steve bannon is defying congress. others might be looking at the electoral fallout of being too associated with steve bannon, but to your point about why these cops are on television, i will say that one of the -- to use betsy's term, one of the gutting things about watching officer fanone was the way that the contrast between how seriously he takes what happened and understands the danger here in contrast to condolezz rice who says we should just move on and i've always admired condolzza rice, and we talk about the republican party but it's the failure of the leaders, those who ought to be the best among the republicans and you work with condolezza rice and i have to say that came as a gut punch to see her saying, can we just move on. that contrast between someone who had been at the pinnacles of government saying, yeah, can we just turn the page and this street cop who is explaining why that can't happen and the threat to democracy. that contrast is pretty dramatic and it does tell you something about our politics,

now steve bannon. and now steve bannon. mr. bannon is a target of the investigation for the investigation because, quote -- this is from the select committee's own report -- quote, his efforts to plan political activity, that's the standard. if you're involved in political activity, they're going to investigate you. we know what this is really about. this is about getting at president trump. getting at president trump. tried to stop president trump before he was even elected with the russia investigation. tried to remove president trump from office twice. while he was in office they tried to do that, and now they're trying to get him after the fact, after he's left. all because this guy cut taxes, reduced regulations, the greatest economy in 50 years, the lowest unemployment all because he built a wall, got us out of the iran deal. americans got their christmas presents on time. but they're coming after him. the roeuter story said this. they don't care the fbi has no evidence. no evidence of a coordinated plan. they don't care.

bannon, steve bannon has no factual defense. steve bannon has no legal defense and the grand jury should indict steve bannon for criminal contempt of congress. >> maya, i mean, steve bannon hasn't been working the white house since 2017. he was long gone by the time he was having these conversations. he was already out. trump got mad because he cooperated in books and gave quotes. he was not involved at all in the trump administration by the time january 6th, 2021 happened so he's not even close to where he could get an executive privilege claim. the fact he's doing it says to me inparting upon himself the immunity trump has been used to and say i'll maybe wait it out. maybe i'll go ahead and violate this law. maybe i'll go to jail and i'll just take it because he's operating under the same crazy fox news world assumption that he can just wait it out, thug it out, go to jail and donald trump will magically come back into power or come back into power because they steal the election and pardon him. if he's thinking that, would he

steve bannon. attendees pledging allegiance to a flag that is said to have been flown at the rally right before the insurrection at the capitol. here it is. >> she's carrying an american flag that was carried at the peaceful rally with donald j. trump on january 6th. [ applause ] i ask you all to rise and join us as mark lloyd leads us in the pledge. >> face the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> can you believe that? again, can you rewrite that please, danny, director danny, every night. so this is a flag believed to have flown at the insurrection at the capitol on january 6th. this event that happened last night. reportedly they are pledging allegiance to that flag. i'm just going to let you see -- think about that. this is a flag flown at the insurrection. >> an american flag that was carried at the peaceful rally with donald j. trump on january 6th. i

rather than the attention being on steve bannon. so, yes, it's a good day for steve. >> so, the maximum penalty if he is convicted of this is 12 months, it's a federal sentence. maybe he serves eight, nine, something like that. you think -- >> he would be in heaven. he would literally be in heaven. this would make, make his career and his life. >> he would do the time and cash in on the time presumably. >> absolutely. absolutely. i mean, it would be -- i mean, i really can't, i have been watching this and i have been thinking, you know, this steve, he is just the luckiest man on earth. >> now, if, let's go to the theoretical, where the committee ends up questioning him. we just saw, you know, jim jordan today trying to answer questions about how many conversations he had with donald trump around january 6th. what would testimony from steve bannon be like if was under oath trying to avoid perjury? possibly using the fifth amendment here and there? >> yeah, that is one of the interesting things about this, i don't think that steve ban

i don't know if steve bannon is trying to martyr himself, i don't know if steve bannon thinks that 12 months in the pokey is time to get in good shape and begin the next chapter of his career and write a book, like others have fun from the fascist movement. but in the end, what congress needs to do and to send a signal to all the witnesses, is you will comply with these lawful subpoenas and we will use the full weight, the full power of this committee under the constitution of the united states to enforce them, full stop. >> and donald trump is out here urging defiance. it's one thing for people who are fan fiction and writing things online to react to that, it's another for those who would end up in the slammer and have their life affected that way. it's also a long ways from where bannon claimed to be because they did have a falling out, when i interviewed him once in his townhouse where he does some of his media and other political work, i pressed him on this point. i'm curious your reaction because apparently it's shifted. this is back when he was saying he didn't care much of wha

because steve bannon has no immunity to somehow just fail to show up. i think no valid privilege claim to assert and even if he did, he would need to come before the congress and specify which question, which document, the former president was formally asserting privilege. none of that happened. so the facts could be clear. the law also could be clear. and to me, this is an early test of whether our democracy is recovering. in the justice department shrugs and says we're not going forward, they're inviting other contempt of law by other individuals. not just contempt of congress, but contempt of the law more generally. and i just don't think that's where the garland justice department wants to go. >> how soon will your select committee decide whether to pursue contempt for other witnesses? for example, mark meadows and dan scavino, and kash patel? >> as soon as we decide we're get getting nowhere. if we feel like we're getting stalled for time, we won't hesitate to move forward with contempt. but if we can work it out and secure their testimony without

he said it's not just about steve bannon. it's about showing congress can follow through and do its job. walk me through what we expect to see with this contempt vote later this afternoon. >> what kenz ger said there is the same thing his fellow republican liz cheney has said throughout this process really trying to speak to republicans and her fellow conservatives appealing to her better angels and trying to unlink the hold that former president donald trump still has over the bulk of his party. while we do expect to see, in kinzinger's words, that a handful of republicans may join the vote and send it over to doj, that's not even a small part of the republican party. the majority still stands in the former president's corner as he continues to tell the big lie about the 2020 election, which of course fed into the events here on january 6th. what we do expect, though, you said this vote could come in about an hour. that's an optimistic timeline. what we're watching to see here is after they end this debate period, whether or

will he charge steve bannon? >>> plus, president biden making a major concession tonight while negotiating another component of his spending plan. will he use the progressives over this key con investigation? >>> and proof that trump supporters are more loyal than ever. video from a trump rally that you will see to believe. let's go outfront. and good evening. i'm erin burnett. out front tonight the breaking news. we are awaiting a vote this hour by the january 6th committee to an

we'll see if steve bannon used that right here. >> do you think steve bannon's testimony is critical to the investigation? >> sure. he was reportedly in trump's ear from the time of january 6th, leading up to january 6th. i mean, he's been one of donald trump's closest political advisers really from before the 2016 election, so, yeah, and there's plenty of evidence that steve bannon was centrally involved here. the committee said they chose bannon for a reap, so i think that there's a reason that they have picked this fight, and there's a reason they are willing to escalate it to the next level. >> obviously it sends a message, too, to other people who may be getting these subpoenas. elie honig, appreciate it. thanks so much for being here with us. >> you bet. >> ryan nobles, thanks for your reporting. our other story this hour, the nfl facing growing pressure to release documents from the documents that led to the investigation of jon gruden's resignation. leaked e-mails showed misogynistic to other league insiders. the league wants and others want the e-mails to be made public. the

even if you play this out the entire way and steve bannon is put behind bars, can steve bannon do that? we're looking at a fine of $100,000, we're looking at a month to a year imprisonment. what this does, though, is send a signal to other people being called before this committee who might not be ready to die on that sword. might not be able to benefit politically or financially as steve bannon might be able to considering this world he lives in. mark meadows, kash patel, people who have not been deposed yet before this committee, they haven't been interviewed yet even though they were supposed to be. but we do have a sense that there is some movement, right? they're not out actively defying this. we've gotten word from the committee that this hasn't moved forward yet. it might be a warning to other people to work with them to get documents. the bottom line, though, is even if this follows through, even if the attorney general moves on this, the committee may never get what they want from steve bannon and it could also take a very long time, which is exactly what the committee does no

in this case that will be steve bannon. this afternoon, the house rules committee to advance the recommendation the full house that bannon be held in contempt after hearing from lawmakers on the january six committee. also, her from good measure trump acolytes jim jordan and matt gates who showed up just to speak against the move to subpoena bannon. during one lively exchange, games made sure to push the former presidents lies about election fraud. do you accept that joe biden won the 2020 presidential election? >> i accept that joe biden is the president. >> do you accept that he won by 7 million votes, and if he did donald trump -- a margin that donald trump or landslide when he beat hillary clinton by the same numbers? >> i think that our election was uniquely polluted by these indiscriminate mail-in ballots. >> today just to remove any doubt republican house leaders officially reminded their members to vote no, on holding bannon in contempt. one of them used a trump to refrain to renounce e

attorney charge steve bannon. because bannon could say, i had advice of counsel, i don't know what's to do, donald trump told me that i should not give this information, because it's subject to executive privilege. who am i to tell him that he does not have that right. that's for a court to tell him. these could all be defenses. but they are not a defense to him simply showing up and testify, which the law is very clear, that he must do. >> so, does the u.s. attorney, reach out to bannon's attorney, and say, listen, we are going to present this to a grand jury, we have it, do you want to talk about reaching some kind of agreement with the house, before we do this? >> my guess is that steve bannon's lawyer, we'll ask to present to the u.s. attorney, and he will try to make the case, that bannon should not be prosecuted, and he'll present some of those arguments that i just made. that bannon has a reasonable belief that he needs to listen to donald trump, and therefore he is not doing this by his own will. he's doin

steve bannon is clearly a warning shot. they want bannon to know and they want other witnesses to know that they're not fooling around. it can be a very long process as preet will tell you, but i think it speaks to the tenor of the message they're trying to send. and especially with steve bannon, who they see as a critical witness to january 5th. someone who had many phone calls with president trump. especially that december 30th call we know about where he tells him to come back f. then when he's in the willard hotel with rudy giuliani and they're calling back and forth to the white house. >> i thought it was very significant and news worthy, preet, what he said about jeff riff ro rey rosen. who answered questions behind closed doors, but eventually we'll get the public transcript. for eight hours. what was your reaction? >> i think it's very significant. we are right to focus on the people who are going to be instructing and a dating process and not appearing to testify in front of the january 6th committee including stev

what will happen to steve bannon? >> under the law when the house finds him in contempt, that's referred to the justice department. the statute says the justice department shall present the matter to a grand jury. the justice department can't tell them who to prosecute. so that's the first bit. we know what's going to happen in the house. the question is what's the justice department going to do. will they refer this to a grand jury? will steve bannon will charged with contempt of congress. it is a misdemeanor to engage in contempt to congress and be fun punished up to a year in a common jail. so that's the big question. and there are a couple issues to look at here. on the one hand, the justice department has never prosecuted anybody for contempt of congress when executive privilege has been a asserted. however, those are cases mostly involving people currently in the government. question, what about a guy like steve bannon who is not in the government and a president not in the government. secondly, executive privil

now steve bannon. now steve bannon. mr. bannon is a target of the investigation, quote, his efforts to plan political activity, that's the standard. you are involved in political activity, they are going to investigate you. we know this is what about. this is about getting at president trump. try to stop president trump before he was even elected with the russian investigation, tried to remove president trump from office twice while he was in office and tried to do that and now trying to get him after the fact after he has left all because he cut taxes and greatest economy in the history, lowest unemployment all because he built the wall and put the embassy in jerusalem and americans got their christmas presents on time. the reuters story said this, the f.b.i. has found no evidence that people around him were not in charge. no evidence of a coordinated plan. they are going to drag these 11 people in for depositions with subpoenas because they are so determined to get their political enemies. the speaker pro tempore: the gen

bannon, as dangerous as steve bannon on the other side. they would do it. this committee must have that level of resolve, otherwise it's not going to make a damn bit of difference. it took don mcgahn two years to testify front of congress and even then they didn't get much from him. two years, and he's not the nefarious character that steve bannon is. so they have got to demonstrate resolve here or else it really is moot. >> juanita, she makes a great point. we heard from adam kinzinger on cnn earlier saying, listen, this is about the history books. it needs to be noted in history what took place on january 6th and holding steve bannon in criminal contempt, but what type of information does it actually get from them? we talk about what tools do they have to make sure they actually provide testimony on an attack on the capitol? >> yeah, i think the tools that we're seeing them deploy with the criminal contempt is the first stem. we know deployments of the sergeant at arms is another escalation. but to your point, yasmin, about getting the i

so why is this select committee interested in steve bannon? it's simple, he is a democrat party bogeyman. >> trump now tries to get his followers like steve bannon not to testify here, and not to turn over evidence that they have about this vicious assault on american democracy. in america, when you are subpoenaed to testify in court, or in congress, you show up, period. >> we are here, going back and forth, arguing if we should continue down a path, of yet another partisan investigation of questionable motives and purpose. >> as we mentioned, what happens next to one city van is now up to the feds, earlier on this network january 6th jamie raskin described the next steps. >> it's that the u.s. attorney for district of columbia, u.s. attorney must go before the grand journey to demanded a mint. we think that it's very likely, given the gravity of this matter is so overwhelming, and the facts are so clear that, he just blew us off. we think the department of justice will move forward,, we're certainly not gonna let anything drag on for a ten mo

steve bannon committed a crime today. people have to understand that. because it is important that people obey subpoenas they get whether from a court or from congress. these are orders of law. you have to comply with them. he committed a crime and so we have referred him for prosecution on criminal contempt. that might not mean a lot to him. if you've got millions of dollars, i think donald trump pardoned him after he took money from trump followers and money -- the wall in mexico and just kept it but the message has to go out to anybody thinking of going down that trump/bannon path that we mean business as adam kinzinger said. the majority of people who have been subpoenaed by us or by the department of justice and various prosecutions have complied. they understand that this was a terrible attack on the united states government, terrible attack on congress in order to overturn a presidential election. and they want to cooperate or at least they understand they've depot a legal obligation to do it. but the point is not a punitive one, lawrence. we're

steve bannon on his podcast, january 5th. "it's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen. it will be extraordinarily different. all i can say is strap in. you made this happen. tomorrow it's game day, so strap in. let's get ready." then later on, "all hell is going to break loose tomorrow," so many people said if i was in a revolution i would be in washington. well, this is your time in history. those are steve bannon's own words flying back in his face from the house committee. they say he was at the center of this effort which ended up erupting into a violent insurrection at the capitol. kate, the other illuminating information we got yesterday from the house committee is we had basically had the cover sheet and now we have the committee believing what steve bannon knows. the investigation includes communications with extremists, groups like the proud boys, the oath keepers, many who are facing conspiracy charges. >> whitney, thank you. appreciate it. that vote coming up tonight. joining me for more on this,

steve bannon would build it if you just sent him your money. steve bannon defrauded trump voters, got caught by the feds, was charged with those crimes, but didn't have to go to trial in federal court because donald trump pardoned him. pardoned him for defrauding donald trump's own voters. steve bannon has been subpoenaed by the special house committee investigating the attack on the capitol to testify tomorrow, and he has already become the first person in history who is trying to hide behind presidential executive privilege even though he wasn't even working in the white house or the government during the period that the committee is investigating. he is a private citizen. donald trump has become the first private citizen and former president in history to try to exert executive privilege in a congressional investigation and felt today once again, president biden smacked down that false and illegal claim by donald trump. the white house released a letter today that was actually written last week to the archivist of the united states where all

steve bannon refused to appear before the panel. the report says that he had specific knowledge of the events planned forjanuary the sixth before they happened. donald trump has urged former aides to reject it is shocking to me. shocking that anyone would not do anything in their power to assist our investigation. so it is a shame that mr manning has put us in this position but we won't take no for an answer. i've been speaking to our north america correspondent — david willis — and i asked him what he had learned from this vote. we learned that this committee is extremely determined to get to the bottom of the events on that fateful day, the 6th of january of this year when a mob of donald trump supporters staged an insurrection at the us capitol and they are pressing ahead with getting steve bannon to give testimony. testimony that he is seeking to avoid. giving to this committee on the grounds that there is executive privilege attached to the remarks and documents you might forward to them. i have to say that there is a feeli

this isn't about punishing steve bannon. the select committee would prefer and, frankly, expect all witnesses to fully cooperate, but steve bannon has led us down this path by refusing to cooperate in any way with our investigation. we believe mr. bannon has information valuable to our probe. he was deeply involved in the so-called "stop the steal" campaign. he was reportedly in a war room meeting the day before the riot and had been pressuring the former president to try to stop the counting of the electoral college ballots. he himself warned that all hell would break loose on january 6th. we believe he can help inform our inquiry as to how the riot came together and what it was intended to achieve. he's clearly an important witness. so, we subpoenaed him, and unlike other witnesses who have engaged and worked with our team to find a way to cooperate, mr. bannon told us he wouldn't comply because the former president told him not to. he hid behind vague and baseless claims of privilege. that's just not acceptable. the selec

steve bannon, requests, saying no hard pass. no runs exist for any adjournment or other delay in your request is denied. it took him all of one paragraph to make that very clear. white house counsel's office, this is interesting, this is not part of congress, this is counsel's office that advises president biden inside the white house. the counsel's office said sent him a letter of their own. telling mr. benin that the white house, quote, not aware of any basis for your refusal to appear for the physician. either legal or otherwise. venegas tried to claim that he can refuse a subpoena on the basis of trump asserting executive privilege. the white house reminding mr. steve bannon, the only the sitting president can exert executive. privilege and in this case president is not doing so. ahead of tonight's vote, the january six committee released a report outlining the ways in which steve bannon, delinquent in his response to a subpoena. but also in the public interest that he comply. the report says that in part, quote, mister stev

to get the facts that they believe steve bannon has. but more importantly, as we have heard, you know, throughout the last couple of weeks, particularly in the run-up to this vote tonight, they want to make it very clear to the other holdouts. to the other former-trump officials who are defying subpoenas, this is what's going to happen to you. they need to start the -- the ball rolling and they need to set the precedent. >> david, you tweeted something this week, obviously sarcastically but your point was well taken. you said that -- is this nation coming to -- what is this nation coming to if, quote, a president can't even confidentially confer with his co-conspirators while plotting to overturn an election and fomenting against the government and constitution, i mean, what's executive privilege for? does it surprise you to hear people basically saying, oh, department of justice won't want to get involved in this or if the courts get involved, it will take forever and there is no point? >> well, look. i think the -- the department of j

steve bannon has refused to appear before the panel. the report says that mr bannon had specific knowledge of the events planned forjanuary the sixth before they happened. donald trump has urged former aides to reject the panel's requests, claiming the right to withhold information because of executive privilege. in his opening statement, the chair of the committee democratic congressman bennie thompson expressed astonishment that mr bannon hadn't given evidence: it is shocking that anyone would not do anything in their power to assist our investigation. so it is a shame that mr bannon has put us in this position but we won't take no for an answer. this position but we won't take no for an answer. let's get more from our north america correspondent david willis. what more did we learn today? we learned that this committee is extremely determined to get to the bottom of the events on that fateful day. the 6th of january of this year when a mob of donald trump supporters staged an insurrection at the us capitol and they are pressing ahead

they subpoenaed steve bannon. they said the vast majority of what we need from steve bannon isn't even subject to the privilege claim he's trying to wash over anything to prevent him from speaking. we'll keep an eye on this. ryan nobles is on it. ryan, thank you for that. still ahead for us as well, president biden will be making a pitch for his economic agenda in his hometown today. why he's headed to scranton and what his message is to americans. is the planning effect. this is how it feels to know you have a wealth plan that covers everything that's important to you. this is what it's like to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. making sure you have the right balance of risk and reward. and helping you plan for future generations. this is the planning effect from fidelity. ♪ ♪ your new pharmacy is here. and here. and here, too. it's here to help you save time and money and trips to the pharmacy. it's here to get you the medication you need when you need it. who knew it c

and so now the matter of steve bannon defying that subpoena, that will be put in the hands of the u.s. attorney in washington, dc to decide if in fact criminal charges against him are warranted. you'll recall that liz cheney lost her post in the republican leadership because of her uncompromising, nonpartisan stance against trump's efforts to overturn the election. she did everything she could today to make this as hard a vote as possible for her fellow republicans. >> there are people in this chamber right now who were evacuated with me and with the rest of us on that day during that attack. people who now seem to have forgotten the danger of the moment, the assault on the constitution, the assault on our congress. people who you will hear argue that there is simply no legislative purpose for this committee, for this investigation, or for this subpoena. mr. bannon's own public statements make clear he knew what was going to happen before it did. and thus he must have been aware of and may well have been involved in the planning of everything that played out on that day. the american

that's different than what steve bannon is doing. steve bannon is basically just thumbing his nose at the committee, refuse to comply and citing trump's contested claim of executive privilege as a child. his attorney writing a letter, until such time as you reach an agreement with president trump or receive a court ruling, mr. bannon not be producing documents or testifying. of course, just a point of fact here, unlike other trump allies, steve bannon was not employed by the executive branch during the insurrection. he is just a guy with a podcast, okay? and he is trying to get executive privilege. trump fired him quite famously in 2017, a fact the committee noted when it understandably rejected bannon's privilege argument. quote, even if bannon had been a senior aide to the president during the time period covered by the contemplated testimony which he was not, he is not permitted by law to the type of immunity he suggestion. now, many of these subpoenas are somewhat broad in their scope. that's true. it's not always apparent to the

steve bannon had said no. that's why he is getting a criminal referral. >> can you imagine a scenario, sir, of anybody in mississippi. let's make a theoretical case. black lives matter protesters in your home state saying we've been subpoenaed. we ain't coming. can you imagine any other situation in the criminal justice system where a prosecutor would say in advance we dent want to be too hard on them because of their associations with black lives matter. so we fear that that might radicalize them. can you imagine that being said about anyone other than trump supporters? >> well, given the double standard that people of color in my state have had to endure for quite a long time, that means that most black people who go on to jail in mississippi would come out radicalized. but that's not the case. so clearly i think merrick garland needs to rethink his position that he's credited with having. we can't have that. look, january 6, joy, was awful. it was not a movement. people saw it in realtime. they saw it with

so why is the select committee interested in steve bannon? it's simple. he's a democratic party boogie man. >> not to turn evidence about what they have of this vicious assault of american democracy. in america when you are subpoenaed to testify in court or in congress, you show up. period. >> we are here going back and forth arguing if we should continue down a path of yet another partisan investigation of questionable motives and purposes. >> as we mention what happens next to steve bannon is up to the feds. january 6th committee member jamie rascon describes the next step. >> the u.s. attorney of the district of columbia, u.s. attorney must go before the grand jury to demand an indictment and but we think it's likely given that the gravity of this matter is so overwhelming and that the facts are so clear that he just blew us off that we think the department of justice will move forward, we are not going to let anything drag on for eight months or nine months or nothing like that. >> now, the attorney general has given no indication as to whether he'll

not just steve bannon. he met with -- suggests that bannon was among several prominent support of efforts to undermine election results. the group that assembled at the willard is reported to have included members of the trump campaign's legal team. several prominent proponents of false election fraud claims that had been promoted by trump. boris epstein was there as well as roger stone, who left the hotel with bodyguards and campaign spokesperson, jason miller. someone will be unwilling to go to jail for donald trump. someone will testify to this committee about where this plan took shape and donald trump's role in it. do you have any sense of where these other individuals stand and how far they're willing to go? >> it's not clear and particularly, many of those folks who were at the willard that day are also part of very much trump's inner circle. people who are closest to him. people who you might say livelihoods are connected to being part of trump's propagating the big lie. they're totally all the way

steve bannon is a radio host. there is no way on earth any court that is rational unless, you know, donald trump himself is the judge is going to support -- this is a done deal. but not prosecuting and not giving steve bannon any consequences before is why he's grifting, claiming trump is coming back in 2022 instead of preparing to go to jail. in your view, do you think democrats made a mistake or the justice department i should say made a mistake in not being swifter and tougher on these people because they just -- they don't believe the law applies to them? >> yeah, joy, i don't think congress does oversight well. that's true of the democratic majority and former republican majority. anybody that's in session part time and while their there spending more time raising money than in committee hearings does not do over sight well. so we have to, you know, modulate our expectations. i agree on the merits with ellie and your premise but expect this to go to court. i expect this to be litigated. i expect donald trump

it is one thing if the courts compel steve bannon and the committee somehow compel steve bannon to either participate or be in trouble or be punished but getting someone to participate doesn't mean that you'll get all the records you want, the information that you want. what could come out of a former white house, a place where government records have been kept, could be much more substantial? >> of course, including not only before, number one, the commit wants to know what was -- how aware it was the former president of who was coming, what their plans were so what did he know on january 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th and lawmakers being rushed out of the capitol and the chambers themselves are under siege and what did the president do. who did he talk to? made a few phone calls to members of congress but a few key details what have trump was doing or not doing, there's still a lot of questions. >> a lot of questions, and if you look at the report that the committee put out last night detailing its efforts to get bannon to cooperate, you see just how extensive and how broad their requests are. n

will he charge steve bannon? >>> plus, president biden making a major concession tonight while negotiating another component of his spending plan. will he use the progressives over this key con investigation? >>> and proof that trump supporters are more loyal than ever. video from a trump rally that you will see to believe. let's go outfront. and good evening. i'm erin burnett. out front tonight the breaking news. we are awaiting a vote this hour by the january 6th committee to try and hold trump ally steve bannon in criminal contempt. bannon failed to comply with the committee's subpoena claiming executive privilege. now, that vote as i said going to be happening live. we are going to bring it to you as soon as it happens. you will see it live. and you will also hear from both the chairman of the committee, bennie thompson, and one of the only two republicans on the committee, vice chair liz cheney. both are going to speak live here on prime time and so you are going to see them live. of course, cheney one of on

steve bannon has refused to appear before the panel. mr trump urged former aides to reject the panel's requests. north korea has confirmed it test—fired a new submarine—launched ballistic missile, for the first time in two years. we've received these images, which we are unable to independently verify. earlier the south korean military reported that one missile had landed in waters off the coast of japan. the british government has set out a range of measures to transition to a greener economy, to try to reach its target of no net emissions of greenhouse gases by the year 2050. it comes less than two weeks before it hosts the un climate summit in glasgow. now on bbc news it's time for panorama. tonight on panorama, how social media can be toxic for women. you will be threatened physically, sexually as well as verbally. from reality tv stars to politicians, women are getting more and more online hate. i got words thrown at me, those kind of words which a man definitely wouldn't have had. people just expect you to accept the fact that

at the end of this, it is all about the committee trying to get this information from steve bannon. they also are hoping to send a message to the other individuals they would like to cooperate with the committee. they aren't messing around. they will do whatever it takes to get that information. ryan nobles, cnn, on capitol hill. >>> well, of the 11 people the committee has subpoenaed, bannon is the only one to defy the call to testify. members of the committee explain the importance of hearing from him to reconstruct the days leading up to january the 6 and to send the message the committee intends to enforce the rule of law. take a listen to this. >> we have to hear from the people who were closest to the former president at the time of january 6th and we're familiar with his thinking and can understand as liz cheney said, things we know publicly from public statements that the president, the former president was aware of these things going on around him. and, you know, made comments himself and failed to take action himself to tell people to stop and go home. >> it is blatant con

steve bannon was not in the white house for several years. his claim that he has that protection of executive privilege by the former president is even thinner than the claim, potentially, by some of the others that have been subpoenaed. >> that's right, he was a private citizen at the time under question. you know he is making this claim in order to drag out the process. it could become a legal battle of sorts, but he doesn't seem to have much credibility there according to legal experts that point out that he was nots a figure in the government in this time. >> and there is a clearly some frustration prung critics and those called by the whole insurrection at the capital that this committee, the delay, getting the committee organized, the rejection of the commission, of course, by republicans, that this is a very time consuming process. and the former president and his colleagues want to stretch this out past the midterms, even. >> it would have been time consuming even if it had been started meetly after january 6th. the reality is that th

and so therefore decided that they would vote to hold steve bannon, in contempt. the web, democrats who are worried about their sport, they were concerned that if the republicans get control at the midterm elections in 2022 or at some point afterwards, there would be a flurry of subpoenas. and that would just tie up the whole idea of the democrats trying to do any sort of business on capital hill. but in the end, they decided that the question of holding congress in contempt was much more important. and that is why the voted this now goes to the department of justice to make a decision on whether or not to charge steve bannon, mary garland, the attorney general has in the last hour said that they will study the evidence and study the case before making a final decision as thirsty bannon, he said this was a question of executive privilege that he'd been speaking to donald trump. and that it really should be that the court to decide whether or not he was protected under donald trump exercising that executive privilege. but there were those who made speeches includin

and so the steve bannon thing is becoming a circus. the donald trump thing is certainly, will be a circus and i think it will signify that this is an effort, a bipartisan effort to get to the bottom of january 6th of what happened, because it put our democracy and it continues to put our democracy in such peril. and i agree with alice. the more that they resist on this, the more that this is going to be front and center, and i don't think that that is a good messaging point for republicans. and donald trump and bannon and all of those guys continue to say that january 6th was nothing. it was a walk in the park. well, look, if they have nothing to hide,. >> there are rational republicans out there that we do have free and fair elections with and they do believe that january 6th should not have happened. we should have certified election results and they do not want to have this be the topic of conversation and there are rational republicans that say that january 6th is not what eneed to be focusing as we head into the midterms, especial

yes, it has a lot to do with steve bannon himself. it also had a lot to do with other groups of individuals they subpoenaed, demonstrating to people like mark meadows and kash patel, the group of rally organizers and jeffery clark, they're willing to do whatever it takes to get the information they are looking for and that includes taking the steps refer to the department of justice and prosecuting the individuals. the committee, this is a strong signal for them today, erin, this was a skeptic they felt they had to take. they're not messing zaaround an today they demonstrated that. >> and gloria borgers is also with me. norm, as i lay out, you can go for criminal contempt but it does not mean it's easy. it's an uphill battle. you were very involved in the house fight to go ahead and subpoena back during the impeachment hearings of don mcgahn. that fight lasted two years, it went to tocourt, trial was overy the time it was settled. this is what happens. can democrats really fight this way and time is not on their s side? >> erin, thank

so, you know, they say that this is the most extreme case with steve bannon. and when the cooperation or the engagement starts and say that they are going to be willing to move in the same direction with mark meadows and kash patel, but they haven't reached that point yet. so they are hoping for potentially full cooperation from them. i don't know if they will get it though. >> and susan page, we both covered bill clinton in the white house and since. and we understand off of the white house gaggle with the reporters on air force one that president biden plans to call bill clinton later in the day. not surprising that he would be calling someone he knew so well, a fellow democrat in the hospital. but that is at least the word. but here you have bill clinton who has been really active with the foundation and really focused from everything that we've been able to tell from the schedule, focused on a lot of this work. was at a foundation meeting. hillary clinton was there. and felt fatigued. and this is another health problem. >> yeah. of course he is 75 years ol

something that steve bannon never did. but the point at which it's clear that they're just playing games or they don't intend to participate, again, we will go back to the full panoply of sanctions we have for people who are disobeying a subpoena of the u.s. congress. it has the same authority as a subpoena from a court. >> yeah. i had so much i wanted to ask you just to make sure before i move on. so there is no contingency plan in this investigation to drag out if republicans take over the house in 2022. right? >> no. we're moving as quickly as possible. we already have tons of information. i mean, we want as complete a picture as possible. we owe the american people a complete and comprehensive report under our authorizing constitution what happened on january 6 and the different lines of attack coming against the u.s. congress, what was the attempt to overthrow the election, what was the attempt to activate different parts of the government to act in league with the insurrection, and what do we need to do to prevent th

he pardons bannon. no wonder steve bannon feels that he can go on with the grift. it's not donald trump's justice department anymore, it's the justice department that believes it serves the public interest, not the interest of the person of the president. and if steve bannon does not have that message, yet he is not paying attention. >> chairman adam schiff, thank you for starting us off tonight. i really appreciated. >> thank you. >> chairman schiff's new book is midnight in washington, it is how we almost lost our democracy, and still could. and coming up. the american medical association has filed an appears court brief in opposition to the new texas abortion law the attorney rule that brief, shannon zeldin, will join us next. n zeldin will join us next. will join us next. at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, you're an owner with access to financial advice, tools and a personalized plan that helps you build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner. this isn't just a walk up the stairs. vanguard. when you have an irregular heartbeat, it's

steve bannon committed a crime today, people have to understand that. because it's important that people obey -- whether it's from a court or -- these are orders of law and you have to comply with him. he committed a crime and so we've referred him for prosecution on criminal contempt. now that might not mean a lot to him, if you've got millions of dollars and trump donald trump pardoned him after he took those dollars from followers -- that he promised to used to build the wall of mexico but he just kept it. but the messages got to go out to anybody who's taking about going down that trump ban in path, that we mean business. as adam kinzinger said. the majority of people who've been subpoenaed bias, or by the department of justice and the various prosecutions, have complied. they understand that this was a terrible attack on the united states government, a terrible attack on congress, in order to overturn our presidential election. and they want to cooperate or at least they understand that they've got a legal obligation to do it. but the point is not

lastly, steve bannon is a figure with a national profile of his own. he's been prominent in far right circles for many years before donald trump even appeared on the national scene, worked on his campaign, worked in the trump white house, has been a strong supporter of the trump message and the whole maga theme vision for the country ever since. >> so matt miller, take us through some of the history here of criminal contempt referrals for refusing to comply with congressional subpoenas. in the past, the doj has declined to prosecute. why is this time different? >> there's one very important difference. in the past when these criminal contempt referrals have come, they have been for officials in the executive branch for whom the sitting president has made an assertion of executive privilege. and doj's long time policy is, if the president, the sitting president, asserts executive privilege and an official declines to testify because of that, which a sitting official almost always will, the department of justice will respect the president's wishes and no