even if the objections had been mounted today just as they hoped and planned, it still could not have amounted to casting into question that joe biden was elected. there are not going to be enough votes to do anything to cause that to be called into question described, is theater. >> absolutely, theater. and -- and republicans, who are worried about being primaried, you know, facing a primary challenge if they, in any way, defy the president, if they want to show their loyalty, i'm a trump supporter all the way, who are facing re-election in two years. many of them were those who lined up, those who want to run for president in four years, and want to claim the trump mantle. those were the senators, who we saw saying, okay, we want to mount an objection to the electoral college. it's not something that's done all that often. and many republicans have been pointing out, in -- in previous days, you know, senator barbara boxer had done it, on the

democratic side, in past elections. so, it's not unprecedented. but, the short answer, you point out, it wasn't going to make a bit of difference, no matter what. none of it was going to. >> especially, given today's events but at the end of the day, nothing is going to change on the road, between now and january 20th. want to go to meet the press moderator, chuck todd, who is back with us. chuck, what do you got? >> well, i think the question is are we going to see a similar reaction and response with the house republicans that, you know, and that's why i have, you know, it -- it -- where it looks like the senate and the -- and the -- and the dozen or nearly dozen senators who wanted to do this are in a bit of a retreat mode. on the house republican side, that will be interesting to see because, you know, if you were to look at what -- where -- where, in washington, is the president's base, it's the house republicans. they are loyal to him, and they really believe it. right? like, a ted cruz is rhetorically

loyal to the president. lindsey graham is rhetorically loyal. right? it was a political convenience. they ran against him. they didn't like him. they called him pathological liars. and then, they decided they had to appease -- appease him and hang around him. not so with many of these house republicans. and more importantly, they, thanks to gerrymandering, i mean, in many ways, the minority of house republicans represent, basically, the entirety of the trump base. and so, you know, as much as we think that, maybe, cooler heads are prevailing in the senate, let's not make any assumptions about what we might see in the house. >> we dip in a little bit here to some of the -- some of the debate underway. >> we must restore faith and confidence in one of our republic's most howelled, patriotic duties, voting. there is no question our u.s. constitution empowers state legislatures to execute free, legal, and fair elections.

unfortunately, in several states, the clear authority of those state legislature to determine the rules for voting were -- were usurped by governors, secretaries of states, and activist courts. our laws and constitution should always be followed, especially in a time of crisis. i don't rise to a state's legally obtained electoral college votes, rather, i rise in hopes of improving the ballot to hold states accountable to the time-proven system of the electoral college. this is why i urge the formation of electoral commission to give constructive suggestions that states can make to make our elections, once again, safe, free, and fair. >> let's listen in. >> responsibility would take us into the night and we'll stay as long as it takes. our purpose will be accomplished. we must, and we will, show to the country and, indeed, to the world, that we will not be

diverted from our duty. that we will respect our responsibility to the constitution and to the american people. on sunday, it was a great -- my great honor to be sworn in as speaker and to preside over a sacred ritual of renewal. as we gathered under the dome of the temple of democracy to open the 117th congress. i said, as we were sworn in then, we accept a responsibility, as daunting and demanding as any previous generation of leadership has ever faced. we know that we're in difficult times. but, little could we have imagined the assault that was made on our democracy, today. to those who -- to tear us from

our responsibility, you have failed. to those who engaged in the gleeful desecration of this, our temple of democracy, american democracy, justice will be done. today, january 6th, is the epiphany. on this day of revelation, let us pray that this instigation to violence will provide an epiphany for our country to heal. in that spirit of healing, i evoke the song of st. francis. i usually do. st. francis is the patron saint of my city of san francisco and is our anthem. lord, make me a channel of thy peace. where there is darkness, bring light. where there is hatred, let us bring love. where there is despair, let us bring hope. we know that we would be part of

history in a positive way, today, every four years when we demonstrate, again, the peaceful transfer of power. from one president to the next. and despite the shameful actions of today, we still will do so. we will be part of a history that shows the world what america is made of, that these -- this assault -- this assault is just that. it shows the weakness of those who've had to show, through violence, what their message was. my colleagues, it's time to move on. i -- i wear this pin, quite frequentl frequently. actually, i gave it to our beloved john lewis, just a weekend before -- weekend or so before he left us. and it's a flag of our country. a flag of the united states of

america. and on it, it says, one country, one destiny. one country, one destiny. written on the flag. that was, also, what was embroidered on abraham lincoln's coat that he had on, that fateful night. lincoln's party. lincoln's message. one country, one destiny. so, on this holy day of epiphany, let us pray. i'm a big believer in prayer. let us pray that there will be peace on earth, and that it will begin with us. let us pray that god will continue to bless america. and with that, let us proceed with our responsibilities to the

constitution, to which we have just, within 72 hours, taken the oath to uphold. what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i rise in opposition to the objection. >> gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> madam speaker, it is a sad day in america. it is a wrenching day, in america. a day -- it is a day, in which our words and our actions have had consequences of a very, very negative nature. we ought to watch our words. and think what it may mean to

some. my remarks were written, before the tragic, dangerous, and unacceptable actions. and unacceptable is such a tame word. my remarks started with, madam speaker, the american people, today, are witnessing one of the greatest challenges to our democracy, in its 2,244-year history. little did i know, that this capitol would be attacked. by the enemy within. i was here on 9/11. when we were attacked by the enemy without.

we need to all work together. to tame and reduce the anger and, yes, the hate that some stoke. but some, not all, madam speaker, but some, in this house and in this senate are doing today will not change the outcome of the election, which is the clear and insurmountable victory of president-elect biden and vice president-elect harris. instead, all they will accomplish is to further the dangerous divisions. this was written before this capitol was assaulted. before this democracy was put

aside by thousands. encouraged, by the commander in chief. instead, all they will accomplish is to further the dangerous divisions, as i said, among our people, and energize conspiracy theories, stoked by our foreign adversaries, which seek to erode america's confidence in our democracy and our system of free-and-fair elections. i was here, in 2000. i was strongly in favor of al gore for president. and my candidate got more votes than the other candidate. his name was george bush, of course. and one of the saddest days was

january 20th of 2001, when our candidate, who won the election, in my view, was not elected. but, it was, also, one of the proudest moments of my career because the greatest power on earth passed, peacefully. from bill clinton to george w. bush. not a shot was fired. nobody assaulted this caucus or this congress or this chamber. because we were not disappointed? no. because we were not angry? no. because we believe in democracy. we believe in we, the people. and the way the people, one of the speakers, i think it was the senator from texas, expressed we're here for the people.

if those were the people, we're in a lot of trouble. our electoral system, our democratic system, however, it did not break under the strains of the misinformation, the claims of fraud, which court, after court, after court, have dismissed, out of hand. not because there was a little evidence, because there was no evidence. that's why the longest-lasting constitutional democracy in the world. i hope all of us, in this body, are proud of that, and understand why that's the case. because, as kephart said on this floor many years ago, democracy

is a substitute for war to resolve differences. it proved, an ever-beating strong heart that gives life to our republic and our freedoms. that strength, madam speaker, is derived, in part, from our institution and our laws. but most importantly, it is powered by citizens and leaders' commitment to our constitution. not just us. we swear on oath. but it's all of america. barack obama spoke from that chamber, and he said i'm going to be taking another title, next year. citizen. and he was proud to take that, and every citizen needs to protect, preserve, and uplift our democracy. some, today, did not do that. many, today. 68 years ago, in springfield, illinois, governor adley

stephenson gracefully conceded his loss to general dwight eisenhower. he said this. traditionally -- it is traditionally american, he told his deeply disappointed supporters, to fight hard before an election. but then, he added, it is equally traditional to close ranks, as soon as the people have spoken, not the congress. not the lelectors. that which unites us, as american citizens, is far greater than that which divides us as political parties. it was another man from springfield, four score and eight years earlier, who won re-election to the presidency and a national crisis that tested our country and its democratic institutions. who pleaded, even in his hour of victory, for the same spirit of reconciliation.

that was the party of lincoln. that hasn't happened, to this hour. lincoln said, now that the election is over, he asked, may not all having a common interest reunite in a common effort to save our common country. such is the duty of an american who stands for elections or participates in our politics, to be either humble or gracious in defeat. i have lost some elections. not too many. and i have won a lot of elections. >> watching the argument in the house. want to take you now to the debate in the senate. senator hawley, who had kind of led the idea of opposing accepting these electoral votes is now speaking. >> in the capitol of the united states, and in this country, in the united states of america, we cannot say emphatically enough

violence is not how you achieve change. violence is not how you achieve something better. our constitution was built and put into place so that there would be, in the words of abraham lincoln, no appeal from ballots to bullets. which is what we saw, unfortunately, attempted tonight. there is no place for that in the united states of america. and that's why i submit to my colleagues that what we're doing here, tonight, is actually very important. because, for those who have concerns about the integrity of our elections, those who have concerns about what happened in november. this is the appropriate means. this is the lawful place, where those objections and concerns should be heard. this is the forum that the law provides for our laws provide for, for those concerns to be registered. not through violence, not by appealing from ballots to bullets, but here, in this lawful process. and so, to those who say that

this is just a formality, today, an antique ceremony that we've engaged in for a couple hundred years, i can't say that i agree. i can't say that our precedence suggest that. i actually think it's very vital what we do, the opportunity to be heard, to register objections, is very vital because this is the place where those objections are to be heard and dealt with, debated, and finally, resolved. in this lawful means, peacefully, without violence, without attacks, without bullets. and so, mr. president, let me just say now, previously, in lieu of speaking about it later, word about pennsylvania which is a state that i have been focused on, as an example to why people are concerned. millions of americans, concerned about our election integrity. pennsylvania, quite apart from allegations of any fraud, you have a state constitution that has been interpreted for over a century to say that there is no

mail-in balloting permitted, except for in very narrow circumstances, that's also provided for in the law. and yet, last year, pennsylvania-elected officials passed a whole, new law that allows universal mail-in balloting, and did it irregardless of what the pennsylvania constitution said. and then, when pennsylvania citizens tried to go and be heard on this subject before the pennsylvania supreme court, they were dismissed on grounds of procedure. timeliness. in violation of that supreme court's own precedent. so, the merits of the case have never been heard. the constitutionality of the statute's actually never been defended. i am not aware of any court that's passed on its constitutionality. actually, not aware of anybody who's defended its constitutionality. and this was what -- this was the statute that governed this last election, in which there were over 2.5 million mail-in ballots in pennsylvania. this is my point. that, this is the forum the pennsylvania supreme court hasn't heard the case. there is no other court to go to, to hear the case in the

state. and so, this is the appropriate place for these concerns to be raised, which is why i have raised them here, today. and i hope that this body will not miss the opportunity to take affirmative action to address the concerns of so many millions of americans. to say to millions of americans, tonight, that violence is never warranted. that violence will not be tolerated. that those who engaged in it will be prosecuted. but that this body will act to address concerns of all americans across the country. we do need an investigation into irregularities, fraud. we do need a way forward, together. we need election-security reforms. i bet, my friends on the other side of the aisle don't disagree with that. we need to find a way to move forward on that, together. so that the american people, from both parties, all walks of life, can have confidence in their elections and that we can arrange ourselves under the rule of law that we share together. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

>> senator josh hawley, who had essentially kind of organized this -- a number of republican senators to stand in opposition to the counting of the electoral votes. ostensibly, there to argue over arizona, but talking about pennsylvania and didn't get everything he said. but he seemed tbe kind of laying this aside. laying the objections aside. >> let's go to our capitol hill correspondent. do we got casey? or garrett haake? one of them, to help us read the tea leaves here because, garrett, josh hawley. i mean, i could see it both ways. maybe, you heard something at the top that we missed. we broke into a little bit later. but it seemed, in some ways, he was saying we have every right to object. there was nothing wrong with what we were planning to do. but it sure seemed like he was saying, but, i'm not going to do that, anymore. but he didn't come right out and say it. that was just my kind of general impression. but what did you take away from it? >> no, i agree with that. i think this was senator hawley

realizing he is probably only going to get one bite at this apple here. remember, he said earlier this week his objection was going to be primary focused on pennsylvania. we are supposed to be talking about arizona right now and he made the point to get his specific grievances about the way the election was conducted in pennsylvania out during this five-minute section that he was entitled to, here. i think that means we're probably not going to be hearing from him, again, later tonight. the beginning of his remarks were mostly just about condemning the violence that we saw here, today. that, you know, frankly, i think a lot of his senate colleagues are looking at him. you could see mitt romney, who's been very outspoken against these objections, sort of shooting lasers at josh hawley during that speech, from behind him. very frustrated that this happened here, at all, today. in part, because of hawley kind of coming out, at the very beginning, and saying he would raise these objections on the pennsylvania case. but you heard him say his argument. this is sort of, you know, the last, best opportunity to have this discussion but it seemed he was willing to have it here very briefly, in what's supposed to

be a debate about arizona. >> yeah. thi i think so. i write it down. i'll just say a word about pennsylvania in lieu of later. which i interpreted as him saying i am going to say my piece about pennsylvania, but maybe not mount that objection that he had planned to make. let's go to chuck todd of "meet the press." chuck, you speak washington fluently, as well. how did you interpret that? >> yes. no, i caught the same thing. and it's like, okay. and again, we have been watching this. notice who's been speaking on the republican side. we've not -- you know, remember, before, we were hearing from some republicans, like ben sasse and pat toomey. but -- who are -- been against this the whole time. but it almost seems as if they are trying to hurry up, and let them say their piece. the hawleys. i imagine, at this point, we will be waiting for ted cruz. oh, yes. >> let's listen to kevin mccarthy, the republican leader, who refused to acknowledge joe biden's victory earlier and is facing some issues on his staff. let's listen.

>> secure and lawful. on monday, my colleagues -- [ applause ] >> the fbi, the secret service, who face the most difficult challenges but did their duty, with confidence and strength. many of them are injured, right now. and it, also, extends to this chamber, where both democrats and republicans showed courage, calm, and resolve. i'd like to recognize the members, now, who helped to hold the line. mark wayne mullen. tony gonzales. jason crowe. pat fallon.

and troy nails. working with the capitol police, they ensured the floor of this chamber was never breached. these are the heroes among us. thank you. [ applause ] looking back on the past few hours, it is clear, this congress will not be the same, after today. and i hope it will be the better. i hope, not just this institution, but i hope every american pauses for that moment, and thinks among themselves. that we can disagree with one

another, but not dislike each other. we can respect the voices of others. there's many times we debate on this body, and we should. there's many times we can get heated. i still consider steny hoyer a very good friend. there's times i get upset, i'll call him at home to express the things i may not see fair or just. but that's the way we should handle things. the majority leader is right. we are all americans, first. should we also think for a moment what do we put on social media? what do we convey to one another? just because you have a personal opinion, different than mine, you have a right to say it. but nobody has a right to become a mob, and we all should stand united in condemning the mob, together.

[ applause ] >> back over to the senate. mitt romney who has been opposed to these objections to the electoral vote counting is speaking. >> watching tv. thinking about this building, whether their grandpa was okay. was okay. i must tell you, as well, i was proud to serve with these men and women. this is an extraordinary group of people. i am proud to be a member of the united states senate, and with people of integrity, as we do here, today. now, we gather, due to a selfish man's injured pride and the outrage of supporters who he has deliberately misinformed for the past two months and stirred to action, this very morning. what happened here today was an insurrection incited by the president of the united states. those who choose to continue to support his dangerous gambit by

objecting to the results of a e legitimate, democratic election, will forever be seen as being complicit in an unprecedented attack against our democracy. fairly, or not, they'll be remembered for their role in the shameful episode in american history. that will be their legacy. i salute senator lankford and loeffler and braun and danes, and i'm sure others, who, in the like of today's outrage, have withdrawn their objection. for any who remain insistent on an audit, in order to satisfy the many people who believe the election was stolen, i'd offer this perspective. no congressional audit is ever going to convince these voters, particularly when the president will continue to say that the election was stolen. the best way we can show respect for the voters who are upset is by telling them the truth. [ applause ]

that's the burden. that's the duty of leadership. the truth is that president-elect biden won the election. president trump lost. i got that experience myself. it's no fun. scores of courts. the president's own attorney general. state election officials. both republican and democrat. have reached that unequivocal decision. and in light of today's sad circumstances, i ask my colleague, do we weigh our own political fortunes more heavily than we weigh the strength of our republic, the strength of our democracy, and the cause of freedom? what's the weight of personal

acclaim, compared to the weight of conscience? leader mcconnell said that the vote, today, is the most important in his 36 years of public service. think of that. authorizing -- voting two impeachments. it's because this vote reveals something about us. i urge my colleagues to move forward with completing the electoral count, to refrain from further objections, and to unanimously affirm the legitimacy of the presidential election. thank you, mr. president. >> democratic leader. >> senator from new hampshire. senator shaheen. >> senator from new hampshire. >> mr. president, on january 3rd. >> so we have been watching, flip flopping between the two chambers of congress that are back in session. back at it, and moving ahead

with the business of certifying the electoral votes and -- and making official, joe biden's victory. inauguration, set for two weeks from today, january 20th, under the constitution. and if i go to garrett haake, we just saw mitt romney, a candidate you covered. and he -- he said -- i know it's not easy to lose. he's had the experience, himself. but he was very blunt. did not mince words. right at the top, saying we are here because of a selfish man's injured pride. referring to the president. and then, later, said, garrett, that if you want to honor the trump voter, you have to tell them the truth. >> yeah, and that comment seemed like a direct message to josh hawley, who spoke only a few minutes before. this idea, proposed by some of these objectors here that, somehow, we need a commission to study this election. and to get at the idea of how, as the president believes, it was stolen and what really happened. romney, trying to cut through all the noise there and say the best way to honor the opinions

of the people who are mad is to tell them the truth, and to be leaders. and i'm struck by, both the emotion in romney's voice at the very start of that, talking about his 25 grandchildren. and that they were calling to make sure that he was okay here, today, doing his job. but also, the fact that this is the second time, in a year, that romney has really spoken out, strongly, against his own party and the president of it. remember, he was the only republican vote for the removal of president trump in the impeachment, which was only a year ago. although, it feels like seven lifetimes ago. but this is now twice that he's sort of tried to capture this moment of -- of conscience in the republican party. to say, this is not acceptable. and we need to tell people the truth. a very powerful speech, and you heard it in the applause from members on the floor there. >> all right, garrett, thanks very much. want to go to kristen welker, right now, at the white house. kristen, we understand there is potential, more fallout happening within the president's staff.

>> it has begun to happen, lester, in the form of resignations. of course, just a short while ago, we reported that the first lady's chief of staff, stephanie grisham, announced her resignation. and now, there have been more. one of the president's top advisers, sara matthews, announcing her resignation, as well as the social secretary. and there is a lot of discussion and buzz about the idea that there may be more high-level resignations to follow. we are told, according to multiple sources, that among those considering resigning is the national-security adviser, robert o'brien. his deputy, matt pottinger, as well as the transportation secretary, elaine chow. that would be quite significant. we have reached out for official comment. so far, have not gotten a response. but i do think it underscores the sense here, at the white house, and the mounting sort of divide that we are starting to see. officials, who are, frankly,

quite angered by what they witnessed today, and the fact that president trump released two tweets and a statement, on twitter, short video statement, responding to those who stormed the capitol. and it was really mixed messaging. the president, again, reiterating those false claims of widespread-voter fraud. and calling for peace, but not doing it defiantly enough, not doing it clearly enough. and so, this is an administration, right now, lester, that is, frankly, sharply divided. i can tell you that the lights are off. i was just told that the president, right now, is in the residence. we know that he was watching these developments unfold, throughout the day. there's only one white house official here, inside the white house, fielding a number of press inquiries. but the lights are out here. and so, it really is a metaphor, i think, for what we are starting to see, which is donald trump becoming increasingly isolated as he refuses to accept the reality of this situation.

which is what mitt romney just said. that he has lost this election. there has been mounting pressure on him, for days now, among some of his closest allies inside and outside of the west wing, to try to get him to acknowledge that. to try to get him to think of next steps. what will his off ramp look like? what will his exit be? and yet, he remains defiant tonight. lester. >> yeah. he said there would be no concession. made that very clear in his remarks before the rioting broke out. we should, also, note, notable, elaine chow, one of the names kristen mentioned, as people pondering their future. she, of course, is the wife of majority leader mitch mcconnell. >> that's right. let's go to political director and moderator of meet the press, chuck todd. and, chuck, as we watch what's unfolding, how do you see this playing out? do we have a better picture of how things will unfold, this evening? >> i think, this evening, we do. i mean, it looks like they're getting -- they are going to get this -- they're -- they're moving in -- in a direction, i

do think that we're going to have a little bit of a lag here because of how the house is voting during -- during the pandemic. and that, it takes a long time for the voting, itself, to begin when they officially reject the arizona challenge. so, in that sense, i think, it -- it is -- we're -- we're making some progress. but i do want to have some people need to urge a little bit of patience because they have to vote in groups in the house. so, when they actually start voting, that's going to be a bit -- a bit time consuming. but i think the real question is and the real unknown is what are they going to do about the president, tomorrow? and, you know, this is -- this is something that there's a lot of talk. there is a lot of everything. but there's, clearly, a demand for some accountability, in some form or another. and what are they going to do? and i think that you can see, there's a lot of folks realizing they need to do something. resignation is a way to try to protect your own reputation. but there needs to be something done, obviously. i think there -- you certainly see there needs to be something

else done, and i think there is a lot of grasping to figure out what that is, per se. >> as we continue to watch the debate play out, right now. this is the house of representatives. why don't we dip in? [ applause ] >> this hallowed temple of democracy is where generations of americans have come to create a more perfect government. this is the appropriate place, we stand to respectfully, and peacefully, give voice to the people we represent, across our diverse country. the representatives of the american people, in this house, are standing up for three fundamental, american beliefs. the right to vote is sacred. that a representative has a duty to represent his or her constituents.

and that the rule of law is a hallmark of our nation. and in the spirit of healing, those are not my words. those are the words of you, madam speaker, from this very chamber when some of my colleagues and friends, across the aisle, objected to the 2005 electoral-llegco certification. in fact, there were objections on this floor, to the certification of nearly every republican president in my lifetime. in 1989. in 2001. in 2005. anin 2d 7. so, history is our guide that the people's sacred house is the appropriate venue for a peaceful debate. and this peaceful debate serves as a powerful condemnation to the violence that perpetrated our capitol grounds, today. the violence that was truly unamerican. today's discussion is about the constitution, and it is about the american people. but it must, also, be about

clearly and resolutely condemning the violence that occurred, today. i am honored, each and every day, to represent new york's 21st congressional district, and i believe it is my solemn and sacred duty to serve as their voice and their vote in the people's house. tens of millions of americans are concerned that the 2020 election featured unconstitutional overreach by unelected state officials and judges ignoring state-election laws. we can, and we should, peacefully and respectfully, discuss these concerns. in pennsylvania, the state supreme court and secretary of state unilaterally and unconstitutionally rewrote election law, eliminating signature-matching requirements. in georgia, there was constitutional overreach when the sec retary of state unilaterally and unconstitutionally gutted signature matching for absentee ballots, and in essence,

eliminated voter verification required by state election law. in wisconsin, officials issued illegal rules to circumvent a state law passed by the legislature, as the constitution requires, that required absentee voters to provide photo identification, before obtaining a ballot. and in michigan, signed affidavits document numerous, unconstitutional irregularities. officials physically blocking the legal right of poll watchers to observe vote counts. the illegal counting of late ballots and hand stamping ballots with the previous day's date. my constituents and the american people cherish the constitution, and they know, according to the constitution, elected officials closest to the people in state. >> representative stefanic of new york. arguing against the count of the electoral vote, as we continue to watch on both sides of the capitol. we want to turn, now, to this -- this issue of social media.

which was -- you know, a lot of new questions, tonight, based on what we saw at the capitol. >> yeah. there weren't enough extraordinary developments today, one of them is that twitter, instagram, and facebook, have now locked out the president of their social media accounts. based on information that violated their policies. but let's get to jo ling kent, who covers tech and silicon valley for us. for more on the thinking behind the decision, and what, exactly, it amounts to. >> savannah, these major tech companies, some of the most powerful companies in the world, are under tremendous pressure, tonight, to do even more than just suspend the president temporarily. so far, what we know. facebook and instagram have locked his accounts for 24 hours. that means he won't be allowed to post, within that period of time. twitter, also, instituting a 12-hour lock. and interestingly, warning of a permanent suspension, if he continues to violate the rules at twitter. and so, they are taking action,

faster and more aggressively than they ever have before. but, this comes, as a lot of critics are saying, look. you have done too little, too late because so much of this violence that's right-wing extremism, disinformation, has been allowed to grow and blossom on social media for years, now. with piecemeal policies that have been put into place. but the president has been allowed to act more freely because of his position, his authority, and his position of power. what's really interesting is we just got confirmation of mark zuckerberg's internal e-mail to facebook employees. and he had been long under fire for saying that, you know, this is a free-speech issue for the president and for politics, in general. not so much allowing that inside his company but he did tell employees today in a memo. he is calling this a dark moment in our nation's history. calling it mob violence, not just protests.

and zuckerberg says he is treating this situation as an emergency and that facebook is implementing additional measures to keep people safe. now, this is coming, as there are ongoing calls for these social-media companies to do more. but so far, twitter, really out front, putting it plainly. saying if the president continues to violate their terms of service, their policies against hate and violence, they are actively considering permanently suspending him. and, of course, as we all know, twitter is the president's, seemingly, his favorite megaphone for getting his message out there. and these tools will not be available to him. but certainly, a lot of chatter going on within these tech companies, as well. our nbc news business and tech team, also, reporting that inside these big social media companies, there's more and more pressure on the leadership to take more aggressive action, to do more to prevent more of these calls to violence from the most powerful seat in the world, from

coming to light on these platforms. and influencing so many people. so far, those are the actions that have been taken by these ultra-powerful tech companies, guys. >> jo, thank you very much. let's go to hallie jackson at the white house as we continue to watch what happens in the senate, and see how this is going to unfold. what are you hearing, hallie? >> yeah. listen. savannah, i think from the white house perspective, there are, you know, the more people that we are talking to tonight, the more you are getting a sense of people that are extremely troubled by -- by what they've seen from president trump. that is evidenced not just by the resignations, savannah, that i know we ticked through here tonight. for example, the social secretary, from others. but the discussion of some resignations by some very high-level officials, including, based on sources that i have talked to, the national security adviser. perhaps, the transportation secretary. we have reached out, obviously, for more official comment. but there are text messages, phone calls, flying across the

capitol, across the white house, and across washington, right now. as we look, now, what's happening on the senate floor and the house of representatives floor. worth noting and underscoring what garrett haake was talking about, a moment ago. josh hawley. not backing down. there was some consideration, earlier in the evening. i had been in touch with sources over on capitol hill, whose hope, frankly, it was, would be that senators would do like what we saw from, for example, senator kelly loeffler. and back down, basically. back away from these objection situation because of the message they feel that it sends. that is not going to be the case here. senator hawley made clear, in these remarks. you have to think that the president is watching this. he is somebody who is very attuned to coverage of what is happening. his vice president, who he's presumably furious with, considering president trump had, for days, tried to lean on vice president pence to stop any of this from happening. of course, the vice president has no authority to do so.

as we know, the president is, oftentimes, affected by the coverage that he sees and the way that that is unfolding. and right now, it is just, i think, some -- some serious alarm bells going off in the halls of the white house, savannah. >> you mentioned, hawley pressing on with his objections. they are still talking about just arizona, right now. do we expect them to hold that position with the other states? >> you know, potentially, lester. there is some discussion about, for example, and this is -- this has been out there and reported about, possibly, pennsylvania, for example. where else you might see that. but, yeah, you are right. they are still focusing on arizona, at this point. you still have multiple states to go, here. >> all right. hallie, thanks. >> sounds like we might have just lost hallie there. let's go to senate floor. senate angus king who is independent but caucuses with the democrats. let's listen. >> the fiery trial, through

which we pass, will light us down an honor or dishonor to the latest generation. the fiery trial, through which we pass, will light us down in honor or dishonor to the latest generation. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. >> mr. president. >> senator from maryland. >> thank you, mr. president. the mob violence and attack we saw on our capitol, today, should be a wake-up call to each and every one of us, of what happens when we fail to come together, not as democrats and republicans but, each of us, as americans. to stand up to a president, who,

time and again, has shown contempt for our democracy. contempt for our constitution. today, here on the capitol, we witnessed people taking down an american flag, and putting up a trump flag. that is not democracy in the united states of america. as every senator who has spoken has mentioned, we have, for hundreds of years, had a peaceful transfer of power. nobody likes to lose, and supporters of the losing candidate are always disappointed. what's different, this time? we all know what's different this time. we had a president who, as the senator from new jersey said, even before a vote was cast, that, if he didn't win the election, it was going to be a fraud. and every day, since then, has

perpetrated that lie. we have a president, who, just today, criticized very loyal vice president, who is presiding right now. urging him to disregard his responsibilities under the constitution of the united states, in order to reinstall donald trump as president. the same person, who got on the phone who the secretary of state in georgia, and threatened him to change the results of the election. mr. president, i read something, this week, i'd never thought i'd read in a newspaper in the united states of america. it was an op-ed by all the living, former secretaries of defense, including secretaries rumsfeld, cheney, and mattis. warning. warning the country about our tradition of peaceful transfer of power, and it would be inappropriate for the military

to take sides. >> the united states senate that's been going for almost two hours now. watching to see whether the senate moves on with this debate and this process. while that goes on, though, let's check in with garrett haake on capitol hill. our correspondent there. because, there is a big question mark about senator josh hawley of missouri, who was the first republican to come out and say that he would object to the certification of the electoral vote. almost a dozen republican senators, then followed suit. so, in many ways, he is the architect of this day. we were trying to read the statement he made, whether or not he was going to stick to those objections. or whether he was going to decide to stand down. we are hearing conflicting things now. so, could you explain, where does that stand and what does that mean for the larger question of what will happen? >> i can try. apparently, hawley's statements were confusing enough that his official spokesperson felt the need to clarify what he is going to do. hawley had originally said that

his objection would be focused on pennsylvania. apparently, according to hawley's spokesperson, he will still object to pennsylvania's electoral count when that moment comes, later on tonight. the spokesperson says he'll yield his time, though. so, what that means is hawley will make his objection known on paper. but he won't stand up again to defend it or say anything more. his objection, if it's joined by house members and we can, i think, safely presume it will, means another one of these up to two hours of debate. sometime, later on tonight. so, we are going to have at least one more debating session like this one, tonight. on the issue of pennsylvania. whether it goes the full two hours is an open question. what's not an open question is, once again, this will not change the results of any state. pennsylvania or otherwise. it's just going to drag this on, a little bit further, tonight. hawley, perhaps, feeling like he had put his name on paper earlier in the week saying he would object to pennsylvania and he still feels like he's got to do that. >> and, garrett, how many states, in total, could we see

challenged? >> there was discussion, during the course of the week, up to six. the sort of six battleground states we have talked most about. arizona, nevada, georgia, michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin. those were the six that i think we were most focused on, early in the week. pennsylvania was the one that republicans felt like they had the strongest case on. that they could make the best argument about. if they were so inclined. whether they do all six now, i think is an open question. >> so, just so i can try to understand it. if, in the senate side, hawley objects but then yields his time, does that presumably end the debate on the senate side, but the two hours could -- could unfold on the house side? or would the two hours go forward on the senate side, too? >> up -- up to two hours would still go forward. hawley can only yield his five minutes. so, he can -- he can object -- and again, if a house and senate member both object, it forces this two-hour clock. he could only yield his five minutes.

so, he is essentially saying i object to this but i am not going to bother to tell you anything about why. here is some other senators who may debate this. >> let's go back to the senate floor. lindsey graham, now, is making his remarks. >> to hold the country hostage to end reconstruction. it worked. the commission was 8-7. it didn't work. nobody accepted it. the way it ended is when hayes did a deal with these three states. you give me the electors. i'll kick the union army out. the rest is history. it led to jim crow. if you are looking for historical guidance, this is not the one to pick. if you are looking for a way to convince people there was no fraud, having a commission, chosen by nancy pelosi, mitch mcconnell, and john roberts, is

not gonna get you to where you want to go. it ain't gonna work. so, it's not going to do any good. it's going to delay. and it gives credibility to a dark chapter of our history. that's why i'm not with you. but i will fight to my death for you able to object. you're not doing anything wrong. other people have objected. i just think it's a uniquely bad idea to delay this election. trump and i. we've had a hell of a journey. i hate it being this way. oh, my god, i hate it. from my point of view, he's been a consequential president. but today, first thing you'll see. all i can say is count me out. enough is enough. i've tried to be helpful. but when the wisconsin supreme court ruled, 4-3, that they didn't violate the supreme -- the constitution of wisconsin, i agree with the three but i accept the four. if al gore can accept, 5-4, he's

not president. i can accept wisconsin, 4-3. pennsylvania. it went to the 2nd circuit. so much for all the judges being in trump's pocket. they said, no, you're wrong. i accept the pennsylvania's 2nd circuit that trump's wasn't right. georgia said secretary of state took the law into his own hands, changed the election laws unlawfully. a federal judge said no. i accept the federal judge, even though i don't agree with it. fraud. they say there is 66,000 people in georgia, under 18, voted. how many people believe that? i ask, give me ten. hadn't had one. they said 8,000 felons in prison, in arizona, voted. give me ten. hadn't gotten one. does that say there's -- there's problems in every election. i don't buy this. enough's enough. we got to end it. vice president pence, what they're asking you to do, you

won't do because you can't. you talk about interesting times. i associate myself with rand paul. how many times will you hear that? the mob has done something nobody else could do to get me and rand to agree. rand is right. if you are a conservative, this is the most offensive concept in the world, that a single person could disenfranchise 155 million people. the president shall, in the presence of the senate and the house of representatives, open all certificates and the votes shall then be counted. the person having the greatest number of votes for president, shall be president. where, in there, does it say can say i don't like the results, i want to send them back to the states, i believe there was fraud. to the conservatives who believe in the constitution, now is your chance to stand up and be counted. originalism. count me in. it means what it says.

so, mike, mr. vice president, just hang in there. they said we can count on mike. all of us can count on the vice president. you gonna do the right thing. you gonna do the constitutional thing. you got a son who flies f18s. they are out there flying so that we get it right here. there are people dying, my good friend from illinois, to make sure we have a chance to argue among ourselves. and when it's over, it is over. it is over. the final thing. joe biden, i have traveled the world with joe. i prayed he'd lose. he won. he is a legitimate president of the united states. i cannot convince people, certain groups, by my words. but i will tell you by my actions. that maybe, i, among any -- above all others in this body, need to say this. joe biden and kamala harris are

lawfully elected, and will become the president and the vice president of the united states, on january the 20th. [ applause ] >> what an extraordinary moment, that we just saw on capitol hill. where senator lindsey graham, the republican who has, so often, been by the president's side. but as he said, what a journey it's been because been with the president, sometimes not. pause that thought because i want to hear what the vice president might be pence hke pe. let's listen. >> mr. cruz and others be sustained. is there a second? there is.

clerk will call the roll. >> ms. baldwin. >> no. >> mr. barasso. >> so, they are starting to vote. garrett haake still with us? our capitol hill correspondent? >> i'm here. >> garrett, so, they're voting the roll call. what's the vote on, functionally? what is this about? >> this is a vote on upholding the objection to these -- to the electors. so, yes votes here are in favor of the objection. no votes are against it. this will tell us a lot about how many of the objectors. earlier in the week, we thought it was about 12 or 13. are still with them. we have seen, over the last few hours, several of these republicans who had previously said they would object to the electoral results from these states, recant. so, this vote, while it won't tell us when this night will end, it's going to tell us a lot about the degree of support that has drifted away over the course of what we saw today. >> yeah, and then to the thought we were just having, as i turn to you, lester, lindsey graham.

what a moment. >> at the end, basically, he is saying, love donald trump, i wished he won, prayed he'd win. he didn't. and basically, telling his colleagues to essentially deal with it. >> he was and he threw his arms around, rhetorically, anyway, mike pence to say we're with you. stay strong. because vice president pence has been under enormous pressure from the president to do something to overturn the election, as senator graham said. mike pence won't do that because he can't do that. it's illegal. it's -- it's not constitutional to do so. but, senator graham has tried to walk that line. supporting president trump. but tonight is a clear break where he -- he, literally, said enough is enough. he said if al gore can accept a 5-4 vote that he doesn't agree with, then lindsey graham said i can accept a vote of wisconsin supreme court. >> he -- and you listen to some of the various -- you see the deep, deep