breaking news in the january 6th investigation into former president donald trump. special counsel jack smith plans to present evidence at trump's trial next year that his continued support for capital rioters showed he intended to inspire violence on january six as part of a conspiracy he led to overturn the 2020 election. >> let's get more now on this with cnn's chief legal affairs correspondent, paula reid and former federal prosecutor, renato mary adi. tell us what we're hearing here and why dissociative again. >> this is fascinating because this is the first time the special counsel has really laid out exactly how they are going to present large parts of their case before a jury next march. they listed all the specific evidence that they intend to present. at a high-level, they are going to argue that, look, since january 6th, former president trump has continued to show public support for the capitol rioters. for example, he has suggested that, if he is reelected, he could offer them pardons. he has called them, quote, hostages. prosecutors argue that this shows that he conspired to incite violence. they say that this shows motive and intent to commit federal crimes. they continue to go down a list of other specific pieces of evidence they want to present. for example, they take it way back before january 6th, in the 2020 presidential debate. you may remember than president trump was asked to denounce the extremist group the proud boys. instead of denouncing them, he instead appeared to call it to them publicly. saying, quote, stand back and stand by. according to this new filing, they argue that many members of the proud boys embraced that. we know, many of them were active participants in the attack on the capitol. they also, they note, refused to commit to the peaceful transition of power out of the 2020 presidential election. and then prosecutor say after the election, he was putting pressure on state officials and attacking anyone who refused to agree that there was fraud in the election, including his then vice president, mike pence. they point to the fact that people he identified were subject to attacks and harassment. one last thing i thought was interesting was a taken all the way, back over a decade, to 2012. they say he is a long established pattern of claiming fraud whenever there is an election result he did not like. this plan, this is effectively putting the former president and his lawyers on notice about what they want to present their case. it does have to be approved by the judge overseeing this case, judge tanya check-in. >> renata, over to you. we have seen trump's team indifferent cases make the argument that trump was within his purview, acting legally on january 6th because of the first amendment. i imagine, when you are visualizing the defense from trump's team, they're likely going to repeat that type of defense. no? does that make sense? >> absolutely. that is exactly why we are seeing the special counsel look at this evidence. the defense has to be, if you are on the trump team, that he just made a speech, constitutionally protected, first amendment protected speech and was shocked to learn that people were engaging in violence and attacking police officers and storming the capital and destroying property. that was surprising to him, he didn't intend for them to do those things. the evidence that the special counsel is going to present is going to show that, despite that, trump hasn't distanced himself from these people. he hasn't said, well, all these people attacked the capitol violently and her people and actually resulted in deaths, some deaths, i have nothing to do with those people. i am shocked and abhorred by their behavior. instead, he has embraced them, called them patriots, suggested pardoning many of them. he has, in many ways, lifted them up. that is precisely why the special counsel can use this evidence, they want to undercut the defense -- >> do you expect that his lawyers at some point, if they were worth their salt, would have said to him, you are opening yourself up to liability here if you do not distance yourself? if you do not condemn this. rather than showing approval for this behavior. >> 100%. you have the nail on the head. if i was defending this case, i would absolutely be telling my client to keep his mouth shut. i will just say, as someone who defends white-collar cases across the country, one of the challenges is, what i will say, client management, so to speak. for a lot of clients, they understand that, oh my goodness, i'm under federal indictment, this is such a serious matter. i'm going to keep my mouth shut, listen to you. others do, not donald trump of course infamously does not listen to lawyers. he is running the show and i think he is really, ultimately, hurting him self more than anything by his continued behavior. his behavior here and that he's had since january 6th is not consistent with somebody who is against the violence of the capital. it is more consistent with someone who encourages and embraces that violence. >> just given his track, record i mentioned there are few plans more difficult to manage than the former president. walk us through where this fits in the broader context of the case of the special counsel is building. >> it's interesting because, when we are covering these investigations over the past couple, years we weren't sure if former president trump would be charged related to january 6th. seemed like a much more obvious case down in mar-a-lago, the classified documents investigation. easier charge, easier to prove. but here, we are getting a better understanding of exactly how prosecutors intend to support their case. of, course this is going to be the first federal criminal case in a series of two. subsequently, he is scheduled to go to trial on the mar-a-lago documents case as well. here, they're laying out exactly how they're going to present this to a jury. as i, noted they are going to go all the way back over, decade back to 2012, and lay out how he has a pattern of claiming fraud when he doesn't like the outcome of an election. they're going to talk about the statements that he did and would not make ahead of the election, what he did following the election. they're going to lay out those pattern of behavior and they argue that particularly the support, continued, unrelenting support for the capitol attackers, that this all helps support their argument that he is engaged in multiple conspiracy counts. and of course, his efforts to obstruct official proceeding. this is a really interesting insight into what we are going to see you in this case goes to trial in march. >> as paula was saying, this is up to the judge, if she is going to allow the prosecution to proceed with this. any indication to you of which direction she will go? >> i think she will absolutely present this evidence. this is core evidence of the defendants intent and motive. essentially, the argument that the defense will have is that this is irrelevant, going to prejudice him in some way. under the rules of evidence, the only prejudice that is considered his fair prejudice. i am imagine that judge chutkan is going to find that this is highly prohibitive, highly relevant evidence of trump's state of mind. it is very likely this evidence will be presented in trial. >> adding a very big new twist to all of this. renato, paula, thank you to vote, we appreciate it. we have breaking news now out of capitol hill. senator tommy tuberville, republican from alabama, saying he is lifting most of his hold on hundreds of top military promotions. we have cnn's lauren fox with us on this. lauren, you are at a gaggle with the senator, a scrum of reporters, trying to get some information from him. what did he say? >> yeah, this was an announcement that senator tuberville made to his colleagues in the republican caucus lunch. the big news here is that he is releasing the majority of his holds that he has had now for more than ten months on hundreds of military promotions. specifically, he is dropping his holds on all three star military promotions and below. that means he's going to be holding up just about a dozen nominations on four star promotions and above. that, obviously, takes considerably less time to work its way through the united states senate within the hundreds of nominations that he was holding up. we pressed him on whether or not he had any regrets about going through this process, given the fact that he did not get what he wanted in terms of the department of defenses policy that allowed them to reimburse servicemen and women who had to travel out of state to seek abortions if that services not offered in the state that they are living in. senator tuberville said he didn't have any regrets, he argued that this was primarily just a draw with democrats. here he was. >> senator tuberville, do you have any regrets that you didn't achieve exactly what you set out to do? that the policy is still in place? >> it was pretty much a draw, they didn't get what we, wanted we didn't get what we wanted. when they change the rules, it is hard to win. they change to the nba, rules we didn't get to fight for it in the senate. it's just unfortunate that the american people didn't get a voice. >> reporter: [inaudible] >> what just happened? i'm releasing everybody. i still have a hold on 11 four star generals. everybody else is completely released from me. i think a few other people got holds, one or two or three people. but other than, that it is over. thank you. >> obviously, major news there from senator tommy tuberville. he was being pressed by many of his republican colleagues to back off of these holds after months because they argued that it was affecting military readiness. they argued they were on the brink of potentially changing the senate rules so that they could pass a large number of those nominations in block on the senate floor. all of those factors lead to senator tuberville backing off today. but again, he said he had no regrets. pressed specifically on what his message was to those military families who have been left in limbo over the last several months, he said simply, thank you for your service. breonna? >> patients as well. frustration for many of them as well. very quickly, i wanted to clarify and something that he said there as your questioning him. he said he is holding 11 four star generals but he also said, is that right, that he may still hold a few others besides the four stars? >> what he is saying there is that other senators always have the ability to hold up individual nominees as they see fit. he didn't provide any answers about which senators might have specific concerns about specific nominees. but, again a senator can't ultimately stop anomaly for moving forward, breonna. just the reality, that because he was holding up so nominations, it was basically impossible for the senate to get through any other business if they were to move through those nominations one by one. if senators have holds on individual nominees, that would take much less time to work its way through the senate, breonna, than the holds that tuberville had. >> still would be extraordinary to go one by one, through them even if it's just a small number. lauren fox live for us on the hill, great hustling there to catch up with the senator. thank you for that. let's bring in now retired lieutenant general mark hertling, cnn military analyst. how are you reacting to this lifting of most of the holds? actually, general, hold on a second, let's go to the pentagon for the briefing there. >> -- he has suggested he would continue to hold for star nominations, what problems does that create? >> certainly we are encouraged by the news and we will continue to stay engaged with senator tuberville and the senate directly to urge that all the holds on all general flag officer nominations be lifted, to include those nominated for four star. as you know, there been a part of 455 nominations concerning 451 general and flag officers at the senate for consideration. in terms of the number of four stars, there would be at least 11 four stars that would be impacted by those continue to hold. and all of those positions, obviously, our key senior leadership positions to include the vice chief of the various services. the commander of u.s. specific fleet, the commander of pacific air forces, commander of air combat command as well as the commander of united states northern command, cyber command and space command. clearly vital and critical organizations, all of which require experienced senior leaders in those positions. >> reporter: does this create any complications as some of the people move up into the three star jobs and some move into other positions? this is create complications for people in the same post? what happens with those who are nominated? >> for, that is something we will continue to work through. this is obviously developing. but clearly, something that the department has experience in in terms of managing general and flag officers. but to your point, it is not just flicking a switch and suddenly everyone moves into these new positions. you have to consider things like when people can move, where the people that are moving out of the positions are going. all of that has to be carefully orchestrated and done in a way that enables us to continue to conduct the operations without having significant impact. not only on the mission but also on the individual family members. that will be something, clearly, that will continue to work through and have more information on in the coming days. jennifer? >> reporter: what was accomplished by senator tuberville's hold? >> i would have to refer you to senator tuberville the talk about that. clearly, from a department of defense standpoint, we have a mission to do and we require senior leaders in key positions to help lead and conduct the operations of the department of defense. so, i'll just leave it at that. >> can you be more specific about the impact it actually had in terms of the officers and their families? what impact it have? >> clearly, again, as evidenced by everything that is going on in the world right now, we have a very important mission in terms of defending this nation. anytime you add a level of uncertainty into the chain of command, it creates an unnecessary friction and has an impact on readiness as we try to stay focused on the mission, which we are going to do. this department is very focused on a daily basis on getting that mission done. when it is unclear whether or not your senior leaders are going to be in place at the time and place they are needed, that of course creates unnecessary friction and does have impact on readiness. >> reporter: was any agreement made with senator tuberville? what changed? >> i would have to refer you to senator tuberville for that. matt? >> i've a question about racketeering. we know about the 1:30 that struck ran back militants interior after -- >> reporter: all right, you are listening there to the pentagon briefing, where we are hearing a reaction to this news that senator tommy tuberville is going to be lifting his holds on almost all of these promotions of general and flag officers. with the exception of four, pardon me, at least 11 four star generals. i want to bring back in retired general mark hertling to talk about this. what is your reaction to this news? because almost all of these holes now going away, but he is holding on to almost a dozen and arguably very important roles here. >> yeah, breonna, it is interesting. i give the general path writer kudos because he was extremely professional and basically said what an acting, serving officer would say. that, is they are still working with senator tuberville and we don't know what he meant to do. i'll tell, you from a retired perspective, this was almost a year's worth of performative politics on the part of the senator. that restricted the capability of the united states military to do its job. that harm national security. that was cruel to the families of these officers and which, really, generated a lack of faith and a lack of trust between the civilian authorities and the military that they oversee. this was just something that a senator decided to do and it hurt the military. it hurt individuals and their families. >> reporter: one of the things i noticed was that it seems to reveal, on senator tuberville's part, a lack of understanding of how the military works. he would, say these are the generals who are running the military and, obviously, he had an issue at least initially. it seems like it, evolved whatever's issue was, overtime. but his issue initially was the abortion travel policy. that is the purview of the civilian leaders of the military. i've talked with people who were in committee with him who say he gets confused over pretty basic things about the military, the difference between space force and space command. as we, know one of the hold still is going to be on space command. why is it so important that someone in his role has a better understanding of how these things work? >> he is a civilian in a civilian authority role above the military. the military is controlled by our civilian authorities. that's why you don't see a lot of the active serving general speaking up against him. they're his bosses, they represent the people who are truly our bosses. not individual senators put those they represent. breonna, from the very beginning, senator tuberville has been insulting and condescending to the military. he has, shown even though he said on several occasions, i know more about the military than anybody. if he did, he would understand how promotion levels are determined in the executive branch for three and four star generals and all flag officers. and he doesn't understand that. he's an irresponsible position. even after he was condemned by his fellow senators for doing the things he was doing, he still continued on. and as you saw with lauren, approaching him at the car just now, he still wasn't understanding what he has not accomplished by doing this and being cruel to active duty flag officers. it is just unfortunate that we have this lack of understanding by the civilian authorities on what the military's, with the military does and how you affect them by these arbitrary moves, which senator tuberville has been doing. and as you say, his beef is with the policy. his beef isn't with the members who are serving in the military. but unfortunately, they're the ones who have had to suffer that degradation. breonna, i'll tell you, i have personal issues with this. i was once on a list with about ten other officers that was held up by a senate staffer. the senator didn't even know that it was being held up. it required one individual on that list who was probably one of the best officers i've ever worked with after literally retire because he went over his retirement age while he was waiting for the list to be published. these are the kinds of things that are harmful and hurtful, not only to the officers but to their families as well who are traveling around and trying to support the military members. as you well know. >> reporter: he said it was a draw, i think it is pretty clear he's being generous to himself. we should be, clear some of his republican colleagues, also very much opposed this policy he was opposing. that's not surprising. but they took major issues as well with the way that he was handling his opposition. general, great to have your perspective, here thank you so much for joining us. >> thanks, breonna. >> reporter: according to the washington post, there have been more deadly mass shootings this year than any years that leads 2006. two senators sponsoring a new bill to tackle gun violence will join us next. the nation reached a grim milestone over the we