no power? no problem. introducing storm-ready wifi. now you can stay reliably connected through power outages with unlimited cellular data and up to 4 hours of battery back-up to keep you online. only from xfinity. home of the xfinity 10g network. tonight on three 60 a new word about how we're gonna use in new on the prosecutors plan to use the former presidents embrace of january six defendants in court, we'll talk about that and more with liz cheney, whose new book has plenty to say about donald trump and the threat he poses a free look. it all style, exclusive new reporting's about how much longer israel might continue high intensity crown operations in gaza, which today saw some of the heaviest fighting for war. plus, what key voters in a key swing state have to say about their choices for 2024. john king finds out in the latest edition of our special series of reports, all over the map. good evening, thanks for joining us again. our guest tonight here within studio is liz cheney, former wyoming republican congresswoman and vice chair of the house january six colo r select committee. our conversation comes at the end of the day that sought to potentially significant january six related developments. the first, involving the evidence the prosecutors in the federal election subversion case want jurors to see. the second, on what house speaker mike johnson wants to keep americans from seeing, and seem to be released video of the attack on congress. and my congress -- congresswoman cheney is going to start in a moment. first, the latest on both of those stories from cnn chief legal affairs correspondent paula reid. so paula, what are federal prosecutors in washington signaling tonight? >> anderson, they're giving us a preview of their federal election interference case, and exactly how they intend to use trump's own words against him, in a court of law. now there really can emphasize how trump's continued support for those who attacked the capital is evidence of a conspiracy. in this filing they said, quote, trump continues to, quote, openly and proudly support individuals who criminally participated in obstructing the congressional certification that day. including by suggesting that he will pardon them if reelected. even, as he is conceding that he had legally to influence their actions during the attack. now they also say they want to show the jury things that trump said in the lead up to election day, including his refusal to denounced the extremist group the proud boys, and his refusal to commit to a peaceful transition of power. anderson, they insist that all of this is evident of his intent to get his supporters, like the proud boys, to attack the capitol and undermined the results of the election, when it didn't go his way. and interestingly, they are even going to try and take it all the way back to 2012. over a decade ago, and when trump has repeatedly tried to claim fraud when elections had alchemy that he didn't like. and prosecutors say look, this laid the foundation for what he tried to do in 2020. now this is their plan, but all of this has to be approved by a. judge >> what did speaker johnson say about the soon to be released january 6th footage? >> this was interesting. the speaker said that he wants to release this footage in the interest of transparency, but is insisting that the faces of the people in the mob be blurred to, quote, protect them from the justice department. anderson, that's an odd thing to say, because federal investigators have the raw footage, they've used them t o prosecute hundreds of people. now the speaker subsequently backtracked. in a statement, saying instead he is trying to prevent all forms of retaliation from non government actors. but again, online sleuths the, public, non government actors, have it into fight hundreds of people in that footage. and the justice department has even asked for their help in identifying others. of course, the speaker was actively involved in efforts to undermine the outcome of the election, but he says he wants to release this footage so that people can, quote, do their own research on the capitol attack. >> tolerate, thanks very much. joining us now is liz cheney, former wyoming republican congressman, -- and someone who might easily still hold both titles tonight, except that she stood up for democracy in the wake of january 6th up to and including in her role as vice chair of the january six committee, which center part from the former president of course , who is running again and most of her fellow republicans who all the cast her out. her new blockbuster book out today,'s oath and honor, a memoir and warning, the final words in that title our warnings that speak to the moment -- . thank you so much for being with us. this is not only a fascinating, terrifying book, and a warning as you say. it is also a really well written, captivating story, that just takes you from the first pages, and gallops you through the last many years of the descent of our democracy. did you write a lot about mike johnson in the book? obviously we were writing this, he wasn't the speaker, he did know he was going to be the speaker. talk a little bit about first of all, this idea that he wants to blur the faces, what does that tell? you >> well i think first of all with respect to the videotape, the department of justice already has these tapes. and i think that we are experiencing a situation where the speaker, speaker johnson, is somehow attempting to suggest that there is something in these tapes that would change the facts of what happened. there is nothing in the tapes that could change the fafact of what hapappened thatat day, orcd change t the violentnt assault.. and you u know, i hahave calledn him m to releasese the tapeses. wewe need to m make sure o obvi, that we e protect ththe security issues of the capital. bubut at this s point, whahat's happenening, i donon't know whwy hehe's draggining his feetet afr having proclaimed he's going to release them, and he ought to release. >> also this idea of blurring the faces, as you said, the tapes, the law enforcement already has. i mean it seems it's kabuki theater to january six defendants, and their supporters and others, that he is statanding up t to protect t, when in n fact it acactually hao purprpose. > yeah, andnd it's a peperfet examample of thehe lengths to wh he will go, even in his rhetoric. i mean he actually said to protect people from the department of justice, and at the same time he proclaims that he is representing the court quote, rule of law party. so, i think the game has to stop, and if he has to release tape, he often released tapes. you >> know, he although he is not well-known on the world stage, he certainly portrayed himself as this very devout and very earnest and thoughtful person. that is not, he seems like a slippery character, in the pages of your book. i mean the reality of him behind the scenes, it is very different. >> yeah, and i certainly wouldn't question anybody's fate. but, i i mean, i knew him well, we were friends, we are elected at the same time. i believe him to be somebody who was honorable. but then sadly, i washed through the whole process, first of the -- brief that he pushed members of the house to sign on, which was constitutionally infirm, and the supreme court. >> let's talk about that. i mean, he sent out a letter to members of congress, essentially saying do this for president trump. and the arguments he was making, according to you i mean, they just weren't sound, legally. >> yeah, and he was claiming and telling members that the brief itself was just simply an effort to convince the courts to hear this case. when in fact, the brief itself made serious charges, alleged activity that was unconstitutional, it alleged that people in the states had conducted themselves in ways that were unconstitutional. and, many of these allegations, even though courts across the country in each of these states had already heard the east facts, that already determined that what the brief was asserting was not true. and, i also think there are serious ethical problems. somebody who is a member of the bar, asserting in front of the court facts known to them about which they don't have any. >> he was also saying that he was a constitutional scholar, and that there was an implied threat in his brief. >> yeah, and i heard from a number of our colleagues who said wait a minute, he is taking down names and making a list for donald trump to look at. is this in fact a threat? >> he denied that it was, but the activity continued into the objections over the electoral votes as well. and i wasn't the only one who was raising a red flag about his activities. kevin mccarthy's own senior counsel was doing the same thing, and she effect said that she had talked to him, and he knew that what he was doing didn't have any basis of the constitution. >> and you said you're right, mike johnson and the republican leaders have played a destructive role, the -- revealed se of mike i had not seen before. he appears especially as susceptible to flattery to trump, and aspire to be anywhere in trump's orbit. he was telling our college he was a constitutional law expert, while advocating positions that were constitutionally infirm. i mean, do you believe he poses a threat to the integrity of the 2024 presidential election? >> i do think that if we come to a place where he is the speaker of the house, where the republicans are in the majority on january 6th in 2025, there are real questions about whether or not that majority will do what is required under the constitution, for example if an election would be thrown into the house, or even going through the process of counting electoral votes. end up going to the house, where the house would've determine where you think the republicans in the house are not responsible enough to do what is right, and what is legal. >> i mean, i think the lesson that we have seen over the course of the last couple of years is that this group of elected republicans can't be counted on to defend the constitution. and it's a very sad thing for me to, say it's a very dangerous place for the country to be. but, that is what we have seen based on the actions last several years. >> i mean, what would get this fever dreams among the republicans to stop, and to go back to being a party that wants to actually govern and get stuff done, and be part of the fabric of democracy? >> i think we have to have the majority of the american people who are not part of sort of the cult of personality around donald trump. there is a portion of the party that absolutely is not going to be convinced to move away from him, but it's a much smaller number than the vast majority of republicans, democrats, and independents combined. and those of us who understand the danger have to be committed to working across party lines, to protect against it. >> kevin mccarthy, i mean in the details that you have about kevin mccarthy in this book, we reported last week that mccarthy told you that his trip down to mar-a-lago, where he went to kiss the ring, was that trump was depressed and not eating. the former president has responded the other day saying actually that he was angry and eating too much. you don't buy either of those explanations? >> i mean, i certainly didn't buy kevin's explanation. trump's, maybe that's the first truth he's ever spoken, i don't know. but the bottom line is, what mccarthy, what he was really doing was when big donors cut off donations to the republicans after the insurrection, he needed money. and, the only place he could get money was to go see trump and get access to his list of donors. but of course, that meant going down there and helping him to begin to wipe away the stain of what he had done. >> why do you think so many i mean, lindsey graham who said he was done with trump, he's out that night. and then, i remember somebody yelled at him in the airport, i think on the way back down to south carolina, and then all of the sudden he is playing golf with the former president. >> yeah, i don't understand it. i mean, i think there's a lot of years are going to be spent on psychoanalyze-ing the number of members of my party. and, i think the danger that we face though as a people, they are not willing to accept the is really extreme things that donald trump is claiming he will do. or not guessing about what he will do. >> do you think, do they actually believe these lies? >> no, i think the number of people who believe the lies in elected office is very small. i think in the house of republicans, it's probably in single digits. but, you have obviously a far larger group of people, some who have determined that they are going to be fully on board and aggressively supporting and enabling trump, and a lot of others who have said we are just going to look at the other way. and that's really dangerous, because then people around the country start to say well, it must not be that bad if you don't have that many republicans speaking out against it. and. >> your dad called you just before the joint session of congress on january 6th, he had been listening to trump's speech at the -- what did he say? >> he called me, i was in the cloakroom of the house floor, working on remarks that i was going to give. and he called me, and he asked me if i was watching this speech. and i said i wasn't, because i was working on the remarks. and he told me that trump had said we have to get rid of the liz cheney's of the world, and he said to me you are in danger. and, he said we need to talk about whether or not, given that he has just done this, that he is just targeted you specifically, what that means for you going on to the house floor, what that means for you in terms of speaking against the objections. through the course of our conversation, it was clear we both knew i couldn't not proceed because of this threat from donald trump. but, you know, you can imagine sort of the emotion of the moment, to have my dad calling me to say the president has just targeted me, in a way that put me at risk. >> do you understand the bill barr, who has very loyal to the president while he was in office, and then clearly has had a change of heart. and yet saying, not saying categorically that he would not vote for the former president. >> i guess i have a couple of views about the. i think there are a number of people, including bill barr, who were around the president, who stopped the president from doing far worse. bill barr certainly is one of the people who told the president repeatedly that what he was saying was untrue about fraud in the election, and said publicly. but i don't think that you can acknowledge and recognize the facts and the mountain of evidence that points to what donald trump did, and his direct involvement in attempting to seize power and overturn an election, and then turn around and say that you would vote for him again. i think people really do have to come to grips with the fact that these are inconsistent, and when you say that you will vote for him despite what he's already done, you are helping to make sure that he continues as a force in the politics of this nation, and that's dangerous. >> you know, we all see historical events, movies and think of how could there be people who would work for that government, and do these things? there was a lot of people saying well, if trump never got a, who would ever work for a second term of donald trump. there are actually a lot of people, and some of them are very smart people, who are willing to do that. i mean that's a real danger, because they've learned from the mistakes of the first administration, of the first of his first term, and they know what to do now. >> right, and you won't have some of the good people to stop him. and, he has said people like mike flynn will be the national security adviser potentially, jeff clark, possibly the attorney. >> mike flynn is like selling t-shirts, and making outrageous statements at conventions. >> ride, i mean those are the people who will be around him, if he were to be elected again. the other thing that people have to realize is what it means if the president of the united states won't enforce the rulings of our courts. and that is absolutely what he said he will do. he has gone to war with the rule of law. and a president who won't enforce the law, creates a situation where things just unravel. and he will have people around him who will help him do it, he will i am sure offer pardons to people, if they are concerned about their own political liability. -- do you think >> do you think he would pardon january 6th? >> certainly, i think he has been very clear repeatedly about his glorification of that day, and again the republicans were almost unanimous in the days just after january six, recognizing that he bore responsibility, and he had to be held accountable. and, very quickly, that began to dissipate, that unanimity the. and now, we have an effort underway to whitewash, it including what you saw today from the speaker of the house. >> according to a poll report, president biden praised what he called your powerful voice at a fund-raiser in boston today. he also said that if trump wasn't running, i'm not sure i would be running, that was a quote. you haven't ruled out a third party run, you've also said that you are not going to do anything that would help donald trump. if you were to determine that your candidacy would take more votes away from trump then it would from biden, will that be a catalyst to get into the race? >> i am going to look at this over the next couple of months, through the lens of, how do we stop donald trump. and on some level, it's not about me, it's not about what i'm going to do or not to do. i look at it very much from the perspective of right now, absolutely we have to keep our eye on the goal of stopping him. i think there is a huge amount of work to be done after this election cycle, whether it's rebuilding the republican party, which increasingly looks like maybe an impossible task, or helping to begin a new party that is very focused on what the republican party used to stand for before this cult of personality. but right now, and in this election cycle, i will do whatever i have to do to make sure donald ford is not elected. >> how concerned are you about a third party candidates who are out there already, you've got a? >> look i think we are at a moment where the possibility of a third party run is more, it's something we have to consider more than we ever have before, because of the threat that trump poses. but i also think we have to ensure that at some point, we are unified against him, and that goes back to what we were talking about before, that it can't be a partisan issue. it has to be a situation where we say, i don't care what your view is on this issue or that issue, or never the big policy issue is. if you care about the constitution who defends it, we have to work together on that. >> what do you say to the vast number of republicans who believe trump's recent messaging that it is joe biden who poses the greatest risk to democracy? >> i think that the overwhelming majority of republicans understand that that's disinformation, that that's a lie. that's been trump's method of operating. he knows that it is a real threat to his political success if people recognize that he himself is trying to unravel democracy. and so, i think he is projecting, he is trying to turn that threat around, but i don't think that that will work. >> you've also said you don't think that trump would willingly leave office after a second term. you said if voters return him to the white house, there may not be many more elections to vote in. i mean, the pushback is that that is alarmist, it's hyperbolic, there are institutional guardrails that would preven