tv Don Lemon Tonight CNN July 6, 2022 7:00pm-8:00pm PDT
now with more speed and more bandwidth. plus find out how to get up to a $650 prepaid card with a qualifying bundle. thank you all for watching with us tonight. i will be back tomorrow. don lemon tonight with laura e sitting in, starts ri now. e sitting in, starts ri >> this is don lemon tonight. this big. i mean, it's really big, the witness the january 6th committee has wanted to talk to for months, i'm talking about none other than white house counsel pat cipollone. he's apparently now making a
deal with the committee for a transcribed interview behind closed doors but it's happening this friday. oh, and it's going to be on video. a lawyer is telling cnn the interview will be limited to specific topics to avoid privilege issues. he was of course the white house counsel. the committee has called him, quote, uniquely positioned to testify. i mean, the understatement of the year. think of what he knows. think about how many times you out there even heard his name from other witnesses during these hearings. >> mr. cipollone said something to the effect of, please make sure we don't go up to the capital, cassidy, keep in touch with me. we are going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> you still sitting on his phone and i remember passing to him, something to the effect of, the writers have gotten to the capitol, mark, we need to go to the president now. mark looked up and said, he doesn't want to do anything, pat. and pat said something to the
effect of, and very clearly said this to mark, something to the effect of, mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your hands. this is getting out of control. >> pat cipollone weighed in at one point i remember saying that letter is a murder suicide pact, it'll damage everyone who touches it. and we should have nothing to do with that letter. >> pat cipollone told the select committee that he interviewed when he heard mr. clark was meeting with the president about legal matters without his knowledge, which was strictly against white house policy. mr. cipollone and mr. feldman, like mr. rosen, told mr. clark to stand down, and he didn't. >> that's just a sliver of what i recall even hearing.
you remember he said we are going to get charged with every crime imaginable, if the then president were to go to the capitol on january 6th. you heard he told mark meadows , people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your f-ing hands. you heard he called the plot to replace the acting attorney general with a trump loyalist, quote, a murder suicide pact. you heard all of that. the thing is you haven't heard it from pat cipollone himself. and the question is, what will he tell the committee behind closed doors, and will we hear the cooperation? and will it be a breakthrough in the overall investigation? i want to bring in alex and ellie. gentlemen, good to see you. this is big. i told you is, we know it today, ellie, i'll begin with you. this is a person whose name we've heard continuously. they are able to secure a taped
interview, behind closed doors, but it's still a big deal because we've seen for the better part of these hearings, many of the people who testified behind closed doors, their testimony appears during the actual hearings. what do you see, as the most important thing he can tell this committee that might lead to either more information about the former president trump or even open the eyes of doj? >> well laura, you've already seized on the two most important words, uniquely positioned, that's the way the committee described pat cipollone, uniquely asked in one of one. and indeed, this guy, was everywhere, as white house counsel should be, the attempt to take over the justice department, the attempt to infiltrate the states and send fake elector certificate. he was there in the white house
on january 6th and usually, his position was, from all the reporting and testimony, that of a cooler head telling people, you can't do this, we shouldn't do this, this is dangerous, potentially illegal. in some instances the doj incident threatening to resign, so it seemed like he had clear eyes, and a level head here, and he's a person who can bring valuable perspective and you heard other people who know pat cipollone say that if he testifies, he will tell the truth. so i think his testimony could be remarkable and you're right, this testimony will be videotaped but you can bet we will see the videotape, snippets of it on tuesday. >> we should and of course we know, alex, the prosecutors, let alone members of congress were having a hearing about a matter of this importance, they want to know the answers before it aired with the red light flashing to show that it slide and ellie described, even lin- manuel miranda miranda was in the room where it happened. i won't go into the details, the singing aaron burr style right now but this is somebody who was in the room where happen, most of the time and i'm wondering, why are we just hearing from him now? we heard cassidy hutchinson, a lot of talk about the idea of
maybe her testimony at just the age of 26, she was a star witness, do you think her willingness to come forward and testify that the necessary pressure on cipollone to now come speak to the committee? >> i certainly think that cassidy hutchins testimony had the effect of breaching the inner circle of the trump west wing in a way that makes it harder for other folks to just shrug off the committee as a partisan investigation, i do think it's particularly significant that cassidy hutchinson repeatedly characterized things that pat cipollone did and said to her, which really puts the onus on him, to confirm or deny that we will see if he does on friday, as you said, there will be a limited interview. and i think in his case, more than in the case of a whole lot
of other people who declined to testimony so far, there are legitimate questions about executive privilege, about his role of a lawyer as a present, members of congress, political appointees, who simply don't want to testify because they don't want to testify or could find it uncomfortable but look, if pat cipollone is in position to cooperate even a fraction of what we heard from cassidy hutchinson last week. it's a major breakthrough in the investigation. it's a major political breakthrough in terms of getting this committee best past the point where even the palace guard can continue to call this a he said she said situation. one thing that's pretty clear, it's not as if trump can come back and say pat cipollone, don't know him, i don't remember , i think he applied for a job at mar-a-lago. that can't be the case here. we remember his appearance at impeachment hearing and trial number 1, yet at the little
role there . you focus on the idea of the unique position. let's flesh it out a little more. he is not the private attorney of donald trump. he's not the personal attorney of any member of the administration. he's the office of the white house counsel and their job was to be able to give counsel to the office, irrespective of who the officeholder is, so, he has a lot to offer with the direct conversation with trump. are there moments they can actually get to with him, that won't include the privileged nature of conversations as well that might be more of a litigation battle? >> sure, i think so. even if the committee allows pat cipollone to carve out certain 101 conversations he had with donald trump. ideally you want to go to court to fight those.
but we don't have the time to go through that litigation. there's plenty of important information that pat cipollone has. plenty of movements, statements that he witnessed, on january 6th, that he needs to testify about. he needs to testify about the things that cassidy hutchinson testified about. he needs to testify about his conversations with mark meadows and other important players. there are so many things that pat cipollone can tell us and you are right, it's going to be hard for donald trump to distance himself from pat cipollone who was white house counsel essentially the second half of trump's term. i don't know how he's going to call pat cipollone a coffee boy to use one of his favorite monikers. >> maybe latte man, you never know. alex, from jared kushner's taped testimony about pat cipollone during the first hearing, listen to this. >> him and the team were saying, we are going to resign,
we won't be here if this or that happens. i kind of took it up to just be whining, to be honest with you. >> lesser thought behind that? not just the thought of this being sort of whining, i remember a colleague of ours tweeted out something like, jared kushner if he had been around during watergate you might he may have lost off the notion of the saturday night massacre as not wanting to work on the weekend. i hear the whining comments that he's made. it'll be fascinating to hear how many times did he maybe threatened to quit? did he try to put his foot down in a way that would say, look, this has serious ramifications. >> well laura, let's just reflect for a second on the implications of that statement from jared kushner, any normal administration, the white house counsel threatening to quit would be an earthquake, if that happened in the biden white house, i think our jaws would
be on the floor. the fact that the president's son and lot and advisor is shrugging it off as, a lot of whiners in the building. that tells you a lot about the culture of the administration. beyond that, it's something we reported in the book that you mentioned in the intro, you have republican leaders on capitol hill, folks like mitch mcconnell, urging the white house counsel to stay in his job, there were adults in the room when events like january 6th happened, and boy, did that turn out to be important, too pat cipollone and people like him. it put the administration in the middle of november, and you would have the total, to borrow a term from any number of republicans in washington, just a clown show, of trump election lawyers involved at this point.
how much worse could it have been if there wasn't somebody telling donald trump, you can't do that. you shouldn't go to capitol hill. and we will see if pat cipollone confirmed on friday that he was one of those people. >> again, i wonder what he had to say to vice president mike pence who was no longer in the room but at the capitol, and actually, well really the one left standing. alex, elie, thanks so much. nice hearing from both of you. new tonight, the most intensive random audit the irs does, so, what are the odds that not one but two former president trump perceived political enemies, would be targeted. former fbi director andrew mccabe is here, next. lunchables! built to be eaten. ♪ researchers believe the first person to live to 150 has already been born. it could byou! w. really? of course, you'll ha to eat your greens,
watch your stress, wear sunscreen... but to live to 150, we're developing solutions that help doctors listen to your heartbeat while they're miles away, or ai that knows what your body will do before you do. cool. introducing elevance health. where health can go. if you wake up thinking about the market and want to make the right moves fast... get decision tech from fidelity. [ cellphone vibrates ] you'll get proactive alerts for market events before they happen... and insights on every buy and sell decision. with zero-commission online u.s. stock and etf trades. for smarter trading decisions,
get decision tech from fidelity. this is john. he hasn't worked this hard to only get this far with his cholesterol. taken with a statin, leqvio can lower bad cholesterol and keep it low with two doses a year. side effects were injection site reaction, joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath. with leqvio, lowering cholesterol becomes just one more thing life throws your way.
with to this, we are now learning that two people who were constantly targeted by former president trump, just so happen to face the most intensive, random audits the irs does. one of them, former fbi deputy director andrew mccabe, who is my guest tonight. the other, according to the new york times, former fbi director
james comey. this all went down back in 2017, and the times report points out the odds of being selected for this kind of audit, that year, were roughly one mac and 30,000. andrew mccabe joins me now. i've got to tell you when i hear the odds, or think about this coincidence, kind of like when you are at the airport and someone says, you've been randomly selected you go, really, every flight i've taken i've been randomly taken out of this line. am i flag in some way? trump fired you and james comey and accuse both of you i would ask, of treason. what are the odds here. that the two of you, high ranking fbi officials considered by trump to be political enemies would be so randomly selected here. did you know at the time, there was this connection between you and james comey and these audits? >> laura, i had no idea. so, i actually got noticed about mine, in october of 2021.
they were auditing me for the tax year of 2019. so, the letter comes, and it simply says, you've been selected, totally at random for this national program we are doing, looking at people's returns. and i just, i took the irs at their word and i just assumed it was right. i will say that my wife was suspicious from the beginning, and had a few choice words for me about it and of course i should have listened to her because it looks like maybe there was something else going on. >> i will be on her side naturally. of course you listen to your wife. thinking about the idea, you trusted the fact that if you got this audit, everything was on the up and up but i'm curious, about this kind of ordeal. what was this audit like , and
dare i ask, what was the outcome. you didn't even know if this was the correlation here. what was the process like? >> i had no idea. no idea about jim comey situation until i was contacted by this reporter but, i was immediately, i got in touch with the person who they said i should call and it began. it's an incredibly rigorous process. although i have to say, the woman i dealt with, who had responsibility in my case was very professional and responsive. we ultimately worked through it and i ended up having to pay a small amount for an oversight, unintentional oversight. no penalties, no fines, it was a pretty minimal thing. in the end, but it's nerve- racking, you know, it's really kind of you know, it's scary, really, to be targeted like that. i don't know what happened here, like i said, i think they handled the business okay.
the person i dealt with was fine but, the question remains, how was i selected for this. how is it that both jim comey and i were selected for the same program which is, as you mentioned, 1 in 30,000. it just defies logic to think that there wasn't some other factor involved. i think that's a reasonable question. i think it should be investigated. people need to be able to trust the institutions of government and so, that's why there should be some, we should dig through this and find out what happened. >> i'm a member of the electorate. someone who is a skeptic in many ways, and the idea that this could have been wielded in some way to exploit these otherwise proper channels of auditing with the irs. it is concerning to think about because you never want any agency or entity of the government to be used against a
perceived enemy of a politician or any way or shape or form. we want that legitimacy. and you said you never talked to james comey about this. >> it goes to the rule of law, the fundamental idea that we all have and we should all believe and invest in, everyone is treated the same under the law. i have less reason than anyone to still believing that because of the way i was treated by the former president and his minions, subjected to it completely biased one-sided ig investigation that resulted in my wrongful termination. which the department of justice acknowledged by reinstating the last of it i was subjected to a completely baseless two-year criminal investigation that of course resulted in no action taken because no action should have ever been taken. this irs audit, i guess we can add to the pile now. there's still the looming,
whatever, of john durham, as he continues, i'm not exactly sure what he's doing, re-looking at all the work that we did in 2016. so, yeah, as someone who has been basically hunted by the former administration for four years now, i guess i should have assumed that this might be the next step. i don't want to prejudge it. i want the irs to go in and look at how this program is being administered. and report back to the american public. they say they can't comment specifically but they released a statement saying in part, audits are handled by career civil servants, and the irs has strong safeguards in place to protect the exam process, and, against politically motivated
audits. it's ludicrous and untrue to suggest that senior irs officials, somehow targeted specific individuals for national research program audits. what is your response, knowing they issue that statement? you've already articulated that you have reserved judgment and is very much feeling like a combination of other things that have happened but what do you say, now that you heard that statement? >> it's obviously not ludicrous when you have a fax pattern like this. that defies the idea of random selection, so it's responsible and appropriate for the irs to go back and look at what happened in these two cases, and see, i'm not pointing a finger at any high level, medium level or low level official at the irs, but i think the people who administer the service should be concerned about its reputation, and in order to uphold that, is you go back and you look and determine what happened here .
the coincidence of the two former top officials in the fbi, both of whom were very clearly considered to be you know, and needs, by the former president and his supporters, both being subjected to this incredibly invasive process that supposedly random. was it actually random? i'd like to hear the answer to that question . >> i've got two small kids and a puppy. a lot of coincidences happen in my house that could otherwise be explained. so i'm waiting to see what happened in your case as well. thank you so much, you know what i'm talking about. >> thank you, laura. look, he's confessing, we are talking about the highland park parade shooter. he's confessing that he was in court today, admititting, that even considered a second shooting rampage, i will get inside the case of the former fbi profiler, after this. no, gr! some relat ionships get better with time.
that's why i got a crosstrek. (avo) ninety-six percent of subaru vehicles sold in the last ten years are still on the road. (grandmother) i'm so glad you got a subaru. (young woman) i wonder who gave me the idea? (avo) love. it's what makes subaru, subaru. the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know where to go.
we are learning harrowing new details about the shooter in the highland park july 4th mass shooting. along with admitting to opening fire on parade goers, authorities say he, quote, seriously contemplated carrying out a second attack in madison, wisconsin. they say he planned to use a firearm and exactly 60 rounds of ammunition but didn't go through with it because authority say, he had and put enough thought into that. he appeared in court today, via zoom for his bond hearing. the judge ordering him held without bail on seven charges of first-degree murder. a preliminary hearing is set for july 20th. i want to bring in former fbi profiler, candace delong.
i'm glad you are here today to help unpack and really, look at this issue under the microscope it deserves because you may have seen the shooter described in court this morning as being unfazed during his bond hearing. they show a screenshot, there, what does this say about his state of mind, the idea of being unfazed in this courtroom, after hearing the judge, the prosecutors, what went through your head? >> well, knowing what we know about what's going on in the minds of people that do this kind of thing, it's almost always men, boys, almost always, is, don't expect to see tears and pleading, please of regret, shame, there will be none of that. which might explain why he was unfazed. >> why is that?
the idea, just the demographic you are talking about, it's not that i think, you know, you expect somebody who would engage in this behavior, would have the remorse perhaps during the act but i think most human beings would assume, that there would be some demonstration of regret, that's just not going to be there, based on the profiles of those who commit these acts? >> that's correct, laura, one of the things that psychologists and fbi research and a study that they did on mass shooting said, in the vast majority of cases, especially if it's a younger adult, they are motivated by anger. they are angry at the world. and they don't have the insight to look at that anger and go, maybe it's this, maybe it's me. maybe i can change my life. no. there motivated by anger and the anger makes them one to seek revenge on those they
believe deserve it. i can understand why his first target was where he grew up. if he truly was like so many other shooters, motivated to exact revenge because he was angry, what better place to do it then in his own hometown. >> what about the idea, i'm sorry, what about the idea, thinking about another attack on the area of madison, does that follow suit as well, tell me why? >> that's what i've been thinking is, it's understandable why the first attack was highland park and it's understandable that it was on a family day, when he probably went to those parades as a kid. but the seeing near madison, wisconsin, i'm assuming that's
the most important thing in madison is the university of wisconsin. there is some connection there. it was not random. there could be someone going to school there that he knows that he's angry at. maybe a girl he was interested in, who spurned him. but there has to be a reason why he drove all that way and why madison or wife the, why that was his target. we will find out because right now the fbi and investigators are going to his phone, his computer, we are going to know everything soon. >> so important to think about the psychological profile that i know you have expertise in. thinking about the why. obviously, we both know that for those families that are grieving, those that are continuing to grapple with the tragedy in their personal lives, the wise will never be sufficient but we as a society, maybe if we know the why, it can lead to deterrence and maybe prevention as well. thank you so much for your expertise. >> you are welcome, thank you,
laura. look, one case could have the supreme court radically reshaping federal elections. what it could mean for your voting rights, next. we definitely have ants in here. not for long. [irish music plays] nice. what's going on here? i said get a pro. i did get a pro. ...an orkin pro. i got you. t ants? don't call any pro, call the orkin pro. orkin. the best in pests.
only two things are forever: love and liberty mutual customizing your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. if anyone objects to this marriage... (emu squawks) kevin, no! not today. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ lemons. lemons, lemons, lemons. look how nice they are. the moment you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels. so you can go and see all those, lovely, lemony, lemons. ♪ and never wonder if you got a good deal. because you did. ♪
in a series of key decisions last month, the supreme court first cutting back on the ability of states to restrict guns in public places, then overturning a half- century of abortion rights protections, then slashing away at the power of the epa to even regulate polluters. now voting rights is back in the mix. the court agreeing to hear a case out of north carolina. this time again, about north carolina's redistricting efforts. first, they tried to redraw their maps using racially gerrymandered lines. that it was partisan gerrymandered lines, the gop arguing the state courts of north carolina shouldn't even have the final say and how they
even get to draw even gerrymandered maps. joining me to discuss, voting rights attorney marc elias, he's the author of a new piece titled a dangerous theory will have its day in the supreme court. mark, this decision by the supreme court to even hear this case, you call it pretty shocking but i wonder, what makes this north carolina dispute so dangerous in the first instance? >> thank you for having me on. the republican leadership in north carolina have now gone to the supreme court, and said, wait, this was all a big misunderstanding because the state courts can't review our maps at all. because the constitution says that the legislature sets the maps, and sets the time, place and manner of election and it doesn't mention the course. so the state courts played no role. >> you and i know, but for the courts to be a bit of a check
on the power that could be abused, the whole idea of the checks and balance system that we have in our democracy, the courts, having some final say in what the legislative body is doing, is not counter to what we think about, about checks and balances in our system? >> that's why this has been frankly a radical fringe theory. it's been sort of taking around in the outer edges of the republican legal community. you know, john eastman, for example was a proponent of the was called, the independent state legislature theory, that would allow the state legislators to choose whatever electors they wanted, this has not have an area of respectability until a couple of weeks ago when the supreme court said they would hear this
case. and consider whether or not to remove those checks and balances that are so important to our system. >> what is the endgame here. if the supreme court is going to end up empowering state lawmakers, given control over federal elections, the idea of not being able to have a state court review what's happening which is a possible consequence. how do you have guard rails in place for voters? there's a long history as you and i well know about voter protections falling to the wayside or never being the point in the long run. you've got section 5 gone, section 2 has been diluted. it sometimes looks almost recognizable. what would you do if the supreme court hears this case and besides, you know what, that theory works for us. >> this is why this is such a dangerous theory. the supreme court has already cut back on the federal remedies. it got section 5 of the voting rights act. it has weakened the interpretation of section 2 as
he pointed out. it's also weakened some of the constitutional arguments that are made to protect voters and ensure freedom. it cuts entirely be ability of the state courts to hold state legislators accountable to their own constitutions, then frankly, there's very little standing between democracy and tyranny. >> but mark, why would a court want to weaken the power of the judiciary? it's the idea of not even cutting off your nose to spite your face, it's handing over the keys to the castle if the judiciary, is saying, you have no role here. why would they weaken that ability to have the power for a different lower court? >> it's a good question, and you know, the foundation of american law is a case called marbury versus madison. this is the supreme court is the ultimate authority to rule on congressional acts and other acts by states. under a principle that the
federal courts are supreme in determining what the law and constitutions are. any number in the places of constitution that gives congress the authority to do something, like the election clause gives to state legislatures. i don't see the supreme court relinquishing any of its power in that arena. so, it makes no sense, but it really, problematic and dangerous. >> it would be the first time, read my sarcasm, that the court would undermine its own power or legitimacy in 2022. certainly, marc elias, thank you so much. i appreciate it. >> thank you. and britney greiner, she's terrified she can be in a rush in prison forever. i'll speak to her former olympic coach was one of many women and people, fighting to get britney greiner released. next.
>> i can't rest as her safety is in question. i honestly can't rest until she's home. emerge tremfyant®. tremfya® is approved t to hep reduce joint symptoms in adults with active psoriatic arthritis. some patients even felt less fatigued. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. emerge tremfyant® with tremfya®. ask you doctor about tremfya® today.
researchers believe the first person to live to 150 has already been born. it could be you! wow. really? of course, you'll have to eat your greens, watch your stress, wear sunscreen... but to live to 150, we're developing solutions that help doctors listen to your heartbeat while they're miles away, or ai that knows what your body will do before you do. cool. introducing elevance health. where health can go.
w nba is hosting a rally in support of their teammate, britney greiner, tonight. the basketball star has been detained in a russian jail for more than 100 days. this rally follows both president biden and vice president harris, speaking with greiner's wife by phone earlier today. as you know she wrote a letter to president biden earlier this week, expressing her fears about being held in russia indefinitely. the wife, putting out a statement tonight, saying that she is grateful to both biden and harris for speaking with her and their express commitment to getting britney home. joining me is britney greiner's
former olympic coach and olympic gold medalist herself, don stanley. there has been as you know the conversation between president biden and vice president harris, with britney's wife, trying to tell her they will work to secure the release. is it a sign of progress here? does it give you some hope that maybe they will do all they can and have the rhetoric match the action? >> i think it's god winks, when god winks at you, it's an incredible thing. so, i think everybody in britney's camp has been wanting this. if not an in person meeting, some type of communication with the president of the united states, you know, to add graciousness to it. vice president harris, was on the line as well, so, we got to
bangs for our buck and hoping that this expedites britney's process to getting her home a little bit quicker than we thought yesterday. >> dawn, you know her quite well. her cause has really been heard about. people are really trying to be her champion. but i she wrote and i'm gquoting i'm terrified i might be here forever. she sits there alone with her thoughts without the protection of her loved ones or accomplishments. talk to me about how you think she is feeling right now. >> well, here is what i think. i think prbrittany had a bad da and that happens to you when you're in that situation, and i think for the most part, is she terrified? yes. is she afraid? yes. is she strong? yes. is she tapping into that mental
strength that requires a pro of her level to have? yes. so i think you go on an emotional roller coaster when you're in the position she's in. i'm hoping she's hearing that cherelle talked to the president, talked to the vice president and i hope for cherelle's sake and brittany's sake, they can sleep a little bit easier tonight but not any other night because until she's home will she get that peaceful sleep that we all want her to have? >> as you know, there was a really powerful letter signed by so many people, so many black women, concerned about brittney griner and that is a very large group of people that goes even beyond black women as you well know, and part of the letter talked about the idea of her
playing overseas in part because of pay inequities here in the united states of america that bought her to play for the russian team and listen to what brittney griner's head coach had to say this very week about her still being detained. listen to what she had to say. >> if it was iran, she would be home. if it was the statement of a value about a black person or gay person or woman. and we know it and so that's what hurts a little more. >> what's your reaction to that? do you agree? >> well, i mean, there's a lot of things that were said in that answer to the question that she was asked. i think the most important thing is we have an american citizen wrongfully detained in a russian prison. if that's not scary enough, i don't want to add layers to, you
know, to what it is. i think it's quite -- when we keep it as simple as it is, it's an american citizen and she's not the only one. brittany in her letter, she said bring all of us home. bring all of the americans home in her moment of reaching out to the president, she separated -- she didn't separate herself from everybody else. she said bring us all home because i'm sure everybody that's wrongfully detained in a russian prison or a prison abroad is feeling, you know, helpless. so we need -- we need to keep our focus on getting her home. getting every other american home in a place in which, you know, their families can rest a little bit easier so we have to be all hands on deck.
the letter that black women sent to the white house, the reverend al sharpton and all the foot soldiers like myself and everybody else that had been screaming at tempeop of our luno get brittney griner home is what we'll keep that sin near sin-- going. >> thank you so much for reminding people about the selflessness contained in that very letter. reminding people not to forget about her or the others who and that's a special classification to be wrongfully detained to have a announcement to get the person home through a process. thanks for giving us insight into what she is like and the focus remaining on her and those who are also wrongfully detained. appreciate hearing from you.
trump's white house counsel is testifying. i'm going to talk to nixon's white house counsel and a watergate special prosecutor, next. should be something that gets you hyped up. and that your new car ought to come with newfound happiness anand zero surprises. and all of us will stop at nothing to drive you happypy. we'll drive you happy at carvana. what if i sleep hot? ...or cold? no problem. the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing, so you both stay comfortable and can help you get almost 30 minutes more restful sleep per night. and now, the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is only $899. only for a limited time. sleep per night. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. [ sfx: submarine rising out of water ] minions are bitin' today. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ minions: the rise of gru, only in theaters.
to help slow the progression of chronic kidney disease. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men, and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may lead to death. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. and don't take it if you are on dialysis. take aim at chronic kidney disease by talking to your doctor and asking about farxiga. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪far-xi-ga♪
look, there is a major breakthrough for the january 6th select committee. trump counsel pat scipollone wil testify on friday. it will take place behind closed doors but transcribed and videotaped. want to bring in nixon counsel dean and prosecutor nick acreman. good to see you both. i want to begin with you, john, you've been saying for quite sometime every time pat s
cipollone's name is mentioned, it's been a lot his name is mentioned at the hearings he has a moral obligation to appear before the committee and now, apparently he will. tell me why it's so important you think to hear from pat cipollone. >> well, i think our democracy is at stake here is what the game is. it's a real -- it's not a game, though. it's a real terrifying situation. he knows what happened and rather than honor the oath of office that he took to defend and support the constitution, he all along has been trying to resist testimony and appearing before this committee, yes, he had an informal session in april off the record. i don't even think it was sworn. and he's been now negotiating apparently as to the terms of under which he will testify. laura, i don't get it. here is a guy who has had the benefit of our democracy. he should be up ther