering, and i always tell people, you know, the things that you were doing back in, you know, several months ago, are much more dangerous today because there's much more virus circulating in the community. so, going to the grocery store, doing things that you would normally do are significantly more laden with risk because today there's more virus circulating and that's why we

feel like we know everybody around us is -- knows somebody who has covid, has had an experience with covid at this point, it's because it is everywhere, and so now is the time to be more careful than ever. >> what does that mean? i mean, can you just remind everybody? wearing a mask. does it mean not going to the grocery store? >> i live in los angeles and in los angeles, we're having an enormous surge. it's a surge upon a surge. we're really in dire straits here so i have limited my exposure to other people to the absolute bare minimum. and what i tell people is, if you can stay home, you should stay home. there are many people who don't have a choice. they're essential workers, people who have to go to work, who have to go places so if you can do your part by minimizing going out, by doing curbside pickup when you're buying something or getting something from a restaurant, anything you can do to minimize the number of people out there providing this virus opportunity to spread, that's the thing to be doing right now. so, i don't go to the grocery store now. >> it's amazing that we have to sort of keep talking to each

other about what the right things to do are, because i think even having a mask on, you're not completely protected wherever there are other humans. dr. anne rimoin, thank you so much for answering questions. still to come for us, if james comey were still director of the fbi, what would he be doing today to respond to the deadly riot on capitol hill? i'll ask him that coming up in the next hour of "deadline white house." ming up in the next hour of "deadline white house. do we really need a sign to live, laugh, and love? -yes. -the answer is no. i can help new homeowners not become their parents.

-kee-on-oh... -nope. -co-ee-noah. -no. -joaquin. -no. it just takes practice. give it a shot. [ grunts, exhales deeply ] -did you hear that? -yeah. it's a constant battle. we're gonna open a pdf. who's next? progressive can't save you from becoming your parents, but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto with us. no fussin', no cussin', and no --

to defend against dark forces attacking your organization, you need to see in the dark.

to have the wisdom to understand multiple cyber threats. the precision focus to end attacks instantly. on computers, mobile devices, servers and the cloud. join the world's leading companies in our mission to defend. cybereason. end cyber attacks. from endpoints to everywhere. stand up and fight. stand up and hold your representatives accountable. >> today is the day american

patriots start taking down names and kicking ass. >> let's have trial by combat. >> we're going to walk down to the capitol, because you'll never take back our country with weakness. you have to show strength. if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. >> hi again, everyone, it's 5:00 in new york. it's all right there on tape, hiding in plain sight. the words uttered just before the capitol was overrun by insurrectionists. yesterday's vote by the house to impeach donald trump for inciting the violence was the most bipartisan impeachment vote in american history. ten republicans voting with all the democrats to impeach donald trump. the process now makes its way to the senate for a trial, which majority leader mitch mcconnell made clear won't happen until trump is out of office. for the impeachment managers will prosecute their case against donald trump. in the words of those ten republicans who voted to impeach him provide a glimpse into the arguments we could see the

managers use to convince republicans in the senate to convict. congressman david called trump's rhetoric un-american, abhorrent, and absolutely an impeachable offense. others noted their decision was made by taking stock of the picture of the president's conduct. congressman anthony gonzalez pointed out, quote, during the attack itself, the president abandoned his post while many members asked for help, thus further endangering all present and from congressman tom rice, quote, for hours while the riot continued, the president communicated only on twitter and offered only weak requests for restraint. it was that refusal to call on the rioters to stop that now seems to have those around trump worried about his future. yesterday, after the votes were tallied, trump released a five-minute hostage video, if you will, with what could be considered his attempt at the strongest condemnation he's offered of the violence, saying it has no place in our country. he skipped the most important part, though, the thing behind

all the violence, the thing animating it. his own lies about the election. he did not say, i lost fair and square, joe biden won in the most secure election in american history. those words did not appear on that video. "new york times" notes that his lawyers were behind what was said on the tape. they write this. quote, the aides, most involved in the language on that video, were the white house counsel, pat and mr. trump's main speech writer, steven miller. there's one lawyer trump doesn't have close by his side these days, rudy giuliani, more from the "times," mr. giuliani is among those facing recriminations because of their involvement in inciting the mob that assaulted the capitol. a group of former assistant u.s. attorneys who worked with him when he served as a federal prosecutor in manhattan expressed dismay on wednesday with his appearance at the rally beforehand. in a letter, the group said that mr. giuliani's comments, in which he urged trump supporters to engage in, quote, trial by

combat, to stop the certification of the election results, contributed to the loss of life and inflicting damage on the country. a president and his allies bracing for legal battles ahead is where we start this hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends. phil rucker, "washington post" reporter, also joining us, contributing columnist, donna edwards is back, and neal katyel is back. there's this line that made me, you know, say my typical boohoo, but you guys are reporting that trump is isolated and angry at aides for failing to defend hymn as he's impeached again. what would that -- what did he think they were going say? what did that defense -- what did he think they should have been out saying? he's particularly mad at kayleigh mcenany. and i guess when you have lost kayleigh, you're really bleeped. jared kushner and the kind of people that we usually see

defending him. >> yeah, nicole, i think he wanted to see an army of people out there saying exactly what he said himself on tuesday when he was down in texas, when he said, look, his remarks at the ellipse inciting that mob riot on the capitol were, quote, totally appropriate. but nobody has said that. there's not been a single member of the white house staff or ally of trump's who's been out there defending his conduct, defending the remarks that he made at the ellipse that incited that mob attack. sure, there are a lot of allies arguing that the house should not have impeached him. there are a lot of allies arguing that the senate should acquit him in the eventual impeachment trial but nobody's defending the president's conduct, and that's what has him so angry, according to our reporting, because he's turning on the television and he wants to see mark meadows, his chief of staff, out on the north lawn of the white house doing interviews defending him, but he won't do it and the reason they're not defending him is

because the staff in the white house feel that this is so odious, they just can't defend it. it's not defensible. we're even hearing that some of the president's regular lawyers, including the white house counsel, pat cipollone, are refusing to defend him in the impeachment trial because they too believe that that is indefensible. >> phil rucker, does pat cipollone plan to go back to a law firm? are they worried they're not going to be able to go back into polite society after serving trump during the insurrection? >> it's an important question. i don't know what mr. cipollone's plans are, but i can tell you a lot of trump staffers, people in his political orbit and who have worked at his white house, have had a very difficult time so far trying to find employment. come january 20th when they're going to be out of a job. normally, we're used to seeing senior white house officials, as you remember from the bush years, leaving government and going into law firms or joining corporate boards.

there's been virtually no announcement of that sort and i think it's because so many of the people who have worked for trump are considered toxic in corporate america. >> neal, it's not a perfect parallel, but joe biden, president-elect biden, has called the insurrection domestic terrorism. and in combatting foreign terrorism, the law viewed speech as incitement and a drone was dropped on -- killed with a drone strike because his speech and his bomb-making videos were so incendiary, they were viewed as a direct threat of inciting terrorism. my question is about an investigation into incitement under domestic terrorism laws. i was told by a former republican law enforcement official that investigating incitement would absolutely be the natural next step of all the arrests we're already seeing in the fbi. can you explain that to me? >> yeah, that's 100% right.

the law has a kind of fine cleave between incitement, which is encouraging someone to go out and commit violence, which is criminal, you know, there are federal and state statutes, and exercising your speech to express an opinion. so, it's one thing to say, joe biden is terrible or something like that or even, you know, i won the election. you know, by itself, that's okay. it's when you go further than that is the powerful excerpts you just showed, nicole, demonstrate. you know, it looks like they went a lot further. now to make criminal cases as opposed to impeachable offenses, it's going to turn on what the criminal law calls mens rea, a state of mind, so that's going to be, you know, have to find out whether or not these people actively were trying to encourage the violence or whether or not they were just reckless in doing so. even recklessness can be a crime to incitement but those are the kind of questions an investigation would uncover. >> neal, what is your sense of what is public-facing in this

investigation? what is your sense of what's happening right now? is investigating the insurrectionists for misdemeanor crimes and then bringing more serious charges, is that a typical way to prosecute a large group? >> correct. exactly. and so, you know, obviously, there's been an asterisk here because the federal side of this investigation is being carried out by the justice department, which for four years has protected donald trump, but you know, it looks like the investigation's occurring in a above-board, appropriate way, and so, you know, everything -- all signs are, yes, and they may even point to members of congress, ultimately, as mickey's letter yesterday suggested. >> right. i want to play for you, donna edwards, one of the impeachment managers on our air earlier today. this is congresswoman diana. >> we've got the president on national tv telling people to come up to the capitol and stop the counting of the ballots, so this is a pretty straightforward

case. you could see that with the articles of impeachment. it was very straightforward and factual and i think that's what we'll be seeing in the trial over in the senate. >> i didn't feel that the last impeachment was complicated, and in a very similar parallel, it was straightforward, donald trump on tape, but i take her point. all the facts are in the public view. the article was very simple. do you think there's a lot of suspense about what people should do and then answer the other question, what you think they will do. >> well, first of all, i mean, i think that, you know, when you spoke are with diana degette, among the members of that -- of the impeachment manager, she's an experienced trial litigator, and i think that she's speaking from that perspective, and you know, it seems to me that just like the impeachment itself, in the house, that it is pretty straightforward, and people knew what they should do, and some people maybe didn't act out of fear, and ten republicans did join because they knew that it

was the right thing to do, and i think that you will see a parallel in the senate. but the difference between the house and the senate will be these intervening days where more and more will come out about what happened, about who was involved, about possible coordination, and all of it, and i think that that is going to weigh very heavily on the minds of senators as they make this decision, and i think the natural course would be to lead them to a conviction if they're about doing the right thing for the republic, and if they're acting out of fear of a possible recriminations, politically, then they'll do what many house members did during the impeachment, and that is they'll stay silent and just cast a vote in favor of acquittal. >> it's such an interesting point, because i know we made so much, myself included, of the ten republicans who voted with the democrats, but it's probably

more newsworthy and more striking that there were more than 100 who did not. especially after hearing sound like this. this is a video of the insurrectionists. it's making its rounds on social media. it's disturbing, but i want to play it. we'll talk about it on the other side. >> the constitution, not your paycheck. >> we were invited here. we were invited. hey, we were invited here. >> they swore an oath. >> they're leading so you can take that oath. >> we were invited by the president of the united states. >> [ bleep ] you. >> phil rucker, we're back to where we always are with donald trump, whether or not he intended to tell the proud boys to stand by, the proud boys heard the call. whether he's saying that he sbinded to invite this insurrection or not, doesn't matter at this point in the story. five people are dead, and the

insurrectionists feel that, quote, we were invited here. we were invited here. we were invited here by the president of the united states. >> and indeed, nicole, that's true. they were invited to washington for many days in the run-up to january 6th by the president. he issued all calls on his twitter account, which, of course, has now been suspended but telling his supporters to come to washington. he wanted his, quote, unquote, patriots to be here to demonstrate, to march, to try to use it as a show of force to intimidate lawmakers into trying to overturn the election when they certified the electoral college votes on january 6th. president trump was very direct in his invitation to these people to come to washington and converge on the capitol. the extension, then, becomes, did he invite them to show force through violence? trump didn't say, on twitter, i want you to be violent. but he did say, repeatedly, i want you to fight. and that he wants to show

strength and that he wanted the election results overturned, so these are people following his invitation, following his call, and acting accordingly. >> well, i mean, and just to apply the same measure that we apply to every other protest, especially the ones over the summer, after the killing of george floyd, he did not ever, ever, ever ask anyone to be peaceful. i mean, icons of -- i mean, it's not really that he didn't say, go in with your zip ties, take the fire extinguisher and beat a capitol police officer to death, but that's never the standard, neal katyal, on a criminal trial, is it? >> that's exactly right and the one other thing i would add about what you and phil said is this. it's not like all the speech and all the protections pre-january 6th and his january 6th speech were the first time. remember that gabe sherman, the georgia board of elections official, on december 1st, said, mr. president, tell people to stop. otherwise, someone's going to get shot.

someone's going to get killed. and what does donald trump do after that? the same thing. he doubles down on it time and time again. so you know, last week, donald trump got a new title, which is, inciter in chief. and people like giuliani around him got titles like cheerleaders to that or, you know, accomplices to that. you know, and i just love the fact that trump is now stiffing giuliani, evidently, on not paying his legal bills, you know, between giuliani not getting paid and trump having giuliani as a lawyer, i can't tell who got the raw end of that deal. >> that's -- let me read that. that's -- and it proves that trump's not even sure giuliani's a real lawyer these days. this is from the "washington post." trump privately expressed concern with some of giuliani's moves and did not appreciate a demand from giuliani for $20,000 a day in fees for his work attempting to overturn the election. neal, i didn't mean to jump in, but we have that great reporting. >> yeah, so, you know, i think, you know, trump got what he paid

for here in giuliani. i mean, it is quite amazing that the only lawyer donald trump could get was a guy who's under active investigation by his old office, the southern district of new york. the one i think i'll say is take all these reports with a little bit of a grain of salt. i don't doubt that trump's going to stiff him financially but maybe giuliani's holding out hope for a different kind of payment. i mean, some lawyers prefer to be paid in cash. others, bitcoin. but i think giuliani prefers to be paid in the form of a pardon. >> that's right. >> and so, eyes on to see what happens over the next week. >> and i'll just say this to pull back the curtain here. we all have -- we're all on full alert for whatever the next and final pardons are. there's only six days to go in the trump presidency, and you're absolutely right, neal, it's been reported that rudy giuliani is among the list of friends and family expected to receive one if he wants one, and it sounds like, donna, there's some real concern that rudy giuliani has some criminal exposure.

he is the one that called for trial by combat. >> well, he is, and i mean, i think that his words were directly incendiary, and then, you know, that coupled with the president's words, and i think -- you know, neal can speak to this better, but donald trump should have had -- given those words -- he should have had a full expectation that those words would actually lead to the violence that indeed occurred, and you know, when i think about rudy giuliani, i mean, giuliani, who has been at trump's side all of this way, may find himself on the short end of the pardon stick given the president's sort of emoting at the end. >> oh, that's so interesting. i want to put up -- this is a follow to what i asked you, donna, about the political calculation. i want to show everyone where republican senators are, right? it's a snapshot. it's a moment. the trial hasn't taken place. but here's where republican senators are on impeachment. ben sasse says, i'll definitely

consider whatever articles they might move because as i've told you, i believe the president disregarded his oath. murkowski, the house has responded swiftly, and i believe appropriately, with impeachment. toomey, i do think the president committed impeachable offenses. romney, when the president incites an attack against congress, there must be a meaningful consequence. we will be considering those options in the best course, so there's four. you've got mcconnell not ruling it out. neal, we talk about 16 republicans being an insurmountable level but i think if you've got these folks on the record, you've got all of the things we know we don't know yet about where the investigation heads. what do you -- i don't think conviction is out of the question. >> no, i don't think it's out of the question at all. i've always thought it's very possible, indeed, perhaps likely, because remember, the big talking point the republicans have been saying on the other side is, unity, unity, unity. to be divisive to convict him. i'm sorry, this would be the greatest act of unity imaginable, and it's not hard to

stand up and say, look, we stand against those who would go and incite people to attack our government, to attack a coordinated branch of government when they're performing one of their most sacred duties, which is counting the electoral votes. this wasn't like what congress normally does on january 6th, like debating what day national turkey day is or something. this was their most powerful, you know, one of the most solemn functions of them and you've got the president and his entire team out there going and encouraging an attack, and certainly, at least not stopping it. and you know, it would be one thing if maybe in the last week, the president really expressed contrition and remorse and said he made a mistake. none. how could the -- how could 16 republican members of congress live with themselves and look at themselves in the mirror under these circumstances? >> i agree. phil rucker, donna edwards, neal katyal, thank you all. when we return, the investigation into the siege at the capitol and the stunning

accusation that lawmakers may have aided the insurrectionists by giving them tours of the building. former fbi director james comey joins us to talk about what he would be doing right now to track down the perpetrators and hold them accountable as well as the man who enabled them if he were still in charge of the fbi. plus, the fight for the truth. how can our country move on from donald trump when so many people still believe his biggest lie? and breaking the log jam of coronavirus vaccinations with the 30 million doses shipped out, only 11 million of them have made their way into people's arms. we'll talk to a governor who's taking steps in his state to speed things up. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. nues after a quick break. don'got anywhere. i made a business out of my passion. i mean, who doesn't love obsessing over network security? all our techs are pros. they know exactly which parking lots have the strongest signal. i just don't have the bandwidth for more business. seriously, i don't have the bandwidth. glitchy video calls with regional offices?

yeah, that's my thing. with at&t business, you do the things you love. our people and network will help do the things you don't. let's take care of business. at&t.

ok everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. whoo-hoo! great tasting ensure with 9 grams of protein, 27 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients to support immune health.

top u.s. officials are warning about a growing threat of violent extremism right here. according to "the new york times," they say last week's deadly attack by rioters on our capitol is a significant driver of violence for next week's inauguration. also intensifying, the manhunt and investigation into hundreds of those rioters, some of whom the department of justice and fbi say may face sedition or murder charges. and now there's this from "the washington post" today. people familiar with fbi evidence say dozens of people in washington that day were on a -- an fbi terror watch list as questions mount over who knew what within law enforcement with growing accusations this week that vital intelligence leading up to wednesday's breach was held back or ignored. and into who knew what within congress. one house member is requesting an fbi investigation and dozens are demanding more information

on whether some of the -- their republican colleagues helped rioters scout the capitol building the day before the insurrection. joining our conversation, former fbi director, jim comey, author of the new book, "saving justice, truth, transparency, and trust." it's nice to see you. tell me what you would be doing right now if you were still running the bureau on the question of whether donald trump incited the insurrection. >> well, a number of things all at the same time. first, trying to make sure that we track down immediately those people we can quickly identify in the attacking force against the capitol. and that's fairly straightforward. the second thing is, to look beyond them to see what facts there are that support conspiracy, who funded, who organized it, who equipped it, and who incited it and are there criminal cases to be made in connection with any of those activities. and at the same time, you're trying to also look forward towards the inauguration and

events in the state capitols and figure out whether any of the people who were involved are going to be involved in new attacks or there are new attackers joining an effort. so you're looking at multiple directions at the same time. it's going to be an all hands on deck effort. >> and you were in the government in the justice department the years after 9/11. the president-elect biden has described the attack as domestic terrorism. and obviously, you and i were both in the government. if you lay a terrorism frame over this or approach to an investigation, you do the things you just described. you investigate the funding, you investigate the incitement. i was talking to neal katyal on the last block that i believe terrorists living in other countries have been -- have delivered -- been delivered harsh judgments for inciting violence. bombed -- dropped a drone strike killed him for his inciting videos, bomb-making videos, incitement to commit violence against the state is deadly

serious. why aren't we hearing more about that from law enforcement? >> well, i suspect that almost everybody at the fbi is working to try and track down the facts and lock people up. i can't fully explain why you're not hearing from the director or the leader of the department of justice, but i know the rest of the folks are working like crazy, looking backwards and looking forwards, all in an effort to keep us safe. >> do you think -- i mean, you sought to run the bureau with a blind eye toward the powerful and it cost you your job. do you think the people there now have a blind eye to whether donald trump incited the insurrection that he is the sitting president or do you think they'll ignore that? >> well, i hope they'll ignore it and given the nature and character of the people in the fbi, i expect that they will. they might be careful, tiptoeing around a little bit in what they say about it over the next six days, but they are people who will follow the facts wherever they go. >> you wrote a book about truth and facts, and it seems that if you're going to deal with the root cause, you need the people -- the people who have

been radicalized listen to and that's donald trump. he still refuses to say that there was no fraud and that he lost to joe biden fair and square. how does that impact or further the radicalization of his supporters? >> well, it just keeps it alive. it's a piece of propaganda. it's like another statement from -- it keeps the followers, the radicalized believing they're on the righteous side, they're on god's side with a noble cause and that still makes it a very dangerous situation. >> can we be safe with donald trump out there continuing to spew his lies? >> we can be safer, but with donald trump continuing to radicalize and energize them, he makes us less safe. as he fades from our picture, as we turn off the camera lights and let him do whatever he does down at mar-a-lago, we'll be safer, but we can't take our eye off of this threat at any time. >> where do you place josh

hawley and ted cruz in terms of culpability? they were the reason that last wednesday became the event that trump supporters wanted it to be, the event that was attack. they legitimized the claims of fraud, which have no basis in fact. where do you put them and all of trump's enablers in congress? >> well, there's no doubt they're morally culpable. they're part of the pack of liars who echoed the president's radicalization message. whether they're legally culpable is a much harder question. i don't know how the justice department will think about it. but at least it's worthy of consideration. but there's no fuzz on it. they're morally culpable for what happened. >> in your first interview with george stephanopoulos in your last book, you talked about your first interaction -- in-person interaction with donald trump and the people around him and you described him -- you described it like an interaction with a mob family. no questions about the state, about the government that he was about to take over, just questions about his -- what it would look like, about pr. what it would look like if the

intelligence that russia had been involved got out. andrew weissman has been on the show and said he thought at the time it was not hyperbolic but that it was a reach. obviously, your analogy to the mob is proven truer and truer and closer to reality as time has marched on and the country has endured donald trump and his family. what do you think a criminal prosecution of the trump organization might look like if you keep that parallel in back of mind? >> well, the trump organization was run the way a cosanostra family is run, the way the president has occupied the presidency. it's all run from the center. he has to have his fingers on everything, it's all about loyalty to the boss in the center. if you find criminal activity, it's actually not that complicated to run it down and to make the case. there's no spider web of relationships. there's the boss at the center, and then those people acting, the capos, the captains, acting for the boss. it's a fairly small group and an

easy case to make if you have the underlying criminality. >> and if you look at what's been reported publicly about the two new york investigations, what do you think it looks like? what do you think donald trump's post-presidency and the post-presidency for his kids looks like? >> i think the one that's most important is the one being done about the local prosecutors in manhattan, the manhattan d.a.'s office. because that's focused on donald trump's life when he was just an ordinary fraudster before we made him the chief executive of this country, and it strikes me, given what we know about president trump, and the way he operates, there will be fraud aplenty to be found, and easy to prove, easy to try a case like that without entanglement of constitutional causes, that's just about locking up the crook. i'm guessing that's the one he fears the most and i hope very much it's pursued aggressively. >> what do you make of the conduct this week -- it's been reporting in the "washington post" and "the new york times" that trump's lawyers are so worried about his legal

exposure, just around the events of the last week, that they made him put out this sort of cascading series of videos where he looks like he's being forced to do it. they're written by more lawyers than speech writers. what do you think they're worried about, if you're inside the minds of his lawyers? >> well, i hope they're worried about the presidency, which is supposed to be their client, those in the white house counsel's office. but they're worried about the fact that that guy has gone out there and incited an attack on one of the branches of government. he's done something that offends all sensible americans and so they now have him reading these scripts, reminded me of someone in a cave in afghanistan reading something he was handed but that's smart lawyering. it does nothing to reassure the country but it's an effort just to limit his risk. >> i mean, that seems like the most important piece. there's been no reassurance and frankly, should be worried about the republicans in the senate. there's been no reassurance of what you just said, that donald trump will stop radicalizing his supporters. and as long as he does, it seems

they represent an ongoing and enduring threat to anyone that they view as betraying the cause. i want to ask you -- i want to ask you about something you write in the book about the current fbi director, chris wray, if i could ask you to stay through a break. >> sure. >> don't go anywhere. on the other side of the break, we'll ask jim comey about his successor, chris wray, and his stewardship of the fbi after last week's deadly insurrection at the capitol. week's deadly i at the capitol i discovered my great aunt ruth signed up as a nursing cadet for world war ii. she was only 17. bring your family history to life like never before. get started for free at ancestry.com

to defend against dark forces attacking your organization, you need to see in the dark. to have the wisdom to understand multiple cyber threats. the precision focus to end attacks instantly. on computers, mobile devices, servers and the cloud. join the world's leading companies in our mission to defend. cybereason. end cyber attacks. from endpoints to everywhere.

we and our partners have already arrested more than 100 individuals for their criminal activities in last week's siege of the capitol and continue to pursue countless other related investigations, and those help not only prevent those individuals from any effort to repeat that kind of activity, but also should serve as a very stern warning to anybody else who might be inclined to try to engage in that activity. from january 6th alone, we've already identified over 200 suspects, so we know who you are, if you're out there. and fbi agents are coming to find you. >> it strikes me that donald trump knows who you are too. you're on his email list. that was current fbi director christopher wray just from the last hour in a briefing with the vice president. we're back with former fbi director jim comey to discuss his new book, "saving justice, truth, transparency, and trust."

i want to come back to the topic of truth, but i want to read what you write about christopher wray in your new book. "at the fbi, the current director should stay and complete his ten-year term, created as a symbol of the fbi's distance from the president. because i know christopher wray is a person of integrity, i suspect his silence on the fbi's behalf in the face of trump's attacks and barr's defamation was a calculated effort to survive, to avoid giving them an excuse to fire a second director and replace him with a trumpian loyalist who would be confirmed by the feeble republican senate. there was wisdom, and i suspect great personal pain, in that approach." what do you think his last seven days have been like? >> i'm sure they have been difficult, and i'm sure he's been trying to make calculations about the tradeoff between doing his job the way it's meant to be done and dealing with that disturbed president who might try to decapitate the fbi. chris once said that he was going to be a workhorse, not a

show horse, and i think i took that as a little dig at me, but you actually have to be both to do that job well. i worked my butt off at the fbi, and i tried to show the work to the american people so they'd be educated and reassured and trust the institution. you must do both. but i also understand that he might hesitate to show the fbi, to represent the fbi if there's a risk he would get his head cut off during a national crisis by this unstable president. >> well, let me ask you, i mean, in the spirit of trust and transparency, should the fbi be able to pursue an investigation into incitement and ask the president for the list of his campaign -- his campaign for the list of people he invited to the ellipse to hear him address them before they stormed the capitol? >> sure, maybe. if they and the prosecutors work on it, the line people think that is relevant evidence, they ought to go for it. given the nature of this assault on our democracy, nothing should be out of bounds. they'll make judgments about the significance of the facts but

they better go get them all. >> one of the things that we understand poison the relationship between chris wray and donald trump and it was reported that he -- his job was on the line from this point forward, and probably beforehand, was when he testified before congress over the summer, that the greatest bucket of threats are domestic terrorists and inside that bucket they are primarily from white supremacists, and he knocked down the idea that antifa was even in the same category. he said, they're not a group. it's a belief system, basically. if that is the case, when donald trump told the proud boys to stand by, what should the fbi have done, and do you have confidence that they did it? >> well, i would expect them in that circumstance to heighten the focus of their sources and their collection efforts out in the field, keep an eye on the proud boys, because the president just sent them a secret -- not even so secret message, sent them a message that i'm on your team. i would expect that they stepped up their focus on those thugs.

>> how crazy is it, though, that the current head of the fbi was trying to fight the threat of white supremacists that were being directed by donald trump? how does that even work? >> it's the world we've been living in. i saw something recently where jim clapper told a reporter that shortly after trump took office, i said to him, the american people just elected a really bad person as president of the united states. and that was that cosa nostra, ma mafia feeling i kept kept getting from him. we have just days to go and we're all trying to hang on. i'm sure inside the government, the people whose responsibility is to protect us and the whole country bds them is trying to hang on. >> like you said, trump revealed himself the first time you met him. is there a parallel between what you tried to do and investigating the russian attack on our democracy in 2016 while trump was cozying up to vladimir putin and saying nothing bad about him? >> sure. it's all about protecting the boss. the boss -- any threats that the

boss perceives, he's going to take a blow torch to or have one of his acolytes take a blow torch to it. they tried it with the fbi, the department of justice, to the election, to the virus, to anyone who would speak the truth that was unpleasant in the eyes of the boss. >> you still get a lot of grief and guff -- you just saw it on my twitter feed briefly when we announced that we'd be talking to you today. a lot of blame for your conduct in 2016. do you have any regrets about any of your decisions? >> i really don't. i -- look, i regret like crazy being involved, but if you really dive into those decisions and no one needs to, because they don't need to relive that past, we did the best we could, and we made -- always picked the bad decision rather than the worst path. and there was no way out of it, being stuck like we were. i hope some day some political scientists prove we had no impact whatsoever and i guess there's some indication in the

way the 2020 election went down but it doesn't change how i think about the decisions. you cannot have an fbi director making decisions based on his view of who should be president. that's the road to ruin. >> do you have any new theories on why donald trump was so intent on destroying the reputations of so many people in the intelligence and law enforcement community? we have pete strzok on in the last hour, he went after brennan, jim clapper, taunts on twitter all sorts of former national security figures who had eyes and ears on russian intelligence and who stood, i guess, in his eye, for a deep state, but they were the people who were tasked with protecting the country from threats, foreign and domestic. do you have any new theories on why he's so full of hatred for people like that? >> well, only in the general sense. i mean, he hates people who might find truth that would be damaging to him. i still don't know what explains his continuing behavior with respect to russia. i gather that the

counterintelligence investigation was actually never done and the closest you come is reading the senate intelligence committee's report so i don't know what it is that drives donald trump, except a fear of something, which is the truth, and he'll burn down anybody who represents that. >> i have to ask you. is that a failure of robert mueller's team that that counterintelligence investigation was never done? >> no, i think it's a failure of the leader, at that point, a guy named rod rosenstein, at the department of justice. i understand he took it from the mueller team, they just investigated criminally, and he decided what to do with the counterintelligence investigation, which i gather, again, from public sources, was nothing. >> former fbi director jim comey is never boring and always answers our question. thank you for spending some time with us. the new book, "saving justice, truth, transparency, and trust" is out now. when we come back with the coronavirus pandemic reaching its most lethal levels yet, states are speeding up the painfully slow process of getting vaccines into citizens' arms. that story is next. o citizens'

arms that story is next ur diabetes... ...using fingersticks? with the new freestyle libre 2 system, a continuous glucose monitor, you can check your glucose with a painless, one-second scan. and now with optional alarms, you can choose to be notified if you go too high or too low. and for those who qualify, the freestyle libre 2 system is now covered by medicare. ask your doctor for a prescription. you can do it without fingersticks. learn more at freestyle libre 2 dot u.s. ♪♪

my name is trisha. i'm 70 and i live in mill valley, california. my biggest passion is gardening. i love to be outdoors. i have jaybirds that come when i call. i know how important it is to feed your body good nutrition. i heard about prevagen and i heard about the research behind it. taking prevagen, i have noticed that i can think clearly. my memory is better. i can say that prevagen is one of the most outstanding supplements i've ever taken. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

president-elect joe biden has made clear that one of his first priorities after taking office will be trying to hit his goal of 100 million covid vaccinations in his first 100 days, but president-elect biden will inherit a rollout plan from the trump administration that has been lackluster at best. on tuesday, officials recommended that states expand access for vaccinations to all citizens 65 years and older. and those in high-risk categories in an attempt to speed up distribution. according to the cdc, the 30 million doses distributed in the u.s., only 11 million people have received a first dose of the vaccine. new jersey is one of the states that expanded eligibility and has set a new goal of immunizing 4.7 million people in 6 months, about 70% of that state's population. joining our conversation, new jersey governor phil murphy.

thank you for spending some time with us. i want to put your state's numbers up for our viewers. new jersey has been sent 654,000 doses and has administered 277,000 doses. where are the other half, and are you satisfied? >> no, it's hard to be satisfied, nicole, when you've got supplies coming out of the feds that are a lot less than we were promised, any american state. i think the reason why you've got a gap in those numbers are a couple of reasons. one is there's a lot of lag in the data reporting. we've got 259 distribution points, including 6 mega sites, that's part of it. the other piece of this, included in that allocation is the federally run cvs and walgreens programs for our long-term care facilities, so on any given day of the week, they've allocated x number of doses for their visit to y senior home on saturday. but we're -- we're not sitting

on any supplies. there's no state warehouse. every dose is at either a point of distribution or in that cvs/walgreens store -- chain for long-term care, but we need more out of the feds. there's no two ways about it. we've created the distribution infrastructure. we didn't want to be caught flat footed when we did get the supplies. and we're encouraged to see the biden administration saying the right things about unleashing the federal supplies and god knows we need it. >> what are you doing in your state to combat vaccine reluctance or vaccine distrust? >> you know, if we were talking a couple of months ago, nicole, on my list of concerns, that would be high on it. reliance on the fed distribution at the levels that we need would have been one of those concerns, and that turns out to have been rightful. it's, frankly, and i'm knocking on wood here, it's less than we were expecting. we've got, i think, baring down on a million and a half people

who have preregistered for their vaccine. you mentioned the number 4.7 million, which is 70% of our adult population within 6 months. that's a very good start. now, is there still skepticism out there? yes. we've got big public service announcements and multiple announcements in multiple languages going into communities where there is particular skepticism for very rightful historical reasons. but i'm hopeful because this is a different kind of vaccine, among other things, and i think it's clearly a moment of crisis in our country's history for a lot of reasons. it's less than we were anticipating. >> other than first responders and health care workers, i don't know there is anyone who has carried a heavier burden than our teachers. why not include them? >> well, listen, they're in the on deck circle. we need the federal supply to get bigger. but listen, we've followed pretty adherently the cdc

guideline. we were actually on our way to the 65 and up population, even before the cdc came out with their advice. if you're younger than 65 and you've got chronic conditions, again, we're trying to attack the people who are most at risk right now, which is 80% of our fatalities are folks 65 and older, and a big chunk of the rest are folks with chronic conditions who are younger. and clearly, if you're an educator and you've got a chronic condition, you're up to that. but we're going to get to educators, i hope sooner than later. and more federal supply will help us get there faster. >> what is the biggest change you're hoping for? we talked specifically about vaccine supply. what is it? it seems like governors in my neighborhood have been on their own for ten months. what is the biggest thing that you need from a biden administration to change? >> there is a fair number of things. i think he is assembling a great team. andy slavitt is a most recent

name who has been a great adviser for us. so he is going in there. his team is great. i think we need a national strategy so it's not a patchwork quilt, mobilizing the defense production act if need be and national masking strategy, consistency, testing our human services commissioner is going to be overseeing testing for country, and she is a star. this stimulus program that he is going to unveil tonight, everything from state and local aid to keep our front line workers deployed, giving services, testing money, school, transit money, i think it's a whole multifaceted approach that has a consistency across the country, not just a patchwork quilt, which is largely what we've got right now. >> under the current management. governor bill murphy of new jersey, thank you so much for spending some time with us today. we're grateful. >> thanks for having me, nicolle. >> when we return, as we do

every day at this time, we'll remember the lives well lived. l. ♪ (quiet piano music) ♪ ♪ comfort in the extreme. the lincoln family of luxury suvs.

let me tell you something, i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio and so much more. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back.

find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more. i'm proud to be a part of aag, i trust em, i think you can too. in more than 40 years as a pediatrician, dr. neera was so loved, she built up three generations of patients. children who turned into mothers, mothers who turned into grandmothers, again and again they went back to dr. butani. the clearlake pediatric clinic said she had a serpent's heart. according to khou in houston,

dr. butani was actually planning their retirement when the pandemic began. she had beloved grandchildren of her own she wanted to enjoy, but she knew her community needed her help. the 72-year-old was only a month away from a vaccine when she got sick. dr. butani died two weeks ago. she was heroic. she was selfless, and we will not forget her. thank you for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. we're grateful. "the beat" starts right after a quick break. don't go anywhere. quick break. don't go anywhere.

welcome to "the beat." i'm ari melber in washington as right now focused on what will be the second trial of donald trump for high crimes after speaker pelosi swiftly achieved her goal of impeaching president trump within one week of the insurrection on a bipartisan basis as republican senate leader mcconnell says he is open