at helpfosterchildren.com it is the top of a very busy hour. i'm alisyn camerota. >> i'm victor blackwell. it is a major breaking news day. first this new indictment in the january 6 investigation reveals how one far right group prepared for potential violence. the justice department has charged 11 defendants with seditious conspiracy. meantime the supreme court has blocked president trump's testing mandate for large businesses, but it allows vaccine mandates for health care workers to take effect. >> and this after biden's agenda took another blow on capitol hill, congresswoman sinema has put a stop to the vote. u.s. attorney kim wheeling, josh campbell and analyst el elie hoenig. tell us about this. >> this is a major step the department has taken. we've seen this from the ground up. what we have now is charges against stuart rose, who is a founder of the oathkeepers, a far right anti-government association, and ten others who are now charged with seditious conspiracy. part of what the government is alleging here is that essentially they carried out a paramilitary plan, essentially, that was an effort to prevent, hinder and delay the certification of the electoral college vote on january 6. how did they do that, according to prosecutors? they organized paramilitary training and tactics for some of the members who were there on that day. there were a total of 19 people so far affiliated with this group that have faced charges so far in federal court. they brought paramilitary gear, knives, camouflage uniforms, tactical weapons that they were ready to deploy that day. they even organized what, according to prosecutors, was a quick reaction force just across the river in virginia which the goal was to try to reinforce the group that first attacked the capitol. according to prosecutors, this is not just -- what this tells us is this was not just a spontaneous riot, which is what some of the people have been trying to minimize what happened on january 6 as. i'll read you a couple parts of this indictment where, on december 11, according to prosecutors, there was a signal encrypted-out message that was being communicated by these groups, and stuart rhodes says, quote, it will be a bloody fight. we will have a fight, that cannot be avoided. that is a quote from the indictment. and according to this, it is reaction to president biden on another one. on another one leader rhodes says, quote, we will have to do a massively bloody revolution against him. that is what's going to have to happen. that is a reference to the idea that on january 20, president biden is going to assume office, something they said they would never accept. alisyn and victor? >> elie, let's go to you next. more than 700 people have been arrested as part of this investigation, but these charges of seditious conspiracy are a first. explain what is this charge of seditious conspiracy. >> victor, this is really a powerful statement by the justice department. the term sedition, obviously it's a powerful sort of loaded term, but it's important that people understand what is and isn't charged here. there are various forms of seditious in the federal law. one of them is to try to overthrow the government by force. that is not what is charged in this indictment. another definition of sedition, which is charged here, is an effort to obstruct a governmental fucnction, as evan just said, here that includes the electoral counting of the votes. there are 11 people charged with conspiracy here. there could be more charges of conspiracy which is an agreement by one or more people to break the law. one thing that jumps out at me in this indictment is the root e motivating factor behind all of this according to the indictment is the big lie, the big lie of election fraud. that is what spurred the oathkeepers, according to doj, to attack the capitol, and i think that's really important to keep in mind when you hear some of the revisionist history that started to crop up around january 6. >> and another thing that jumped out at me is how far in advance before january 6 that this planning was. as evan just read, that text to the group chat, the invitation only signal group, that said if president-elect biden were to assume the presidency, it will be a bloody fight. that was on december 11. again, as we all know, the idea this was a spontaneous riot, if you read through this indictment, there is just so much evidence between the training of the paramilitary exercises, the tactical gear the group wore, and then all of these planning texts that were before it. >> right, and that's the concept of conspiracy, right? it's the meeting of the minds of one or more people to agree to commit a crime, even if the crime isn't actually carried out. we heard a lot of discussion of this around the first trump impeachment, if you recall, is it conspiracy or collusion? this is the real deal. and i think it also underscores the violence, where we had been gaslighted as a nation around what actually happened january 6, even people like mitch mcconnell and kevin mccarthy, who afterward denounced the president, are now backing the president and asking kevin mccarthy to participate in the lawful exercise of getting to the bottom of that. i think honestly, alisyn, the big question is were others on the signature text besides these oathkeepers who have been charged today. the fact that he said he's willing to go all the way to the top, and i'm paraphrasing, does not bode well for inside government for validation of their participation or at least refusal to stop the carnage that happened on january 6. >> let's go to josh campbell, former supervisory agent with the fbi. the details in this, josh, says much about how much they have in this case and the likelihood there is someone on the inside here who is helping them in this investigation. >> well, these cases are very complex. we're talking about a conspiracy, and of course we've seen over 700 people charged in the capitol riot, many of them the so-called low-hanging fruit, the people who were there taking selfies and boasting about what they were doing. this is different. this is now the fbi and justice department saying this was a seditious conspiracy. they just weren't there as tourists, as we've heard some politicians say, but they were there to engage in an unlawful act to try to stop the counting of those votes. and because these investigations are so complex, that requires time. people have been impatient saying where is the justice department? now we're starting to see the results of some of their work. as alisyn was just mentioning, the level of planning and preparation that went into this is so key, and you see that as you read through these court documents, where people didn't just show up on that day and wander into the capitol, but there was that level of combat training in advance, that they were willing to use force, preparing to bring firearms into the district of columbia, and even as striking as the moment the breach happened at the capitol, what these court records show is that while some of the rioters went into the building, this group of oathkeepers were forming what's called a stack. that's a line of one in front of the other, similar to law enforcement or the military preparing to make dynamic entry into the building. that's what these oathkeepers were allegedly doing as they made their way to the capitol and reached the building. the allegation is they had weapons such as knives and batons, and one of the other striking things, they allegedly had this cache of weapons waiting outside the district of columbia that they could draw upon to come and help them should they need it. all of this is allegations of planning, what you don't see from people who are there just as tourists. finally, if you are a member of the oathkeepers, you probably should be worried. as you mentioned, victor, of possible inside help. when you talk about encrypted messages making their way into the hands of law enforcement officers, we can assume that law enforcement got members to provide information or they have confidential human resources they are now running themselves into these groups. a level of complexity, but again, very serious charges by the justice department. >> let's go to julia now. what do you think of these charges? >> a lot of it had to do with january 6 of last year, but i want to talk about the january 6's to come. there could be no better news from the perspective of counter-radicalization, counterviolence than to have charges like this against this group. we'll talk about the past and what they say about the planning. organizations like this, violent organizations, because we really have to focus on the violence. there's radicalization in our country, obviously, but we need to be really focused on those who would turn to violence for political gain. it breeds off success, and they got that a lot in the previous administration with donald trump sort of neurturing these kinds f groups. they are dismantling in the last year culminating in these charges. it does a lot for stopping the kind of recruitment they found easy during the previous administration and threatened to nourish if it wasn't dismantled. so from the counterradicalization perspective, this also has a lot to do with 2022, 2023 and 2024. it doesn't mean it's all kum-ba-ya now, but any concerns about the groups becoming bigger, this does a lot to end the aura of success or that they're part of a winning team. they will act like victims, that's fine. but it's going to be hard to get new people to be interested, to be curious, even, about groups like this. >> kim, how does this evidence stack up against the challenge they have proving these charges in court? >> if the justice department has made the decision for this indictment, particularly given how merrick garland has taken quite a bit of heat for what people perceive as delays in bringing these larger charges, i imagine they have all their ducks in a row and they're pretty confident they can win a verdict in favor beyond a reasonable doubt, and it's also important to point out these investigations take time, the fbi are putting out thousands of search warrants, et cetera, and we're just at the beginning, is my guess. it will continue unfolding leading up to the midterms, frankly, to determine the fate of democracy moving forward, and i agree with the comments before 100%, that it's the future that matters in this moment as much as the past. let's turn to a split over the vaccine mandates. the president wants it mandated for large businesses but also for health workers nationwide. >> we have jessica and john biskupic. >> this is a much bigger loss than win. that's because the first of these mandates were supposed to go into effect in february for 80 million workers who were part of employees of 100 or more. that was blocked. this came down to a decision with liberals relenting, the justice department explaining that while osha can overrule occupational hazards in the workplace, they really can't implement these rules that go to a much bigger, broader public policy aspect. so that is why this is blocked. of course, the liberals say they can't believe it has not gone into effect given the perilous covid crisis this country continues to face. on the other side, there is a mandate that will be allowed to go into effect. this only affects about 10 million health care workers. this is being allowed by the supreme court. this is a 6-3 decision with justice kavanaugh as well as chief justice john roberts joining with the liberals to allow this health care mandate to go into effect. i'll read you the line from the majority. it says, of course, the vaccine mandate goes further than what the health and human services secretary has done in the past to implement infection control. but he has never had to address an infection problem of this scale and scope before. in any event, there can be no doubt that addressing infection problems in medicare and medicaid facilities is what he does. this is a mandate that goes into effect for health care workers who work at facilities that receive federal funding through medicaid and medicare, and that is why the supreme court is giving this a green light saying it's different than that other mandate, saying the other mandate, osha doesn't have the broad power as an agency to put this into effect. guys, a little bit of a split verdict, if you will, for the biden administration, but definitely a much bigger loss because they wanted this mandate with employers to go into effect of 80,000 workers. >> joan biskupic, 6-3 on both of these. where do you see the justice landed on this? >> sun is 6-3, one is 7-4. there was a division among the conservatives in the majority that the unsigned opinion that stood for the court looked fairly narrowly at this rule, looking at what osha was trying to do here in the workplace and specifically addressing the requirement for a vaccine or testing. as i said, narrowly look being at that. but there was a very muscular concurrence written by justices thomas and leto which would have gone far for the justices' power. i think the justices tried to get on the conservative side some power there. but the other one that involved health care workers at medicaid and medicare facilities, that was justice thomas, aledo, barrett and gorsuch, and the thing i want to point out is that the chief justice brett kavanaugh went with the three liberals to form a 5-4 majority. i think what we saw on that one, which is tied to the spending power of the health and human services secretary and the ability to set conservatives, but four of them splitting off and being more aggressive in trying to curtail the power of the federal government. >> elie, help us understand if there was anything surprising here we should take note of. also, does this mean they can institute that same mandate if they choose, but they do not have to follow a mandate from the biden administration? >> on your second question, alisyn, that's exactly right. private employers can choose to have a vaccine mandate, they can choose to have a vaccine or test mandate, but what the supreme court said today was the federal government cannot force them to do that. i think this tells us something really important about the overall orientation about the new supreme court as it regards federal power. so the key distinction here, first of all, is that the supreme court was uneasy with the bigger mandate, the vaccine test mandate that occurred for all employees across the whole country. they said that's troo broad and congress has not authorized you for this. the workers' mandate, they said that is more narrow, more targeted, done under the spending power. traditionally, they have been skeptical of power coming out of the agencies we have a 6-3 supreme court. we'll see if it holds when it comes time for conservative policies that the judge perhaps likes more, but that's the judgment we're seeing here. >> elie hoenig, jessica schneider and kim wehle, thank you. so if biden can't get an agreement for voting rights, what does president biden do? that next. so you can reach more customers, create more opportunities, and make this the best year for your business yet. visit your local t-mobile store today. what if you could have the perspective to see more? at morgan stanley, a global collective of thought leaders offers investors a broader view. ♪ we see companies protecting the bottom line by putting people first. we see a bright future, still hungry for the ingenuity of those ready for the next challenge. today, we are translating decades of experience into strategies for the road ahead. we are morgan stanley. as a professional bull-rider i'm used to taking chances. but when it comes to my insurance i don't. i use liberty mutual, they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wooo, yeaa, woooooo and, by switching you could even save 665 dollars. hey tex, can someone else get a turn? yeah, hang on, i'm about to break my own record. yeah. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty. ♪ for people living with h-i-v, keep being you. and ask your doctor about biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in certain adults. it's not a cure, but with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to and stay undetectable. that's when the amount of virus is so low it cannot be measured by a lab test. research shows people who take h-i-v treatment every day and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your doctor about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b, do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your doctor. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. if you're living with hiv, keep loving who you are. and ask your doctor if biktarvy is right for you. - [narrator] introducing the grubhub guarantee: our promise to deliver the food you love on time, and give you the lowest price, or you'll get $5 off your next order. we're having a baby, so the new law came at a perfect time. for less than 30 a month, the whole family is covered. i love my job and it pays really well. there's just no health coverage. for $182 a month, i found the perfect plan. all that stress about coverage just went away. for $14 a month, my plan covers my meds, vision and dental. now, more people can get financial assistance. what you pay depends in part on how much you make. new law. lower prices. more people qualify. at healthcare.gov your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire more than 250 scientists, doctors, nurses and researchers wrote a letter to spotify about the misinformation of covid-19 on the pandemic spread on joe rogan's podcast. the group wants to take action by developing a misinformation policy. the letter to spotify in part says this. by allowing the propagation of harmful assertions, spotify is enabling ilts hosted media to damage public trust in scientific research and soh w doubt in the credibility of data-driven guidance offered by medical professionals. she helped design that letter. thank you for being with me. i want to talk to you about the process of trying to debunk misinformation. how significant is joe rogan's podcast source of some of that misinformation? >> thank you so much for having me. the request for debunking misinformation is a common ask throughout the pandemic. there is a ton of disinformation and misinformation surrounding covid-19 as a virus, covid-19 vaccines and the data. i wasn't surprised i was getting a deluge of inquiries about this particular episode which, unfortunately, has gone viral and is filled with pretty regularly debunked misinformation. what was most concerning to me, though, and made me respond was the fact i was noticing a trend from people i found to be quite discerning and able to distinguish what's true and not true following the sharing of that particular episode. >> what i find interesting is you're not asking spotify to take down the episode or to cancel joe rogan, you're asking them to create a policy. so what are you looking for here? >> correct. and i think that has somehow gotten completely misconstrued by a lot of joe rogan fans, by a lot of people who are very sensitive to anything that maybe looks like censureship. we're asking for policies and reinforcement of that policy because it is an enormous platform. that particular show has an enormous following and i think there is a responsibility for media companies to at least provide warnings when things are very easily refuted through data and information, not opinion, and people should be warned about what the content they're about to listen to is. >> if you were to craft this policy, what would you need to see? >> i think at the very least, it would be banners and warnings posted about that policy. it would be directing people to credible sources like the cdc and w.h.o. on vaccine-related information or other sources of evidence since there seems to be a ton of speculation happening on these shows, and people take it as infallible, people take it as the other side of science when really there is a ton of consensus here to prove that that information is actually incorrect. at the minimum, banners and warnings. >> joe rogan so significant here because it's the most listened-to podcast in the world. millions of people listen to each episode. have you heard anything, quickly, from spotify? >> no, we have not. i have not personally. >> we reached out to spotify, we reached out to joe rogan. we have not heard anything but i want to read to you the statement spotify released back in april after joe rogan said he would advise a 21-year-old against getting vaccinated. they said, spotify prohibits content on the platform which promotes dangerous, false, deceptive or misleading content about covid-19 that may cause offline harm and/or poses a direct threat to public health. when content that violates this standard is identified it is removed from the platform. is that not enough? >> i know you removed that podcast but podcast is still available on spotify, and that is a problem. it is clearly a policy that exists but is not enforced. we're asking for policies to be enforced that do cause the public harm and do spread misinformation. >> jessica malaty rivera, thank you for your time. >> thanks for having me. president biden tried to get two voting rights bills through congress, but after the meeting, he was not success fortunately. >> the honest to god answer is i don't know if we can get this done. we missed this time and the state legislative bodies continue to change the law not as to who can vote but who gets to count the vote. count the vote. count the vote! it's about election subversion, not just whether or not people get to vote. who counts the vote. that's what makes this so different than anything else we've ever done. i don't know how we get it done but i know one thing. as long as i have a breath in me, as long as i'm in the white house, as long as i'm engaged at all, i'm going to be fighting to change the way these legi legislatures are moving. >> back to you. >> manu raju, abby phillip joins us now. it's hard to do it in separate rooms. abby phillip with us as well. let's start with you, manu. take us inside the room. >> the president did speak at length about his desire to pass these two bills, and his concerns that democracy is at risk, and trying to convince his members to come along. but there is a problem. he simply does not have the votes to do what he wants to do. if they just were going over the current regular order, they would need 60 votes to overcome a republican filibuster. that does not exist. there is zero support for this measure they're trying to get through. there's been a pressure campaign on kyrsten sinema, on joe manchin for months, trying to get them to change the senate rules to pass along straight party lines. sinema came out very forcefully saying she still supports maintaining that 60-vote threshold, concerned that undercutting that would have drastic ramifications on the senate itself. manchin told me moments ago, he said his position has not changed at all. he said, everybody knows where i stand. he did not praise the president's appearance. it was not contentious. but i am told he did not address the room. a number of senators are concerned and frustrated that she came out and officially put the nail in the coffin before biden himself came to capitol hill. just moments ago i tried to ask sinema why the timing of her speech, why she gave that speech before biden even came to the hill. she would not engage on that question at all, but there is definitely some frustration. one senator from new mexico told me -- i said, quote, i'm very frustrated right now and the reason is pretty simple. the biden agenda is simply stalled on many fronts, the build back better bill, it's a question of what can be done before the election, and it appears not a whole lot. >> manu has done a great job of telling what the process seems to be, but what about substance? do we know if senators manchin and sinema are as concerned as president biden seems to be when he kept sounding the alarm when he says, this is about who counts the vote, this is about people being installed in election oversight positions. are they as worried about that? >> well, i think that manchin and sinema would say that they are but their actions seem to indicate that they do not believe that those concerns override their concerns about the process long term, and look, democrats are really angry about this, but you do have to take into consideration that one of the concerns is obviously that if you pass voting -- you know, if you pass voting legislation in a democratic administration to expand voting rights without a 60-vote margin, when republicans take over the senate, they could reverse that just as easily. i think that's part of the concern here. i do think, though, we should read between the lines of what biden was saying to get a sense of where the next move might be. he was talking about who counts the votes. that is a slightly different thing that some of the pieces of policy that are in the legislation that we've been talking about. who counts the votes is also about the process by which some of these republicans who are trying to push the january 6 lie are being installed in positions in the states. that's one of the reasons some people are saying, let's focus on the electoral count act, let's focus even on the john lewis voting rights bill and try to find something around those things. they are starting to be skeptical that republicans won't engage, but that could be the concerns for the next cycle. >> build back better is in the mud. we've seen what happened today with voting rights, and locking the president's mandate on vaccine or testing for large companies. have we heard anything from the white house on that decision, and where does the administration go from here? >> on that, probably not the best day the white house has had when you look across the board at their key priorities. they were bracing for the decision of the vaccine mandate, they could listen to the chief justices on the floor like anybody else could when this was actually heard in the court. i don't think white house officials were not only aware this was likely, but they viewed those 17 million individuals dealing with the vulnerable people, they see that as a positive thing. we also talk to white house officials and they're keenly aware there's been an increase in vaccinations since they attempted to put the mandates in place. they don't belief this will stop large employers from deciding to do it on their own, so they're hoping that will continue, large employees will continue to pursue it. the president earlier this week was pointing out united airlines which put a mandate in place. 95% have complied with it and the deaths in the company have gone down to zero from once a week since that mandate was put in place. i hope that will help as well, but one thing you see in the weeks ahead, if you look at the data and omicron, the fact those people are not vaccinated and they're not dying at the rates before. it's a sharper contrast that white house officials have been considering going into over the course of the next several weeks just with the value vaccines bring in this omicron surge. obviously they wanted to win this. they thought when they introduced this mandate that they were on solid legal footing. the supreme court today said they were not. >> manu, back to capitol hill's next steps. what are the priorities? if voting rights isn't going anywhere, if build back better, as victor just said, is stuck in the mud, what's next? >> a basic housekeeping of government. they have to avoid a government shutdown by february 18th. but the big ticket items on the agenda, there's just simply no path for that. when i talked to manchin about ten minutes before coming on air here, i said, have you had any discussions on the build back better bill? he said, i have had nothing since late december. that was, of course, when he essentially put the brakes on that bill. he wants significant changes. so even getting him on board would take weeks and weeks and weeks, and then they have to get the whole democratic caucus in line. it's uncertain if they can even get to that point. what else is left? possibly smaller changes to voting laws, mainly the electoral notification act, the 1887 law that talks about how votes are certified. then-president trump tried to get vice president pence to throw out electoral votes. there is talk of typing that up to keep the president from discarding the votes from various states. there are smaller, narrower issues where perhaps they can get some agreement, but the big ticket items are essentially out the window, and everything capitol hill for as long as i have, there is one thing very clear. when it's election year, or particularly close to an election, big deals almost impossible to achieve and they worry about their campaigns and their seats back home, so we'll see probably congress move to pretty aggressive campaign footing pretty soon in the coming weeks. >> manu raju for us on capitol hill, phil mattingly at the white house, abby phillip, thank you. now to this. 2021 saw the highest number of law enforcement officers intentionally killed in the line of duty since 9/11. so what's behind this? that's next. (birds chirping) ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ (phone beep) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ (music quieter) ♪ (phone clicks) ♪ ♪ age-related macular degeneration may lead to severe vision loss. and if you're taking a multivitamin alone, you may be missing a critical piece. preservision. preservision areds 2 contains the only clinically proven nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. "preservision is backed by 20 years of clinical studies" "and its from the eye experts at bausch and lomb" so, ask your doctor about adding preservision. and fill in a missing piece of your plan. like i did with preservision" the number of law enforcement officers targeted and killed in the line of duty reached a 20-year high last year. according to the fbi's preliminary data, that's the most since 9/11. the baltimore police commissioner expressed the frustration that he has with the lack of respect for officers who put their life on the line. >> it shows the lack of respect for authority and government that we've seen in our country. our officers knowing this signed up to do this work, show up every single day. >> cnn's josh campbell joins us now. josh, this is horrible, and i can only imagine the effect it's having on the police and the morale. >> reporter: absolutely. this new data from the fbi so troubling. the bottom line here is 2021 was an exceptionally deadly year for law enforcement in the united states. we've covered so many of these stories of slain officers, but we're now getting the figures that explain what exactly happened, what is happening to officers around the country. i'll describe some of what the fbi found. they found there were 73 intentionally killed officers in 2021. that was up from 46 in 2020. it's being described as the highest number of police officers killed in a year since 9/11. just as troubling, some of the tactics that suspects are using, ambushed and unprovoked attacks on officers, up from 2011 and up from 2021. in illinois there was an officer that was killed. they were responding to something as simple as the call for a barking dog. there was an officer in colorado, a 19-year veteran, shot and killed by a suspect that they said targeted that officer specifically, and as we said from the top, former boston police officer kiani holley laid to rest. they snuck up behind her and shot her in the head. she was described as a public servant just trying to make the community a better place. they also have other law enforcement officers out there who might be grieving. take a listen. >> he had dedication over fear, always. know that your loved ones gave their lives for something special. they didn't believe they would be leaving their children, their moms, their dads, their families and their friends behind. but what they did was they put other people first. >> reporter: now the biggest killer of cops last year was covid-19. nevertheless, this trend of officers being assaulted and killed in the line of duty. the highest number since 2011 has the attention around the country. it also has the attention of lawmakers. they're trying to do something. one republican bill in the senate seems to make assaults on police officers a federal crime. alisyn, victor? >> josh campbell, thank you for that. there is big news out of buckingham palace. prince andrew can no longer use the term "his royal highness." more fallout from a sex abuse lawsuit. we're live in london, next. it's time for our lowest prices of the season on the sleep number 360 smart bed. what if i sleep hot? ...or cold? no problem, the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing so you both sleep just right. and it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. so, you can really promise better sleep? yes! you'll know exactly how well you slept, night after night. we take care of the science. all you have to do is sleep. don't miss our weekend special. save up to $1,000 on sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, 0% interest for 36 months and free premium delivery when you add a base. ends monday. subway's eat fresh refresh has so many new footlongs, here's how they line up. we got the new chicken & bacon ranch, new baja steak & jack, and the new baja chicken & bacon, aka "the smokeshow." save big. order through the app. people with moderate to severe psoriasis, are rethinking the choices they make like the splash they create the entrance they make, the surprises they initiate. otezla. it's a choice you can make. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. liz, you nerd, cough if you're in here! shh! i took mucinex dm for my phlegmy cough. what about rob's dry cough? works on that too, and lasts 12 hours. 12 hours?! who studies that long? mucinex dm relieves wet and dry coughs. staying up half the night searching for savings on your prescriptions? just ask your cvs pharmacist. we search for savings for you. from coupons to lower costs options. plus, earn up to $50 extra bucks rewards each year just for filling at cvs pharmacy. major news out of buckingham palace. the palace is stripping prince andrew of his military titles. he will no longer undertake any public duties as a royal or use the title "his royal highness" in any official capacity. >> just yesterday a judge ruled a sexual abuse civil lawsuit can proceed against him in new york. virginia dufrey alleges the late sex trafficker jeffrey epstein forced her to perform sex acts with the prince when she was just 17. cnn's max foster has more. prince andrew has denied all these claims but his mother the queen signed off on these actions. what do we learn from that? >> reporter: well, if you imagine, the british monarchy is a family firm. he has effectively been fired from the firm. he is still part of the family, still prince andrew, still duke of york, but not a working member of the royal family. he has no public role. all of his royal patreonages, the military title, have been taken from him and will be given to other members of the family and he won't get them back. this is permanent according to a royal source, saying he won't be getting them back. we are interpreting that as permanent. as you say, his whole life he has been known as his royal highness. that is a styling his or her royal highness that comes from being a senior royal, someone who represents the queen, who has a very high profile, public position. he doesn't have that anymore. he is now a private citizen. he's out of the firm. a tough decision i'm sure for the queen but another example of how she always puts duty, the monarchy above any personal thoughts and she just felt i think that the monarchy has to be protected from any further damage of being associated with this case in new york. >> i mean, part of what is so interesting, max, is this has not been adjudicated yet. he hasn't been found guilty of anything yet. what would it mean if he is compelled now to testify? >> it's interesting because as you say some people are saying the queen acted way too late on this. this should have happened back with the disastrous bbc interview he did with the bbc. others say it is premature because he has not been found guilty. there is no doubt there are huge questions about how he handled all of this. how much sympathy he has expressed for epstein's victims. you didn't hear that very often. but dufrey and andrew do want it to go to trial or to the next phase which was potentially trial in september. lots of embarrassment for the monarchy to come. therefore i think the queen wanted to separate from that. >> okay. max foster, thank you. president biden is promising masks, tests, and military support to help battle the omicron surge as covid hospitalizations and cases hit record levels. much more on his plan just ahead. superpowers from a spider bite? i could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance so they only pay for what they need. (gasps) ♪ did it work? only pay for what you need ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ spider-man no way home in theaters december 17th growing up in a little red house, on the edge of a forest in norway, there were three things my family encouraged: kindness, honesty and hard work. over time, i've come to add a fourth: be curious. be curious about the world around us, and then go. go with an open heart, and you will find inspiration anew. viking. exploring the world in comfort. national university has been focused on the future of higher education for over 50 years. we believe the future is accessible, so we offer four-week classes, online options, and over 75 career-focused programs. and we believe the future is affordable, so we offer scholarship opportunities that help make earning your degree possible. ♪ ♪ national university. your future starts today at nu.edu. the pandemic made teaching and learning really hard. but instead of working to help students safely return to the classroom, the san francisco school board focused on renaming schools and playing politics. and they've even saddled our district with a $125 million deficit. our children can't wait for new leadership. here's our chance for a fresh start. on february 15th, please recall school board members collins, lópez and moliga before our kids fall even further behind. switching wireless carriers is easy with xfinity. just lean on our helpful switch squad before our kids fall to help you save with xfinity mobile. they can help break up with your current carrier for you and transfer your info to your new phone. giving you a fast and easy experience that can save you hundreds a year on your wireless bill. visit your nearest xfinity store and see how the switch squad can help you switch and save. get $200 off a new eligible 5g phone when you switch to xfinity mobile. talk with our helpful switch squad at your local xfinity store today. tensions between russia and ukraine are escalating even further today. another round of talks aided without any commitment from russia to pull roughly 100,000 troops back from the ukrainian border amid growing fears of an invasion. >> russian president vladimir putin has warned he is ready to take military action if he does not get what he wants. cnn's kaitlan collins just asked national security adviser jake sullivan about the u.s. response. >> reporter: in your view what is the likelihood of russia invading? >> i'm not going to put any likelihood on it. the united states and our allies and partners are prepared for any contingency or eventuality. we are prepared to keep moving down the diplomatic path in good faith and prepared to respond if russia acts. beyond that all we can do is get ready and we are ready. >> "the lead" with jake tapper starts now. the most serious charges yet related to the january 6 attack on the capitol. "the lead" starts right now. breaking news. the department of justice has arrested and charged the head of the far right oathkeepers. the leader of the far right extremist group is charged with seditious conspiracy to use force to undermine the election and he is not alone. there is breaking news from the u.s. supreme court this afternoon. the biden administration's nationwide vaccine and testing mandate for big businesses has been blocked but may still be lo