that tonight with ms. cheney, drawing on her experience and the mission she took as one of only ten house republicans to ultimately cast an impeachment vote over that insurrection. cheney key to the bipartisan jan 6th committee, deemed by independent expert as one of the most effective congressional probes in our modern air ram i'm sure you remember some if not all of these evidentiary hearings. cheney relying on her experience, how to get and then tell, convey, and a full at canning of what was donald trump's multipart conspiracy. we know the committee's work actually reached ten of millions of americans, presenting the evidence and testimony at those hearings, and we have indications that they impacted some prosecutors' pursuit of justice. they led to two precedent making convictions who tried and basically failed legally to defy the lawful subpoenas. news that impacted many cases, from fox news, to fortifying the case for donald trump's coup indictment. the former president legally presumed innocent, but faces a lot of evidence in that march trial, and cheney in the book here tracks the road to those results in oath and honor. there's a front row seat, which she uses to tell the story, harrowing and depressing, but left for americans to tell what we all do as member of this society, documenting the conspiracy and including information on the now indicted fraudulent elector's plot. >> today an alternate state of electors in the contested states is going to vote, and we're going to send those results up to congress. >> something that rudy and the team have worked on, the trump slate of electors are showing up today in the state capitols. >> there has been an alternate slate of electors voted upon that congress will decide in january. >> yes, i was part of the process to make sure there were alternate electors. >> there you have some of it. stealing an election through fraud is a crime. it's a crime apart from what became the second violent insurrection and questions about whether or not donald trump met the bar for legally inciting that plot. in the book we recount how cheney listened to trump backer to listen to the plan to use fraudulent electors to lie and claim there were dueling slates of electors headed into the election. now jenna ellis saying outloud this was a plan to interrupt the counting of votes and knew that was a straight forward, inunambiguous level of -- one question is how high it must go, and we'll ask ms. cheney when we return live in 60 seconds. conds. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. power e*trade's easy-to-use tools make complex trading less complicated. custom scans help you find new trading opportunities, while an earnings tool helps you plan your trades and stay on top of the market. e*trade from morgan stanley. he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ sometimes your work shirt needs to be for more than just work. like when it needs to be a big soft shoulder to cry on. which is why downy does more to make clothes softer, fresher, and better. downy. breathe life into your laundry. remaining silent and ignoring the lie emboldens the liar. i will not participate in that. i will not sit back and watch in silence while others lead our party down a path that abandons the rule of law and joins the former president's crusade to undermine our democracy. >> liz cheney speak out on the house floor, and she is our special guest live right now. former congresswoman and vice chair of the january 6th committee. welcome. much to get to. >> thank you. great to be here. >> appreciate you being here. >> thank you, and thank you for the coverage that you all have done, that you've done so clearly and completely of what is, i think, the most important issue of our time. >> appreciate that. and of course this is one of those things where our viewers, news viewers have been watching those hearings, covering them, and now we're here to discuss it. i showed the elector plot, which you write about. why was it important to document that, and how did you experience that, first as a republican insider -- talk about being a witness. you detailed being on that call and saying, this is not acceptable going into the 6th. >> i think the way you laid it out is so important. there had been talk that -- and stephen miller appeared in december. you've got steve bannon there. there had been some talk that these fake electors were going to meet in the states, but it wasn't until this call on january 4th -- i was on an email list. i don't know how long, how large it was, but it was a list that went out to so-called surrogates for the campaign. probably had just not taken me off of the list. so when i got the email on the 3rd announcing this call, i thought, i'm going to dial in so i can understand exactly what they're talk about. they said this would be plans for january 6th. and it was on that call that i understood for the first time this description given by both jenna ellis and jason miller that the fake electors were in fact going to be the basis for vice president pence to refuse to count the legitimate electors. and that link, as ux imagine, was chilling. and after i listened to them lay out this plan, understood what it meant, i went immediately into the capitol to talk to the house parliamentarian, who is sort of the guru of the rules of the house to understand, what do we do? and the answer was, there's not that much you can do. you need to work with the senate. you probably need to make a motion to adjourn. but it was a moment that was really just in some ways terrifying to recognize, this is the plan, this is the plot, this is what they intend to do. i learned later of course vice president pence and his counsel were almost at the same time the day before speaking to the house parliamentarian and senate parliamentarian about the fact that vice president pence was not going to refuse to count the electors but we didn't know that at the time. >> what comes through in the book and your report, the violence -- we've dealt with that partly as a country -- these potentially nonviolent criminal plots could have also functioned -- some of them may have gotten further with a few different people in charge without the violence. you write that jenna had examples of what pence might say. then he could refuse to count any votes for those states and he would have the appearance of something contested when in fact it was being slowly stolen. >> and there is as you know, absolutely no legal basis. we had certified legitimate electors from all 50 states. the fact that the trump campaign, and as we've now seen in three states there have been indictments for those fake electors themselves. so it was key part of the overall plan. you actually have shown on your show several times the chart that shows the different elements and the different time frame in terms of -- >> the conspiracy arrows. we'll put that up. i didn't knowou were going to bring it up. he it is. we in our reporting takeains to emphasize that however silly a lawsuit, it's not a crime. people can file all types of lawsuits. these have been indicted. you see the elector's plot have been indicted at the state and federal level because they crossed over. with this in mind sinou bring it up, what is important for people to understand as we get ready for both trump's federal trial andn election where these are live issues? >> there are several things that are fundamentally important about this chart. the first one is, as you say, a candidate has the right to go to court ify believe that there's been fraud in a election. they have a right to challenge it. but what donald trump did was ignore the rulings of the courts. he lost 61 out of 62 of these lawsuits, and that is really important for people to recognize what he will do if he's elected again. as a president, he will not abide by the rulings of the courts. but what we understood, one of the biggest eye-opening things for me about the select committee was the multipart plan and understanding that, you know, there was this plan to pressure the state legislators to, pressure the vice president, to use the justice department corruptly to put this plan in place, to pressure the vice president. and all of those things were part of this effort to overturn the election and to seize power. and of course the violence itself, refusing to stop the violence, refusing to tell the mob to go home, sending the mob to the capitol when he knew they were armed, as we demonstrated in the hearings, all of that is part of this, you know, illegal, unconstitutional plan that donald trump oversaw to do something no american president has ever done, to seize power. >> and you talk about what no other president has done. he is now at times telegraphing or normalizing vows of revenge. we saw that both -- again, against you, former vice president pence and others, taking officials who by the way, happen to be long-term republicans -- but put that aside, trafficking in intimidation, menacing, potential violence, appeals to violence, talking at a dictator ship, talk about going after the press. these are things we know. your family has a background in foreign policy. we know what that playbook looks like. i'm going to show briefly what kind of dictator he might be. >> we love this guy. he says, you're not going to be a dictator are you? i says no, no, no. we're closing the boarder and we're drilling, drilling, drilling. other than that i'm not a dictator. >> first of all, sean hannity who was conducting that interview, sean knew at the time -- we have the text messages between sean and cay league mcenany. they were trying to land the plane. they gnaw the country was in danger and donald trump was the source of that danger. sean hannity knew that. he has several times tried to bail donald trump out when he said something or suggested something that is illegal and completely beyond the bounds. he did it again last night, and donald trump won't deny he has plans like the ones we have been discussing. he says it on a weekly if not a daily basis, and i think what we as americans and voters and citizens need to commit to do is not to become numb to that. what he says is so outrageous that it can be very easy for his allies to say to the rest of us, oh, come on, you know that's not true. what the lesson of donald trump of the last several years has taught us is we have to take him seriously and we have to take him literally. he has shown us what he's willing to do. >> the justice department did not seem eager to take him literally or look at him as a potential suspect, as the criminal definition, initially. do you think he would have been ultimately charged without the january 6th committee's work? >> i think that our work was critical. i think the justice department was obviously very focussed in a very important way on those who had invaded the capitol that day, but i think the work that we did -- i think the opinion by judge carter, which was a result of the select committee's efforts to get access to john eastman's emails and judge carter's ruling that it was more likely than not that donald trump and john eastman had violated at least two federal statutes, i think that all of those things clearly contributed. and i hope very much led the way, and i think you can see it in the indictment in the way that the plan that we have been talking about has laid out in ways that are similar to the things that we found. it's not a surprise. those are the facts. that's the evidence. but it's really important for the future of the country that donald trump be held accountable, that everyone who was involved and engaged in this be accountable. >> have you spoke ton jack smith or his team? >> i have not. >> when you look at the case they're building, given you are what we'll call a subject matter expert, what do you think is factually important to convey? you brought up the charges and arrows. the report you help author talks about a seven-part process. yet you and i -- i think we all know, you can't throw everything at a jury and say, look at all this mess. what do you think must be conveyed clearly and factually? >> i think from what i've seen, from what i've read, to the work to date, they're doing an effective job. i think the focus on donald trump's intent is very important. one of the things we did in the select committee report was make sure we put together a chart that showed with specificity the claims that he was making, the times he was told those claims were false, and afterwards when he went out and made them any ways. so there's no question he was saying things he knew to be false in furtherance of his efforts to overturn the election. >> looking a little bit -- we have your exchange with meadows aide hutchinson and sort of where all that goes. i want to play a little bit of that. >> is it your understanding that president trump asked mark meadows to speak with roger stone and general flynn on january 5th? >> that's correct, that is my understanding. >> ms. hutchinson, is it your understanding that mr. meadows called mr. stone on january 5th? >> i'm under the impression he did complete a call to mr. stone and mr. -- on january the 5th. >> we've report on that and other fooj thing that have come to light about mr. stone. he definitely seems to be around and aware things could go to another level. he had contacts demonstrated with the militias. he publicly denied what ms. hutchinson said under oath. he denied that in public under oath. do you believe her version of events? what do you know about mr. stone, who has evaded any real legal consequence for this? >> we focused in the report -- included a section on the credibility of witnesses and thought that was crucially important, because witnesses like cassidy hutchinson, sarah matthews, matt pottinger, pat cipollone -- one of the reasons cassidy was so important was because before she testified cipollone would not testify, and after he did engage and his testimony corroborated hers. it was very, very important. so i have complete confidence and gratitude and respect for her courage for what she did as well as for other witnesses who at great personal risk told the american people the truth, told the american people what they knew. with respect to people like roger stone, mike flynn, you know, there's first of all, video and photographic evidence of both of them with members of the mill as. as well as the fact they took the fifth when they appeared in front of the committee. one of the things we know is jack smith has tools the committee did not have in order to get to the truth. but one of the most chilling moments for me, of many during this process, was when i asked general flynn if he believed in the peaceful of power in the united states of america, and he took the fifth. >> just to spell that out, the implication is he's taking the fifth amendment because the answer that might support violently overthrowing the government would be to him a type of confession. >> right, that it could incriminate him. >> i think that's quite striking. i want to look a little bit at the process. we have something prepared, just a little archival material. the january 6th committee ended with the last congress. since then there's been trials with trump aides who tried to defy it. i want to turn to that and then we'll bring ms. cheney back in. i'm talking about how the committee, ms. cheney and her colleagues voted to hold mr. bannon and navarro in contempt. they demanded mr. navarro's testimony after he detailed -- on this program. >> we have 100 senators on capitol hill ready to implement the sweep. remedy was for vice president pence as the quarterback in the green bay sweep to remand those votes back to the six battleground states. >> do you realize you are describing a coup. >> no. >> navarro's discussion of what we called that sweep plot did draw interest. he claimed he viewed his testimony as privileged even though he was making public statements. after defying the january 6th committee subpoena, the committee held him in contempt. might want to show ms. cheney what you seed briefly as vice chair at the contempt hearing for mr. navarro. >> mr. navarro is also a key witness. he's written a book boasting about his role in planning and coordinating the activity of january 6th. and yet he does not have the courage to testify here. we have many questions for mr. navarro, including about his communications with roger stone and steve bannon regarding the planning for january 6th. >> navarro did not answer those questions to congress. both of those defendants have since been convicted and sentenced to jail. they are currently out free while they appeal those convictions. mr. meadows was not indicted by doj after being held in contempt. in the book cheney writes, she found that difficult to understand. the update now, meadows does await a rico trial in georgia. ms. cheney, we look at all of that, what do you see as the lessons being -- vindicated as those are independent juries who agreed, and what about mr. meadows? >> in terms of the processer it was fundamentally important to the committee that we engaged in an aggressive litigation strategy, that we ensured our subpoenas would be enforced. and it was -- one of the things we learned was it didn't matter in judges had been appointed by democrats or republicans. i think this is one of the things we're still seeing today almost without exception, that members of the judiciary recognize the threat we're facing. and what we saw with respect to the committee was that they moved quickly, that they acted in ways that recognized very clearly the impact and import of the committee's work, that we needed access to this information. so the process itself i think was very important. with respect to mr. meadows, you know, we were hearing from the staff on the committee that they expected that he in fact would be indicted. when he wasn't, it was a surprise, and it was a surprise in particular because the justice department did not in fact assert the kind of complete blanket immunity that meadows himself had been claiming. they said in fact that a former chief of staff is not entitled to that sort of complete immunity, so that made it even more curious why they actually had to move to indict, and i think at the time we anticipated -- we thought that it might be because he was cooperating. i think that's still possible. we don't know for sure. >> possible but not confirmed whether he's cooperating fully with jack smith. >> we don't know that. >> mm-hmm. you look at what they're preparing in georgia -- mr. bannon, we just mentioned, and pence is a star witness. first, any reaction to this reporting? does that track with what you would understand to be the right way to make a case? do you think pence would be a strong witness in georgia or the jack smith case in. >> i think what that list shows is what we saw in the committee, what we demonstrated in the committee, was that the people that know this story, the people that in fact were the subject of pressure from donald trump, the people that tried to stop him, the people that have the evidence are republicans. so people who say for example what the committee was doing was mal partisan overlooks the fact that -- that list doesn't surprise me at all. >> when you look at florida, jim jordan, who you know well and have clashed with,s saying he wants to lead an investigation in your committee's work, and specificly- i wt to be precise -- he's without much evidce suggesting there would be contact between the committee and the georgia rico prosecution's office that somehow bears scrutiny or is bad, that there's a problem there. your response. >> i think that we have seen jim jordan do everything he can to try to cover up what happened on january 6th, to try to divert attention from the facts of that day. one of the things that i talk about in the book is the extent to which he's been very confused himself when he's had the answer the question about, when did you talk to donald trump that day? what was your role in that? i think people should go back and take the time. it's only a few minutes but watch jim jordans after exchange with mcgovern, the chair of the rules committee, when we were in the process of holding bannon in contempt. when mcgovern questioned him and -- as well about the communications he had with trump, jordan has never given a straight answer about that, so i think he's going to do everything he can to protect donald trump, to try to cover up. he has a lot to hide, and i think that he owes the american people answers. >> hmm. another former colleague of yours, now former speaker mccarthy making the announcement had will not run for congress again. i want to give you the floor for response to that. your book talks about risk and standing up for something, and i think people are familiar with the risk that you and others have taken. and because of the climate we're in, some of that risk is quite serious. it's physical security risk to your life and family. but even career risk, which many people spend decades -- if you go hang out in washington, some people spent the better part of their adult lives trying to get this job and they don't want to do anything to risk it. what does it tell you even by that narrow margin, i'm curious, ms. cheney, that you and former speaker mccarthy took different approaches here. both of you paid consequences, which we could explore. but it does not seem that kevin mccarthy's documented -- i would say, i don't know how you would put it -- documented, craven efforts to be on both sides and attempt to cozy back up to maga, doesn't seem like that saved his job. >> i think it's a fundamentally important lesson for everybody to learn watching this period of time, which is that leaders matter, and decisions that individual leaders make matters. the story of kevin mccarthy is throughout this period, he had multiple opportunities to do the right thing, and each time he did the wrong thing. and it isn't just that it has now cost him his career in terms of losing the speakership ultimately at the hands of trump, being abandon by trump. but it cost the nation greatly that the leader of the republicans in the house didn't lead, didn't say you know what? i'm going to stand up and do the right thing. we aren't going to object to electoral votes. he was in the right place in the days just after january 6th, but because the financial campaign contributions dried up, corporations said they wouldn't give to republicans after the insurrection, he went down to mar-a-lago. he needed donald trump. he needed donald trump's donors, and that meant he had to help donald trump wipe away the stain of what he's done to our country. >> we spend a lot of time,s awe mention, tracking the committee's work and evidence. that's where our head has been on report on it. reading the book there's a little more personal there. we learn about you as a person. you chose to share some of that. we have one of the photos, then-president ford. i think we have you -- just there. not everyone gets that kind of quality time with the president. here you are with president reagan. your father behind you. much has been discussed about you and your father, the former vice president, but what we notice in the book is it goes back even further. my question is partly about your own life personallying but also about, here you are and the choice you have made. i wonder, do you think in any way there was a positive that was you had more exposure and time, that in some way that may have given you an extra perspective or calcified your backbone? you write about your father and president bush and that's been discussed, but seeing you there. let's put the ford one back up, because why not? but seeing you there, in a good way, i wonder, do you think that any of that time from such a young age made you more aware of the humanity of all these people involved and less cowed by it? did it give you something beyond all the things we've heard about to stand up where so many people couldn't? >> you know, i think that having spent time with republican presidents, with democratic presidents, too, but certainly more with republicans, having known people like president ford, who was a good and decent and honorable man -- and president weighen and president bush as well -- both president bushes -- you know, i know what presidents should be. and i know the kinds of presidents we have had in the past, everyone if we disagreed on policy. so to see donald trump do what he was willing to do, i do think that i found it absolutely beyond doubt that this is not -- this can't stand. we as a nation can't stand for that. i don't know whether people with perhaps less experience, you know -- i don't think there's any excuse. >> sure. and i don't mean it that way. >> yeah, but -- but i also think that when you look at where we found ourselves as a nation -- and it was also the fact that my parents spent a huge amount of time with my sister and me making sure we understood american history, teaching us about american history, teaching us about the constitution. to me it was obvious that we cannot survive as a nation who's going to unravel the foundations of the republic. >> understood. the final three are what we call around here lightning round. you're busy, so i don't know if you see -- >> i do. >> these are tailored toward you. the first one, complete the sentence in a sentence or so, for you, the worst part of all this has been -- >> the worse part of all this has been the realization that my kids might grow up in a country where america doesn't know the peaceful transition of power and that fear. but it also has been what has given me an absolute determination to do everything that i can do to make sure that doesn't happen. >> the best part of all this has been -- >> the best part of all this has been just the incredible outreach and outpouring of support for the constitution that i have seen, especially from young women around the country. it's been the lesson of the very courageous witnesses in our hearings. you know, people like rusty bowers. very, very moving to see people who supported donald trump and then said, but wait a minute, i'm not going to violate my oath of office. and we had so many of those witnesses. but i would say in particular, the young women around the country that may not agree -- we might not agree on a whole range of issues, but boy, they're willing to stand up and fight if our constitution. >> and finally, you have been elected to wield power. you've used power and decided where you stand. you risked your congressional seat. you're now a citizen among other things. the final sentence is, regular citizens can and should do what right now? >> regular citizens in this country can never be bystanders, and right now we've got to consider running for office yourselves, put your name on the ballot if you're going to uphold the constitution, vote for good people, but most of all, come together across party lines to stop donald trump. >> liz cheney, bit busy lately in the news. appreciate you coming on "the beat." the book is "oath and honor". michael steele joins us after the break. we'll be right back. the break. we'll be right back. help take control of your symptoms - with vraylar. some medicines only treat the lows or highs. vraylar treats depressive, acute manic, and mixed episodes of bipolar 1 in adults. proven, full-spectrum relief for all bipolar 1 symptoms. and in vraylar clinical studies, most saw no substantial impact on weight. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles or confusion which may mean a life-threatening reaction, or uncontrollable muscle movements which may be permanent. high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death, weight gain and high cholesterol may occur. movement dysfunction and restlessness are common side effects. sleepiness and stomach issues are also common. side effects may not appear for several weeks. ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie could help you save. (carolers) ♪ iphone 15 pro, your husband deserves it! ♪ and learn how abbvie (mom) carolers? to tell me you want a new iphone? a better plan is verizon. (dad) no way they'd take this wreck. (carolers) ♪ yes, they will, in any condition. ♪ ♪ get iphone 15 pro and ipad and apple watch - all on them! ♪ (mom) please forgive him. (carolers) ♪ it's all good - just a little awkward. ♪ (soloist) think we'll wrap this up. (vo) for a limited time, turn any iphone in any condition into a new iphone 15 pro with titanium and ipad and apple watch se - all on us. that's up to $1700 in value. only on verizon. hey, while you're there, grab more delectables. you know, that lickable cat treat. de-licka what? delectables. delickables? delectables. delickable delectables. yes, just hurry! hm. it must be delicious. got it. delectables lickable treat. ♪ deliciously de-lick-able delectables ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ we're building a better postal service. for more on-time deliveries. and easier, affordable ways to ship. so you can deliver even more holiday joy. the united states postal service. delivering for america. ♪ if there's pain when you try to poo ♪ ♪ and going sometimes feels like you ♪ ♪ pushed through a pineapple or two ♪ ♪ colace is the brand you need ♪ ♪ to soften stools, we're all agreed ♪ ♪ #2 should be easy to do ♪ trust colace to soften stools with no stimulants for comfortable relief. ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com. we just heard from liz cheney, a member of republican leadership until he departed the congress. and now we hear from michael steele, a leader of the republican party. now msnbc analyst. i want to get your thoughts on all of it, including something we don't often see, which was as we looked at a very young liz cheney with president ford and reagan and those memories, your thoughts on what we heard from her. >> let's start with that. i appreciate you putting this in front of the country. it's important to understand back story and origin stories, and with liz, she's part of people say republican loyalty for sure. but it's the pedigree. it's the consistent say she learned from her parents to be true to herself, true to what she says and so honor the things that matter. that to me is what is so striking about her political career. she's standing here on the precipice looking at her legacy, the career, the work, the body of work that she's done, but he's always looking at her values, her principles and the things that she swore an oath to, and she took that leap of faith that those things, those principles, those things she swore an oath to mattered more. then you get to understand why she did what she did and why more importantly everyone else around her reacted to negatively to it, because they were not similarly moored. they were not similarly anchored. they valued trump's relationship with them. they valued political position more. >> here she was donald trump's day one dictator comments. >> donald trump won't deny that he has plans about the ones we have been discussing. he says it on a weekly if not a daily basis, and i think what we as americans and voter as citizens need to to do is not to become numb to that. what he says is so outrageous that it can be very easy for his allies to say to the rest of us, oh, come on, you know that's not true. what the lesson of donald trump of the last several years has taught us is we have to take him seriously and we have to take him literally, and he has shown us what he's willing to do. >> michael? >> yes, yes, a thousand times yes. i have been screaming it with a few others that the man will always tell you what he intends to do because he doesn't think you can stop him. i wrote it down because i believe it's the core of our problem here. leaders matter. when you don't have leaders, you don't have men and women of principle who are willing to stand up to push back against the thing if front of you that's telling you what it is, but instead, do like kevin mccarthy, get on a plane, go to mar-a-lago and bend the knee, because you need to raise some money? pause your coffers drying up and your country suffered the worst thing since the civil war, and you're worried about whether or not your fundraising is going right. >> and then still have the shortest speakership ever to show for it. >> after all that donald trump love, what you got to show for it? your behind, make an announcement, i'm done, i'm resigning at the end of the year. so leaders matter, and that again relates back to the first point about why it was so parent for her to be here at this space in this time because of all the leader, she was the only one along with adam kinzinger -- the others who voted impeachment, who actually led, and i think the country needs to take stock of that as it sets up for the 2024 election cycle. >> i got one more question for you, michael. i say we end on a high note. lord knows there's enough downers. here's the high note. she's out of government. took the big risk. speaks honestly it seems. speaks bluntly. the book i've read now. asked whether or not doj acted in response to the evidence that came out of the committee work, she said -- and she's got quite a vantage point on this, she said, yeah, probably, think so. cannot 100% prove it. we a lot of evidence. "washington post" had a great account. doj had the off switch. they were not interested in going up the line for all the reasons -- we've covered it. and the facts that move them towards considering it, looking at it, and by the time you get jack smith in there -- which again, other reasons because garland decided they need a special counsel. there's always one of course for hunter biden. then suddenly you go to the on switch. the question i have for you is what do we take from the fact that the evidence mattered the process worked? obviously if you have a bunch of hearings with bad evidence or inconclusive you wouldn't have all that. even amidst all this, what do we take from that? i thought it was striking she said that's how we saw it, and there's a lot of reporting that reflects the same thing -- the evidence carried the day on that one. >> the evidence carried the day, and the proof is in the ultimate pudding. so, you start to summer before the hearings, and everyone is like, yeah, whatever. the hearings start. and the process unfolds. the narratives are told. by the end of that summer and fall, the weekend before the election, the number one or number two depending on the poll, issue for voters was democracy, which told me in that moment that that committee, her leadership, bennie thompson's leadership, the leadership of all the other members of that committee, mattered to the american people and not only did it move them, but more importantly it moved those institutions within government and outside of government, our judiciary, to think twice about the significant of the moment and to understand exactly the work that was put in front of them. we did not have that with the mueller investigation. we had it backsliding and excuses, and the justice department found a way not to lean into the moment to say, y'all need to bring some indictments, right? and we will. that's different now. and i think that is the work of this committee is going to go down in history as a seminal moment for the country, and i think it appropriately sets up ari -- i'd love to -- we can debate this over a beer, but i think it appropriately sets up what happens next. and it puts the onus on the american people, because they didn't hide anything. they laid it out there. they showed it to us. we leaned into it so much to the point that we recognized the importance of democracy by the time it was, you know, ready to vote in november. so we'll see what we do next with that. >> i think that's well put, and as i mentioned, the world changes, the party changes, but you actual ran the party. she was in house leadership. you know, she was on those calls, as we're reminding. so that's what we're hearing from over that perspective. you mentioned the chat over beer. me, i prefer a mud slide. baileys on the rocks. keep it sweet and creamy, but for you i would try a beer. >> i'm going get in your lane, baby. you rolling faster than me. >> we can put the -- double mud slide, politics, and we can put the photo up on the internet and show people it's real. this is real. >> done. >> good to see you, michael. >> thank you, buddy. >> thanks to michael steele and lch lp tonight. coming up, why mike pence could be taking a star turn. next. uld be taking a star turn. next i had to get help somewhere along the line to stay competitive. i discovered prevagen. i started taking it and after a period of time, my memory improved. it was a game-changer for me. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. hi! need new glasses? it was a game-changer for me. get more from your benefits at visionworks. how can you see me squinting? i can't! i'm just telling everyone! ...hey! use your vision benefits before they expire. visionworks. see the difference. (fisher investments) it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same, but at fisher investments we're clearly different. (other money manager) different how? you sell high commission investment products, right? (fisher investments) nope. fisher avoids them. (other money manager) well, you must earn commissions on trades. (fisher investments) never at fisher investments. (other money manager) ok, then you probably sneak in some hidden and layered fees. (fisher investments) no. we structure our fees so we do better when clients do better. that might be why most of our clients come from other money managers. at fisher investments, we're clearly different. ian will find the true meaning of the holiday sweater. i will? because he went to michaels and got everything he needed to make a one of a kind crewneck you could never get off the rack. turn ideas into i-did-its. ♪ (holiday music) ♪ my husband and i have never been more active. tu shingles doesn't care.. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care. because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today. news out of rico da willis' office. we're learning about the witnesses they may put forward, including people like bill barr, georgia coffer kemp and mike pence. the argument about whether he could take power to reject electoral votes. here on "the beat" we reported on the pence plot and the testimony to the committee about all of this. >> i remember hearing the word, wimp, either he called him a wimp. i don't remember if he said you are a wimp. you'll be a wimp. wimp is the word i remember. >> it was a different tone than i heard him take with the vice president before. >> do you remember what she said her father called him? >> the p word? >> we're joined by former sdny chief david kelly. welcome, david. we started with liz cheney and we heard from michael steele and you specifically on the pence news or if you have anything to say about what ms. cheney said the idea that da wants to make him kind of a star witness. what do you think of that plan? >> i don't know it's a star witness. look, i think she has to provide a lengthy list of witnesses. it's better to be overinclusive than underinclusive. i don't know that i would read this as he's on a deficit list. i think if i was in her shoes and i had access to, he would be somebody i would want to put on. i certainly would want to interview him and have the opportunity to speak to him. i don't know that that has happened yet. you want that to happen before you make the decision whether or not to put him on the stand. >> one potential problem for prosecutors with someone like pence and the history that we know is all these meetings and all this debate, which overlaps with something liz cheney and i were talking about, which is everybody in reality knows they lost the election. there was no widespread fraud. the courts looked at it. the supreme court didn't even hear a case on this, let alone side with them. pence is on the stand, don't the defense lawyers get to go up there and say, how clear cut was this if you kept having meetings about it? there must have been some question about what you could have done if you kept talking to your lawyers about it. as of x date close to the 6th, you were still considering doing this, weren't you? how could it be debatable one week and a giant crime the next? and my point is not whether that's true or not. my point is does a prosecutor want to open up that defense argument? >> yeah. so look, i think that there's compelling evidence that you have from attorney general barr that we know of, from lawyers within the white house, ms. cheney talked about people who all concluded and who all had advised him, you did not have a chance, there was no fraud here and you lost. i got to think whether or not as enticing as it would be to have the vice president up there, i don't know how many cans of worms that opens that you want to avoid. and so, i think i might -- i don't know that you need him when you have all that. >> interesting, yeah. >> gets a little distracting to the jury and the drama having the vice president testify against the president. i would go lower down the ladder and people who talked to him -- i don't know if i would call barr. there's some other people there that can say quite convincingly that he knew it was done long before, you know, january 6th. >> so, again, with about 40 seconds left, if you're on the federal case where barr is relevant, maybe you don't need him because you're getting esoteric and you want to keep the case compact to the people and facts close to trump. >> i might find somebody who is less of a marquee because i don't want to distract the jury. it brings an extra element there. >> yeah. >> at the same time, though, you pretty much know where barr is going to come out on this and he is pretty rock solid anti-trump. i think barr may be a good choice. pence could be a little wishy washy on some issues. i don't know that -- i don't know that -- he may bring more to the table than you want to deal with. >> very interesting. and you know, we come to you for the independent, straight up analysis. sometimes online everyone is like, oh my god, mike pence. that would be so exciting. he certainly ducked the committee while seeming to cooperate behind the scenes. but you're reminding folks in a case you might not want to go there. david kelley, good to see you, sir. >> nice to see you, too, ari. >> great to see you. when we come back, we answer the question who is the person of the year? ear? [dog barks] no it's just a bunny! only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ (carolers) ♪ iphone 15 pro, your husband deserves it! ♪ only pay for what you need. (mom) carolers? to tell me you want a new iphone? a better plan is verizon. (vo) for a limited time, turn any iphone in any condition into a new iphone 15 pro with titanium and ipad and apple watch se - all on us. only on verizon. [city ambience sounds] [car screech] [car door slam] [camera shutter sfx] introducing ned's plaque psoriasis. [camera shutter sfx] he thinks his flaky, red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. [ned?] it can help you get clearer skin and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing it for nearly a decade. otezla is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. [crowd gasp] ♪♪ with clearer skin, movie night is a groovy night. [ting] ♪♪ live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. hey, grab more delectables. live in the moment. you know, that lickable cat treat? de-lick-able delectables? yes, just hurry. hmm. it must be delicious. delectables lickable treat. first time i connected with kim, she told me that ♪ deliciously de-lick-able her husband had passed. and that he took care of all of the internet connected devices in the home. i told her, “i'm here to take care of you.” connecting with kim... made me reconnect with my mom. it's very important to keep loved ones close. we know that creating memories with loved ones brings so much joy to your life. a family trip to the team usa training facility. i don't know how to thank you. i'm here to thank you. ♪♪ ♪ i promise that you'll never find another like me ♪ ♪ i'm the only one of me ♪ ♪ baby that's the fun of me ♪ fact check, true. taylor swift is the only one like her. and we have some news tonight that is actual real serious news because if you know anything about the tradition of "time" magazine's person of the year, it is kind of a test of the achievements being honored at any given period of our media and culture. taylor swift is the first entertainer to ever be named person of the year across the 96 years of this tradition. there is the new cover. we can tell you past winners include presidents, pope, she's also, think about this, only the third individual woman to win the award in the recent era. that follows german chancellor angela merkel and the environmental activist greta thuneberg in 2019. keeping track of that kind of shift, the word was long called just man of the year. they changed that near the turn of the century at 1999. our congratulations to taylor swift, who as we reported, is, of course, a creative entertainer, singer, artist, writer, but also increasingly a powerful force beyond any particular stretch of culture. she's had a lot of right wing republicans concerned about her dabbling in politics against trump as well. we don't think this is the last of "time"