in the effort leading up to the attack on the capitol to overturn the will of the american people. now, one of nine attempts to pressure the justice department to undermine the election. yet as horrifying as the details are and the attack was, it may still be tempting to file it away as just another collection of the latest in a series of such horrifying accounts. we've all gotten pretty numb to it. and that's understandable. but it's certainly a mistake. it's not like reading william shirer's “the rise and fall of the third reich” when it first came out in the 1960s, safe in the knowledge the monster had been slain. as we'll discuss tonight, there has been no fall. there's very much an alive and real-time threat of clear and present danger. that's because the enablers are still enabling and gaslighting. >> so president trump assembled a bunch of people in his office and they discussed what they ought to do. >> that's senator chuck grassley, ranking republican on the judiciary committee, whose members put out a rebuttal to the majority report. he's misleadingly describing a meeting in the oval office on the 3rd of january, a meeting we just learned happened three days before the capitol attack, more than a month after then attorney general barr declared there had been no widespread fraud in the election. also after dozens and dozens of courtroom losses on election fraud claims. now, at the meeting barr's replacement, acting attorney general jeffrey rosen, also present, justice official and trump ally jeffrey clark whom the former president wanted to replace rosen with. reading from the report, according to rosen, trump opened the meeting by saying, "one thing we know is you, rosen, aren't going to do anything to overturn the election." now, again, i assume he was saying that in a negative way. again, this is an election the courts, republican state officials and the president's own handpicked attorney general had already said was clean. according to the report, rosen told the former president the department "can't and won't just flip a switch and change the election." incredible. then according to committee testimony from department of justice second in command richard donoghue, "trump asked that doj," department of justice, "just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the republican congressmen," whom donoghue understood to be the republican house members who would be challenging the electoral college certification on january 6th. he was rebuffed, thank goodness. the meeting went on for up to three hours. only at the end after being presented with the prospect of mass resignations at justice department if he replaced rosen with clark did the former president actually relent. and nowhere, not found in one bit of testimony about the moment, did he say, we're not doing this because it would be wrong. of course we're not doing this because it would be wrong. his only complaint, according to richard donoghue, is about not being able to pull it off. now look at senator grassley's take on the former president's conduct there and throughout the affair. it's posted on his website. and i'm quoting now. "the available evidence shows that president trump did what we'd expect a president to do on an issue of this importance. he listened to his senior advisers and followed their advice and recommendations." that is rewriting history. and if any reminder were needed that today's majority report is more about today and tomorrow than the past, here's some more gaslighting today from republican congressman andy biggs. >> who won the election in arizona? donald trump -- >> we don't know. because as the audit demonstrates very clearly, mr. raskin, there are a lot of issues with this election that took place. >> i mean, that's just complete bull. it's amazing that that person is a sitting congressman. that person is just lying. it's become so normal, hasn't it? just incredible to me. congressman biggs is one of several lawmakers being looked at by the house select committee for his role in the former president's rally which preceded the attack on the capitol. the committee issued more subpoenas today. meantime, four of his former top aides and allies are facing a midnight deadline to turn over documents to the committee. so no, none of this is history yet and sadly it is still current events. for more on the subpoenas, i want to go to cnn's ryan nobles at the capitol. so what do we know right now? what's going on? >> well, anderson, today the select committee issuing a round of subpoenas to a new group of individuals and these are people that were connected to the stop the steal organization, which planned and organized the stop the steal rally, which served as the prelude of course to the insurrection here at the capitol on january 6th. the two men in particular who they're looking for documents from and an interview and deposition of is ali alexander and nathan martin. now, alexander in particular is an interesting figure. he was very popular on the conservative far right internet, and he is someone who also has publicly boasted about his direct and personal connections with three members of congress, among them paul gosar, mo brooks, and the man you were just talking about, andy biggs, who had been long perpetuators of the big lie, also people that voted to object to the election results and played some role in that stop the steal rally ahead of what happened here on january 6th. so this does give us some insight into what the committee is looking for. they're looking for coordination, planning and organization around that rally and then how it could have enabled or led to the violence and chaos here at the capitol on that day. >> so what exactly is the former president telling his allies to do in regard to these subpoenas? >> well, this is an interesting development today, anderson. and there's no doubt that the committee felt that it was very unlikely that these four men would comply in the way they're looking for to the deposition and subpoena requests that they had put forward. but the fact that we have the former president of the united states, according to "the washington post" in a letter they reviewed, specifically telling these four men not to comply with the committee's requests because he plans to defend executive privilege. now, it's not exactly clear how he thinks that he is able to do that and then extend that ability to these four men -- there is really a lot of ambiguous legal arguments in that regard. but we should also point out, anderson, that it's unlikely that even trump himself can use executive privilege to shield himself from any information being gleaned from the select committee. most legal experts believe that it is only the responsibility of the current occupant of the white house to take care of and invoke executive privilege, much less extend that to four people including one person, steve bannon, who wasn't even a white house official on the day of the january 6th insurrection. so this is more than anything likely to be a delay tactic by trump and his allies, because it's going to be a difficult legal battle and of course the committee just doesn't have that much time to do their work. >> right. and the courts take time. ryan nobles. appreciate it. we're joined now by cnn contributor, former nixon white house counsel john dean. so john, this strategy's going to work. the former president, you know, obviously he can't exert executive privilege as he clearly thinks he can, but it doesn't really matter, does it? this will just end up in courts and will drag on so long that, other than for history, it may be irrelevant. >> that's his goal, is to just gum it up so bad and probably to litigate it. and a lot of these issues are not resolved, anderson. you're right. he cannot -- there's no way he can say to these people, you cannot testify, you cannot produce any documents in your control. the only sort of range where there's sort of mechanics that we might get to the documents is the presidential records act, if they've complied with it, their records from the white house are in the national archives. and the archivist is under an executive order written by barack obama that tells him what he can and cannot do. and with an incumbent president, he has limited impact on a past president's papers. and if trump does invoke executive privilege, the archivist is the one who will make the decision. in consultation with the attorney general and the white house counsel, as well as under general instructions from the incumbent president. so -- but this has never been litigated. we don't know if that executive order is even good. and i think that's what trump wants to go for. his lawyers have probably told him, you can drag this out for years. >> because there's this reporting from "the washington post" that the former president's lawyer is telling these former aides not to comefully with subpoenas from the january 6th committee. obviously, it's one thing to actually fight a subpoena in court. it's another to completely ignore it at the direction of the former president, isn't it? >> there's no -- he has no authority to do that. each of those people have to decide what they can do and they can't say, well, i'm acting under the orders of former president trump. that's no order. it is meaningless. so they can find themselves in contempt. and anderson, again, this is where the house has failed to get itself in order, to prepare for this. there are remedies for this. there are housekeeping things they can do and make these subpoenas through their inherent contempt powers have some meaning. >> why wouldn't they do that if that was a possibility? what is the inherent contempt power you're talking about? >> boy, i don't know. i cannot figure out. it is a no-brainer. ted lieu introduced in the last congress and again in this congress a resolution that would amend their rules that would give a fine power, up to $25,000 per incident and up to $100,000 per particular material, which can be repeated again and again. it can really add up. and this is just amending their rules. they don't have to go to the senate, they don't have to go to anybody. and i just don't get it, why they don't brace themselves to deal with this kind of behavior. >> how significant are the new subpoenas for the so-called stop the steal organizers from the january 6th select committee? it's worth noting one of the organizers claimed he worked closely with republican congressmen in planning the rally at the capitol. of course, whether or not he was being honest, you know, who can tell with these people? >> i think they're important. i think they're being very thoughtful, the subpoenas they issue. and if these people indeed comply, and i don't know why they wouldn't, they will get more information as to how this thing really came down. and that's what they're clearly trying to get a hold of. >> john dean, appreciate it tonight. thank you. now, his former watergate counterpart in a sense, cnn political analyst, author and investigative reporter carl bernstein. carl, thanks for being with us. so the senate judiciary committee report is the most comprehensive look so far at the former president's assault on democracy, asking the justice department nine times to undermine the election result. i'm wondering what your takeaway is. >> well, that there has been a coup led by the president of the united states to undermine the constitution and possibly and likely a criminal conspiracy as well. and all of these things that are laid out in the report are uncontrovertible evidence of the president of the united states trying to overwhelm constitutional responsibility, to subvert and evade the laws of the united states and the constitution of the united states. but i think we also need to look at something, we are looking at an ongoing coverup led by the republican party to keep the people of the united states from knowing what the hell happened in these terrible moments in which the president of the united states, for the first time in our history, tried to subvert a legal and free election. and now we are heading toward the next election in which these same forces are planning to subvert the election. so we are in a constitutional crisis. >> you know, you have chairman durbin saying we were a half step away -- >> we're in it. >> you think we're in it. >> we're in it, because look toward the next election. look at what has happened already. and look at the country itself. the most significant thing, perhaps, is not just the coup attempt and the coup by the president of the united states and the republican party going along with it, but almost half of the adults -- adult voters in this country, from all of the polls and what we saw in the last election, are willing to go along with these lies. >> yeah. >> so, we are in a kind of civil war in this country. >> not only voters, the base, supporters willing to go along with this lie, if senator grassley's rebuttal from the gop saying nothing to see in that meeting. you know, that trump, oh, he listened to his senior advisers and followed their advice and recommendations -- that's an insane interpretation of an insane meeting which took place with the former president. >> chuck grassley was once a really honorable man with a terrific record serving his party. >> that must have been a long time ago. >> and it is a long time ago, because what he is doing is a disgrace. as his colleagues are doing. what the republican party is doing today is unprecedented in our history. going along with subversion of the constitution of the united states. this is not about a set of unknown facts. it's very clear to these people in the republican party what happened. they want to win and prevail in this civil war at any cost. and the cost to the country is something that we have not seen in this nation since 1860 to '65. that's the only period in our history we can look at as to when the forces of undemocratic to say the least, but when the forces gathered to undermine our unity as a country and what we stand for and who we are, we are in a similar period right now in which -- and that's what we need to be covering as well in the media. what is going on in the country that is allowing this to happen? we need to find out what's on people's minds that they are willing to go along with this? >> also, you know, look, who hasn't become somewhat numb to this constant assault? and that's -- you know, that's how psychopaths are able to remain free, you know, succeed in society because they wear down everybody else around them and just are shameless and have no -- >> let me say -- you just raised a really interesting point. you used the word "psychopath." let's say that perhaps we have a sociopath or a psychopath who has been the president of the united states and seeks perhaps to be the next president of the united states and has ignited this movement. we have never had a period in our history when 40%, 45% of the people in our country have said oh, yeah, i'll go along with this psychopath, i'll go along with this sociopath. we need to be looking at these facts as well as the coup and what this individual did. we need to look at why are our people, so many of our people following this sociopathic undermining of our democracy? it's extraordinary. >> yeah. it is. how did -- i mean, you owe, there's been a lot of comparisons obviously to watergate. but just looking back to the darkest days of the nixon administration? >> the system worked in watergate. richard nixon left office. he agreed to leave office. he didn't start a coup at the last minute to say, i'm going to stay here, i'm not leaving, don't let that chopper take off on the lawn. he said, i have to go. he acknowledged that he had to go. whatever he thought of the facts, he knew that there was a constitutional process in place and that he had lost and that the supreme court had made him turn over his tapes and that he was no longer -- and he would have been impeached and convicted in the senate. what made him go was his knowledge that his own party was going to convict him. now, donald trump's party has not convicted him in the senate, is not about to convict anybody, but rather is intent on covering up this horrible, horrible coup and undermining of our democracy, led by this person and now endorsed, enabled by one of our two political parties. we've never had anything like it in our history. >> carl bernstein, i appreciate it. thank you, carl. coming up next, more breaking news. significant new details. randi kaye has just learned about what police were doing when brian laundrie returned home to florida without his fiance, gabby petito. and later, the surgeon general of the united states joining us to talk about some positive trends in the battle against covid. we'll ask if he thinks the worst of the pandemic is actually behind us, ahead. having someone else do your books for you. i'm linda, your quickbooks live bookkeeper. let's do this linda! sounds good! a live expert bookkeeper who understands your business. felipe, i've categorized last month's hair gel expenses. steve, i just closed your books. great, how are we looking? profits are up! on to next month. on to next month, linda! get your books done for you by trusted experts. intuit quickbooks live bookkeeping. i've always focused on my career. but when we found out our son had autism, his future became my focus. lavender baths always calmed him. so we turned bath time into a business. and building it with my son has been my dream job. at northwestern mutual, our version of financial planning helps you live your dreams today. find a northwestern mutual advisor at nm.com discover card i just got my cashback match is this for real? yup! we match all the cash back new card members earn at the end of their first year automatically woo! i got my mo-ney! it's hard to contain yourself isn't it? uh- huh! well let it go! woooo! get a dollar for dollar match at the end of your first year. only from discover. there is some breaking news tonight in the search for brian laundrie. he disappeared just days after his fiance gabby petito was reported missing. randi kaye just spoke with the police in florida, where laundrie's family lives and where he was last seen. so i understand you learned some new details including whether or not police actually spoke with brian laundrie when he returned home to florida without his fiancee. >> reporter: we did, anderson. and the answer is no. i'm told by the spokesperson for the north port police department that authorities did not speak with brian laundrie before he disappeared. we also learned, and this is also new, that police were surveilling brian laundrie before he disappeared. they were doing what they could legally do. i'm told there were some limitations. because remember, there hadn't been a crime at that time. gabby petito's remains had not been found yet. so there were some legal limitations to this. but this is how the spokesperson for the north port police department explained it to me. >> if you talk to a lot of people who have experience in law enforcement, i mean, the guy goes for a walk in the carlton reserve, he's not wanted for a crime, i mean, what are we supposed to do? we're going to go tree to tree, following him back through the woods? i mean, you know, it just wasn't there with the information we had in this case. >> reporter: he also added that there was -- there has been plenty of effort, plenty of hustle by the north port police department in trying to solve this crime but no investigation is 100% perfect. but anderson, we also learned from police today that on september 17th when brian laundrie's parents reported him missing, police as you know came to this house here behind me and i'm told from police that the laundries would only respond to questions about their son missing and they had their attorney on the phone. they would not answer any questions about gabby petito missing and the fact that she hadn't been found. and i'm told that police thought that behavior, anderson, was odd. >> you also got some new information about the family's cell phones. >> reporter: right. well, as you know, we learned recently that brian laundrie had bought a new cell phone after he returned from that trip to wyoming. he went to a store here in north port, florida on september 4th and bought a new phone. so the question was, where was his original phone that was on that trip with him out west? i confirmed today with police that they don't have brian laundrie's original phone, authorities don't have gabby petito's phone, neither phone was in the van that brian laundrie returned in from wyoming to here, to his family home on september 1st. but we also spoke with a former fbi agent and attorney who said that even if you don't have the physical phone, there is plenty of information that you could get off -- you could still get that information from the records of the phone, you can track the phone, you can check geographic locations. so not only would they be able to find out where gabby petito was, but also where her phone was and where those text messages might have been coming from, including these two very bizarre text messages that were sent in late august that her parents don't believe were actually sent by her. now, i'm also told that these text messages would only stay for a few days, maybe they would only be stored for a few days, but there's other information that would be stored longer in the cloud. for example, maybe internet searches that she did which could possibly prove to be very valuable to investigators, anderson. >> and today, brian laundrie's father went into that nature preserve with authorities. is there any detail on that? >> reporter: he went in early this morning with law enforcement, and we understand from the laundrie family attorney that he was in there to show them maybe areas in there that brian frequented, also areas that he and his son had hiked and camped in. but the family attorney released a statement as well later in the day that said there were no discoveries and hopefully brian will be located soon, anderson. >> and just -- i just want to double back. when you said that the police were kind of observing brian laundrie, obviously you said there are limitations, you know, he wasn't accused of a crime or charged with a crime. do we know anything more about that? like what kind of observations? were they actually surveilling him? do we know? >> reporter: it sounded to me as if -- he was very careful about what he was saying, because this is an ongoing investigation, he doesn't want to compromise the investigation. but he did confirm that there was surveillance. it sounded like it was a bit of a loose surveillance where they had some eyes on him but obviously if they had known he gave that example of, if he was in the reserve they weren't going to go tree to tree trying to follow right behind him. >> if brian laundrie is alive and caught and charged with gabby petito's killing, there's the question of what his defense would look like. we're joined by mark o'mara who famously defended george zimmerman in the killing of trayvon martin. mark, we appreciate you being with us. we should say brian laundrie's officially only wanted in connection with using gabby petito's bank card following her death. that said, as a defense attorney, i'm wondering what you make of this case and the, you know, the family's involvement, the family's attorney, et cetera. >> sure. well, i mean, there's so much. but most importantly, there's so much that we don't know. we know the fbi is being very tight-lipped. we don't even know the cause of death or the circumstances surrounding gabby's passing, so we have a lot of sort of supposition. obviously, it's easy to focus blame on brian, because he came home without her and now he's taken off. there may well be good explanations for that. we're going to have to wait and see. but certainly when you're looking at this case from the outside and you see brian come home with the family for several days and then sort of out and now seemingly in hiding, it's very easy to point a finger at him. but i would just hope or suggest that we do what all of us in the legal profession are trained to do, which is only follow the evidence that's actually there and keep the suppositions to a minimum. >> well, obviously there's a lot of people who are looking at the parents, blaming parents as well. again, we have no idea what knowledge they had or had -- it's important to point out. i think we just don't know. it's very easy from the outside on cable shows for people to be hurling invectives and criticizing and making assumptions. but again, the facts actually do matter still in this world. if laundrie is captured, what is the -- i mean, conversations between a child, or an adult child and his parents, are those things which -- is there some obligation for families to come forward or is just saying i'm not going to discuss anything in this subject matter to police, is that okay? >> witnesses actually don't have an affirmative obligation to come forward necessarily. they're not allowed to do the opposite. they're not allowed to actively interfere with an investigation. they're not allowed to harbor a fugitive. they're not allowed to obstruct justice. even accessory after the fact, which is helping somebody to continue to get away with the crime, you know, the getaway car example. so all of those are things that they cannot do. you know, we also have to look at this. this is never well planned out step by step in the beginning. this is always handled in all of these cases, you know, one small step at a time. something happened with gabby, brian takes off potentially. then comes home, mom and dad say something. so these are all small steps. what the family cannot do is use anything to affirmatively interfere with the investigation. and you mentioned, you know, if and when brian is captured my hope is for the opposite. my hope is that brian finds himself good counsel. this needs to be addressed more affirmatively, even with fears that he may have of predispositions against him or concerns with law enforcement, whatever that might be. this is better to be done in the light of day rather than in the shadows. >> mark o'meara, appreciate you being with us. thank you, mark. it is a pleasure to say this next sentence, which is nearly all the trends in the u.s. are pointing in the right direction in the fight against covid right now. we'll talk to the surgeon general about whether he thinks the worst is behind us. and we'll also ask him about when kids 5 to 11 might be able to get the vaccine after pfizer today requested emergency use authorization. we'll be right back. knows everyone's unique. that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. [ nautical horn blows ] i mean just because you look like someone else doesn't mean you eat off the floor, or yell at the vacuum, or need flea medication. oh, yeah. that's the spot. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ ♪ look for the bare necessities ♪ ♪ the simple bare necessities ♪ ♪ forget about your worries and your strife ♪ ♪ the bare necessities of life will come to you ♪ all the delivery, no delivery fees. dashpass. (man) so when in doubt, just say, "let me talk to my manager." next, carvana's 100% online shopping experience. oh, man. carvana lets people buy a car-- get this-- from their couch. oh, how disruptive. no salesman there to help me pick out the car i need. how does anyone find a car on this site without someone like us checking in? she's a beauty, huh? oh, golly! (laughter) i can help you find the color you want. that sounds nice. let me talk to my manager. (vo) buy your next car 100% online. with carvana. this is the planning effect. if you ask suzie about the future, she'll say she's got goals. and since she's got goals, she might need help reaching them, and so she'll get some help from fidelity, and at fidelity, someone will help her create a plan for all her goals, which means suzie will be feeling so good about that plan, she can just enjoy right now. that's the planning effect, from fidelity. one of my favorite supplements is qunol turmeric. turmeric helps with healthy joints and inflammation support. unlike regular turmeric supplements qunol's superior absorption helps me get the full benefits of turmeric. the brand i trust is qunol. every single day, we're all getting a little bit better. we're better cooks... better neighbors... hi. i've got this until you get back. better parents... and better friends. no! no! that's why comcast works around the clock constantly improving america's largest gig-speed broadband network. and just doubled the capacity here. how do things look on your end? -perfect! because we're building a better network every single day. there is good news tonight on a number of fronts in the battle against covid in the united states. hospitalizations, cases and deaths are all down. vaccine mandates, though, still very controversial in some quarters, significantly increasing the number of people vaccinated. and one of the last big groups yet to be eligible for the vaccine is kids age 5 to 11. that got closer today when pfizer applied for emergency use authorization for their vaccine to be eligible for that age group. certainly a lot to get to. we're very pleased to have the top doctor in the nation joining us, surgeon general vivek murthy. thanks so much for being us with, dr. murthy. i think a lot of people watching tonight are wondering if the worst of the pandemic is behind us. i always want to knock on wood in even suggesting such a thing. what is your answer to that? >> well, anderson, i'm certainly cautiously optimistic. and i think whether or not we see another surge of the virus depends in part on what we do to really accelerate vaccination rates. you know, we've seen, right now, anderson, that we've got nearly 215 million people in our country who have had at least one dose of the vaccine. that's pretty extraordinary progress. but when you're dealing with a pretty incredibly contagious variant like the delta variant, even people who aren't vaccinated, even though they're a minority of the population, the virus can spread very quickly in that population. we are thankfully seeing cases and hospitalizations come down. but it's not a reason for us to take our foot off the accelerator or to relax our guard, so to speak. we've got to continue getting people vaccinated because that is our surest way to keep them out of the hospital and to save lives. >> i actually got my flu shot at cvs today. i was very happy to do that. as the president touted in chicago today, vaccine mandates, they appear to be working according to the white house. in late, july there were 95 million unvaccinated americans. now there are 67 million. that stat, according to the cdc, more people are going in for booster doses than first doses. is that a good or bad metric in your view? >> well, overall i think we've made a lot of progress. anderson, as you mentioned, the numbers of unvaccinated individuals in this country are dropping. and the vaccine requirements are working. we're seeing evidence of that. on average, organizations that put vaccine requirements in place are seeing a 20% plus increase in the percentage of people who are vaccinated. henry ford health system in detroit, for example, went from 68% to 98% of their employees in compliance with their vaccine requirements when they put those requirements in place. so we know that these requirements work. here's the other really important thing, anderson, that i think people don't always appreciate enough, which is that vaccine requirements are not new. we actually have a long history in our country of requiring vaccines in various settings. president george washington required inoculation against smallpox of soldiers. in the 1800s, we started in schools requiring vaccines. hospitals like the ones i've worked in over the years have long required vaccines like the flu vaccine that you recently got in order for people to practice medicine. and this is really about creating a safe environment for people to work, for young people to study, and for all of us to engage in commerce. so these are a good thing. they're going to continue to help us move forward. and it can't come soon enough. >> what is the likelihood of some other variant emerging like the delta variant that's worse or easier to transmit to kids or some variant -- i mean, obviously that's why they call it a variant. with variable different things about it. >> anderson, i'm glad you brought it up because we do have to be aware and vigilant of the fact new variants can develop and the more spread there is of covid the more likely those variants will surface. but here's interestingly what we've already seen. is over the past 18, 19 months with all the variants that we've had, delta, alpha and others, the vaccines have actually been remarkably effective at preventing the worst outcomes, hospitalization, severe disease and death. with all of these variants. which has been actually very useful to us. now, could that change in the future? it's always possible. but that's why we are prepared to modify these vaccines to do what we need to make sure we keep up with covid-19. but there is no substitute for making sure people actually get the vaccine. you know, the science is working. the production and manufacturing has stepped up. but we need people to actually get that vaccine in order for it to save lives. >> so pfizer formally requested emergency use authorization for its vaccine for kids age 5 to 11. do you think the vaccine will become one of the immunizations needed for school next year? should it be required along with measles and mumps and rubella? >> i think there's certainly a case that a number of states have already made, you've heard california, you know, indicate that it will support vaccine requirements for kids when the vaccine becomes available. and i think you're going to see more states move in this direction. vaccine requirements have typically been local and state decisions in terms of which vaccines are required. i think part of the reason you're going to see more states likely move in that direction post-authorization is because we all want our kids to go back to school, to be able to stay in school, and to be safe. and many people out there think that covid's not a big deal for kids, we shouldn't really worry about it. but i will tell you, we've lost hundreds of children to covid. thousands have been hospitalized. and we could prevent a lot of this with a safe and effective vaccine. >> also the idea of my child getting long covid or something that sticks around for -- that's awful. when do you think the 5 and up group will be able to start getting shots and what about the under 5 group? >> well, i have a personal interest in this for sure because i have two kids who are 3 and 5. i certainly want them to get vaccinated. the fact that pfizer has indicated it has now formally requested authorization is a good sign. the fda has said that it's going to move in the order of weeks, not months to get this done. it's already scheduled an advisory group meeting to consider vaccines for children, which is also a promising sign. so i think we're going to see movement very quickly here. but anderson, one thing the fda is not going to do is they're not going to cut corners in this process and they want people to know when they make their decisions and if that ends up being in support of a vaccine for kids that people know that the vaccine is both safe and highly effective. i think we'll see vaccines for kids under 5 come not too long after that, because those trials are slightly behind, about another month or so behind. so we've got to wait for the companies to submit that data but i think that's going to come not too long after. >> just finally, scott gottlieb, former fda commissioner, said on cnbc that he thinks the combination of a vaccine for children and the new anti-viral medication for merck would "bookend the pandemic phase of the virus." do you agree? >> well, i certainly think it moves us in that direction. keep in mind, we haven't given as much attention as a country in terms of our news coverage to anti-virals as we have given to vaccines. and that's understandable. but we haven't certainly on the federal government side let up our focus on anti-virals and oral medications. and this recent news, telling us that from the clinical trial conducted by one of the manufacturers telling us that there is now data that indicates that there may be an oral option that could cut the risk of hospitalization and death in half among people at higher risk of covid-19, that's incredibly good news. it's got to go through the fda process. they've got to scrutinize safety and efficacy. but it's certainly a move in the right direction. if we've got good vaccines, we've got good oral medicines, we can use preventive measures like masks when we need them, we will be in good shape against covid-19. >> it's really good news tonight. and i appreciate you being with us. thank you. >> of course. thanks, anderson. take care. >> dr. murthy, thanks. coming up next, a leading critic of the texas abortion law joining us now that a federal judge has put the law on hold and clinics are back providing the procedure, ahead.cold r elie. dissolves quickly. instantly ready to start working. so you can bounce back fast with alka-seltzer plus. now available for fast sinus relief. bipolar depression. it made me feel like i was trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of people living with bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place... ...and be hard to manage. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. latuda is not for everyone. call your doctor about unusual mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children, teens, and young adults. elderly dementia patients on latuda have an increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about fever, stiff muscles, and confusion, as these may be life threatening... ...or uncontrollable muscle movements, as these may be permanent. these are not all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor about latuda and pay as little as $0 for your first prescription. the new citi custom cash℠ card, a different kind of card that rewards rashida and dan where their spending is trending. just ask fifth class this week rashida... rashida: dan, no pain, no gain. okay? dan: yeah i know, it's just...hello? claire, what? fire? ...or always road tripping on empty dan... rashida: i told you this would happen. dan: the light was not even on. no, it was on. dan: what? with the new citi custom cash℠ card it pays to be you. from fitness clubs, gas stations, restaurants and more, earn 5% cash back that automatically adjusts to your top eligible spend category, up to $500 spent each billing cycle. (video game vehicle noises, engines revving,) (horns beeping, cars hitting one another.) (continued vehicle calamity) just think, he'll be driving for real soon. every new chevy equinox comes standard with chevy safety assist, including automatic emergency braking. find new peace of mind. find new roads. chevrolet. working at recology is more than a job for jesus. it's a family tradition. jesus took over his dad's roue when he retired after 47 year. now he's showing a new generation what recology is all about. as an employee-owned company, recology provides good-paying local jobs for san franciscans. we're proud to have built the city's recycling system from the ground up, helping to make san francisco the greenest big city in america. let's keep making a differene together. wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. over the next 10 years, comcast is committing $1 billion to reach 50 million low-income americans with the tools and resources they need to be ready for anything. i hope you're ready. 'cause we are. the day after a federal judge put the texas abortion law on hold and the supreme court on notice with his 113-page opinion at least one clinic operator in the state says it's back to providing abortion for women who are more than six weeks pregnant. which we should point out has been permitted under roe v. wade for nearly five decades now. texas officials have indicated they'll appeal the ruling but they haven't formally asked the fifth sure kit to put it on hold. want to get perspective from former texas state senator wendy davis. thank you for being with us. can you just walk us through what this ruling is now? >> sure. the judge put an injunction in place, federal district court judge robert pittman, enjoining the enforcement of this law and enjoining our state courts and state clerks from accepting the filing of petitions under this law. and while it may seem that all is well, at least for now, as a consequence of that, as we've talked about before, anderson, there are many pernicious layers to this law. and one of those is the fact that there is a provision in the law saying that if the fifth circuit or the supreme court stays an injunction, all abortions that are provided during that injunction time period will be considered retroactively to have violated the law. and so there are doctors still on the ground in texas today, many clinics on the ground in texas today that have continued to keep their doors closed. the ones who have decided to move forward, even though they are at risk of retroactive application of the law, are doing so very, very courageously. and they know that they are subject to personal financial risk as a consequence of this. this is the reason that we set up a legal fund for them. if your viewers want to help contribute to it, it's fundthefrontlinetx.org. you can go there and find out more information. we want our health care workers to know that we have their back and that they shouldn't feel like they need to be cowed as a consequence of the retroactive provision in this law. >> and then, just from a legal standpoint, what is the next step? and what is the next court to hear this? >> so the fifth circuit will hear an appeal. the state of texas has already indicated that it intends to appeal judge pittman's injunctive order. they will make a decision on whether that injunction should stand. and it is very likely that the question that they may consider and overturn this injunction on is standing. this was a lawsuit filed by the department of justice, and the question will be whether the department of justice has the standing to sue in a situation where the state has argued it is not in any way, shape or form in the role of enforcing this law because they put it in the hands of private individuals. that will be the question before the fifth circuit. and it probably will have that appeal before it very quickly, and i would imagine it's going to make a decision fairly quickly as well. in the meantime, there are people who have been waiting for days and weeks to have abortion care in our state. i am so proud of and impressed by the courage of whole women's health and some of their clinicians who are trying as best they can in this period of time to provide the care that people have so desperately waited for. >> senator wendy davis, i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you. up next, south dakota's governor, rising star in the republican party, accused of abuse of power in trying to help her daughter with her career. the state's top law enforcement officer has launched an investigation. we'll tell you what the governor is saying about all that when we continue. u've saved, what you'll need, and help you build a flexible plan for cash flow that lasts, even when you're not working, so you can go from saving... to living. ♪ let's go ♪ (birds chirping) ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ (phone beep) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ (music quieter) ♪ (phone clicks) ♪ ♪ ♪ look for the bare necessities ♪ ♪ the simple bare necessities ♪ ♪ forget about your worries and your strife ♪ ♪ i mean the bare necessities ♪ ♪ are mother nature's recipes ♪ ♪ that bring the bare necessities of life ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ the bare necessities of life will come to you ♪ they'll come to me! ♪ they'll come to you ♪ all the delivery, no delivery fees. dashpass. ♪ i see trees of green ♪ ♪ red roses too ♪ ♪ i see them bloom for me and you ♪ (music) ♪ so i think to myself ♪ ♪ oh what a wonderful world ♪ tonight south dakota republican governor noem is facing accusations she abused the power of her office to help her daughter become a state certified real estate appraiser. the attorney general is investigating and some in the legislature. noem has made a name for herself as a staunch supporter of the former president. the question is will this accusation tarnish her national political ambitions or perhaps a run for president in 2024? >> it is such an honor to be with all of you here today. >> reporter: south dakota governor noem has been basking in the national spotlight. >> people had no idea who i was six months ago. >> reporter: trumpeting her approach to the coronavirus pandemic. >> my people are happy. they're happy because they're free. >> i think it is clear she wants to be president. she intends to run for president in 2024. she spends more time than any governor in recent history has spent out of state. she is inserting herself in issues that don't directly impact lives of south dakotans. >> reporter: now controversy over a closed door meeting in the governor's mansion threatens to derail those ambitions. noem called the meeting july 27th of 2020 with state officials. >> these are my kids. >> how's it going? >> reporter: and her daughter. >> oh, man. best husband ever. >> reporter: according to the associated press peters was facing a denial of certification as a real estate appraiser when the meeting took place. four months later she got her license. while the woman who oversaw the appraisal program for decades said she was forced to retire. in this age discrimination complaint filed last december she said she was told the reason was her inability to change gears. she settled with the state for $200,000. >> privacy is for individuals but transparency is for government. >> reporter: south dakota republican representative says the meeting flaunts noem's campaign promise. >> being transparent making sure all public meetings are are posted. >> reporter: he says it should have been handled with the legislature out in the open. >> there have been three years of sessions where it could have taken place. that's where it should take place. >> not by some closed door meeting. >> right. >> i never once asked for special treatment for cassidy. >> reporter: noem defending her actions saying her daughter completed the same requirements as any other applicant adding the state appraisal system needed to be reformed. >> it was way too difficult. appraisers weren't getting certified and south dakotans were having to wait much longer to buy a home. >> reporter: nepotism in the south dakota statehouse. >> reporter: it's not the first time she's been under the microscope for allegations of nepotism. >> kennedy noem became a policy analyst and her salary rose nearly $10,000. >> reporter: governor noem's office said her daughter was fairly compensated but ethicists say noem's actions in the latest case leave the door open for doubt. >> we can only hope from the governor that she recognizes that she made missteps in conducting the meeting this way and involving her daughter in the process and engaging personally in the process while she had a personal stake. the issue of conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety remains and those are problems that i don't think there is a retroactive fix for. >> reporter: a state legislative committee and attorney general have announced plans to investigate the july 2020 meeting. >> i think she has done an excellent job. >> reporter: is it making a dent with voters? >> i feel like her daughter shouldn't have been in there at all in that meeting. >> in south dakota family first things so any father or mother would try to do something to help her daughter. >> most people are going to support her anyway and i think people looking for a reason to not support her are just going to use that as another reason not to. >> you mentioned the attorney general is investigating. where does that stand? >> reporter: well, attorney general jason roundsberg who is a political rival, she has previously called for his resignation, he announced yesterday he has referred this to the state accountability board asking them to investigate the circumstances of the meeting. he is also in a separate matter asking the same board to investigate allegations she may have violated state law, south dakota law by using the state plane to fly to events organized by various political organizations. >> appreciate it. thanks. a quick programming note. princess diana was a fashion idol, trail blazing activist and out spoken member of the royal family. there is a new cnn original series called "diana" giving us all insight into the princess and reveals a life far more complicated than the world knew. here is a preview. ♪ ♪ >> i was always different. >> she was going to marry her dashing prince like all the stories she had read. >> she was iconic. she was box office. >> going to dance with the princess tonight? >> if she'd like me to. >> pre-diana there was not zilch interest in the royal family. >> i don't think anybody has grown up in public like diana has. >> diana provided a very public model for defiance and truthfulness. >> isn't it normal to feel angry and want to change a situation? >> i was able to recognize an inner determination to survive. >> the new cnn original series "diana" premieres sunday at 9:00 on cnn. >> that's it for us. the news continues. want to hand it over to chris for cuomo primetime. >> appreciate it, coop. i am chris cuomo. welcome to primetime. people with nothing to hide comply with authorities. right? then you have trump and co who will do anything to hide. one guy is literally in hiding. dan scavino and now cnn has learned trump may try to assert executive privilege and block the january 6 committee from getting information from those subpoenaed. lie, deny, and now defy. remember, we define that as the triple play of trumpery. according to "the washington post" a trump attorney instructed his former advisers not to comply with congressional investigators and with good reason. they clearly may have damaging information. the senate judiciary committee just made that obvious in a new report about january 6th titled "subverting justice." nearly 400 pages and they have the receipts. we'll give you some of the biggest headlines tonight but i argue that the obvious headlines about the main report aren't the real thing to focus on. the rebuttal from the gop is what you must look at. why? because those who empowered this, ignored it, also empowered it, but all of them collectively. they are still in power and the