nevada. >> bill: we'll try to get a fair debate here soon. we'll see what happens in nevada on tuesday. thanks. >> thanks. >> dana: house committee investigating the january 6 riot at the u.s. capitol will soon hold its second in a series of public hearings today. they plan to focus on president trump's claims of voter fraud and efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. welcome to a new hour of "america's newsroom." i'm dana perino. good morning. >> bill: i'm bill hemmer. that hearing delayed a bit as one witness, former trump campaign manager can't testify. he has a family emergency. won't testify today we should say. lawmakers plan to present evidence aimed at showing president trump spread false information to cast doubt on the election. what democrats are calling the big lie. protests take place outside the u.s. supreme court less than a week after the assassination attempt targeting justice brett kavanaugh. an event largely ignored by the networks. brit hume last hour with dana and me pointing out the double standard at play. >> the broadcast networks have placed themselves, by the way they cover things, at the service of one party, the democratic party. we have one very real threat against brett kavanaugh and the possibility of further threats against amy coney barrett and perhaps others. this is a big deal or should be. the fact that it merits so little coverage should tell people all they need to know about what kind of news divisions and what kind of attitude these networks have. >> bill: we'll get into that this hour as we await. with us a great group. martha maccallum, anchor of the "the story". katie pavlich, jonathan turley, and marie harf former state department spokesman. thank you for being here. i'll start with the legal mind, professor turley, what do you expect today? >> well, it seems like they will use today again to try to drive home this point that president trump really knew he lost the election but was still pushing this narrative and pushing the effort not to certify the election. the question there is a disconnect. in the first day they talked about an attempted coup and how this was criminal conduct linking the white house. they haven't quite made that nexus yet. i think most people agree with the criticism about the election results but the democrats are suggesting that they have much more than that. obviously that's something that we have been discussing for two years. but today's witnesses are primarily going to be focusing on what they presumed the president really knew and that he was pushing what they considered to be a false narrative. what many considered to be a false narrative. the question is what does that actually prove in terms of what was promised with these new hearings? >> dana: martha, to that point, this is not something that is a surprise. this is an actual conversation going on since the election, since november of 2020. going into march -- january of 2021 and your leading up to january 6th. we heard from the committee when they had their prime time hearing last week they showed the testimony of bill barr the former attorney general and the president's daughter ivanka trump saying they believed the election was not stolen and i think the committee will try to drive that home this morning? >> i think that's right, dana. i think that they will continue to show that they believe that the president was lying about something that he knew and that that misinformation was used to stimulate and foment what we saw on january 6th. the question is whether or not they can make that link. you can also go back and break down the president's statements that day. a lot of legal scholars and jonathan turley can speak to this and has in the past say incitement is a very difficult thing to prove especially given the fact the president told people to go there peacefully. we heard a lot of testimony whether or not the president what should have been done to stop what was going on to the extent he was capable of and how much of an effort he made there. i really think that this is really all about 2024. obviously the members of this committee feel it is an important event to go back through. on the other hand, you have the department of justice that has brought over 800 people -- arrested over 800 people and have incarcerated 80 or that's the total number so far. some of them have served and some will serve time for this. we had an impeachment process that went through at the end of president trump's term with regard to this. so i think you will get a lot of americans who believe this is well-covered ground and i think the reason to go back there is in large part political because they are afraid on the democrat side he will run again. >> bill: the point you are making leads us to a question will the hearings be effective? if so, to what degree? let's bring if katie pavlich to address this. 20 million viewers over six or seven networks thursday night. you will have six hearings, maybe more, katie, before this is all over. by comparison, one nba game had 11.5 million viewers. how effective could this be in the end? how do you view that? >> well, of course it depends on who is watching and whether they've already made up their mind what they think happened on january 6th and who is responsible. martha's is right when she talks about the politics of this. unfortunately the 20 million people watching are seeing a very one-sided committee hearing that is not one that is based on norms of capitol hill. one that has both sides properly represented. one that has pushback and questioning on both sides of the witnesses. that is something that should concern all americans in terms of the precedent being set with this corrupt-style hearing that is very different than the process we've seen on capitol hill before. the questions that aren't being answered or asked throughout the process so far as we saw last week are how did this occur at the capitol in the first place? how is it that the capitol was able to be broken into? how is it after 9/11 with all the funding that went into the department of homeland security and making sure these targets were given some security, how is it that people were able to get into the capitol and breach that building? what was the process with nancy pelosi, for example, speaker pelosi, the mayor of washington, d.c. those questioned aren't being asked and answered. if they're interested in preventing something like this from happening ever again those are key questions that need to be asked and answered. >> dana: good to have you on the show, marie. two questions, one is to what katie is saying. would the committee have been more i guess considered more credible if they had allowed the republicans who wanted to be on the committee to be on it? that will be a question they'll have to deal with. those republicans won't be on the committee but making statements outside the committee room and media elsewhere. the other thing i wanted to mention. i saw dan pfeifer, he had the point that this hearing is not just a look back but is dealing with ongoing issues. he tried to list several people that he thought were trying to continue what the democrats are calling the big lie into even gubernatorial races they're running on that issue in pennsylvania. >> well dana, first there are republicans on this committee. liz cheney will probably likely could pay a very high political cost for this. the idea this committee is politically beneficial is not necessarily true in the mid-terms. you can't have people sitting on the committee when they're part of the people being investigated. members of congress, we know, because of the committee's work texting with the white house, actively promoting the big lie and asking the white house to keep promoting it as well trying to find a legal path quite frankly where there wasn't one, dana. and so i think there are two republicans on this committee and i think that's important going forward. there are a lot of questions this committee will answer. of course, january 6th did not happen in a vacuum. that's why so much of this history, what did donald trump know on election night? when was he told in those days and weeks between election night and january 6th that he lost? that's important context and important historical information to have. and finally to dan pfeifer's point it is an ongoing threat. we've seen far right extremist groups arrested just this week trying to interrupt a pride parade in idaho. this groups, the same groups that attacked the capitol are trying to foment unrest across the country. on the republican side a number of now mainstream republican nominees for positions that are up this november, for example in pennsylvania, the gubernatorial nominee, they embraced the big lie and they go further than donald trump. you have republicans running across the country, dana, pledging to not adhere to the will of the voters in upcoming elections because of this big lie that started on election night and continued through january 6th. it is an ongoing threat. >> dana: just to be clear, the group that was arrested outside the pride event in idaho, i understand that you are saying it's the same type of group as oath keepers but they were not in connection -- no connection saying president trump urged them to do that activity. >> no, i was talking about the future threat. president trump encouraged his supporters and these groups on january 6 and seen it with our own two eyes. in terms of the ongoing threat, these are the same groups donald trump supported and winked and nodded to and gave energy and air to online. these groups have now spun off. we see them continue to threaten communities across the country and so it is an ongoing threat that is bigger than january 6th. >> bill: joining our coverage now andy mccarthy. welcome back getting the full work out of you today. kevin mccarthy it should be pointed out offered republican members to sit on this panel and was rejected by nancy pelosi. some are suggesting republicans were wrong sided not to pursue some sort of independent investigation but you have dealt with legal trials all your professional life and would it not perhaps be more interesting to viewers if you had, let's say, a prosecution and a defense presentation of sorts during a hearing like this so people could debate it among themselves? it might actually draw more interest. >> if that is what you were really interested in, which is drawing people in, obviously the tension of a confrontation between different perspectives is what is interesting. the more important thing, i think about our system, is that we believe our adversarial system is based on the conviction that when that clash happens each side's position gets sharper and how we figure out what happened. having put bad guys away for a long time i can tell you that whether it's terrorists or mafia or scammers or what have you, we give everybody lawyers and we give an opportunity to be heard in court and to try to poke holes in the government's narrative. they do the same thing in an adversarial congressional hearing. i'm someone who believes it is important to get to the bottom of what happened on january 6th. i think the committee disserved the cause of having a legitimate -- politically legitimate committee investigation by the way this committee was staffed. >> dana: the man testifying today, there was a family emergency and will not testify at least not today. we believe everything is fine but with his family but he needed to be with his wife, of course. the question i had is i read this coverage this morning saying he might not be a friendly witness. friendly to who? >> well that's right. it's part of the problem with how this committee has been stripped of the type of legitimacy we've seen in previous special committees. we have investigated very divisive issues at very divisive times. the house has always honored the bipartisan tradition to have a balance of sides here. speaker pelosi really robbed the committee of that sense of legitimacy. not that there is not important work to be done or not that we don't want to see this evidence. most of us want greater transparency. but the lack of balance here is undermining the effort. so when you get to the question of who is he hostile to, those questions become magnified because how this committee has been turned into a muscle play by the speaker. it is really unfortunate. they have lost a lot. also this idea we're trying to prove the big lie again raises the question of motivation. we were told on the first day they would show new evidence of an actual coup and criminal conduct. that's not rearguing the big lie narrative. that's giving us evidence of a direct criminal connection between the president and the violence that occurred during that riot. >> dana: i just noted that in some reporting now from our team on the ground that liz cheney said to them that mr. stepan had testified by video and some of that will be shown today. >> bill: we're on stand by for that. stand by with us as well. in the meantime on your money this is no-brainer. gas more than $5 nationwide. because of that and a series of factors you have a sharp sell-off to begin the week. the dow taking another hit. investors rattled by friday's worse than expected inflation report. is china going back to the covid precautions? something we're watching as well. can wall street shake it off? right now we can't. down more than 2% in 45 minutes of trading. back on that and everything else as we continue. ition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪ your spirit is stronger than your highs and lows. your creativity can outshine any bad day. because you are greater than your bipolar i, and you can help take control of your symptoms - and ask about vraylar. some medicines only treat the lows or highs. once-daily vraylar is proven to treat depressive, acute manic, and mixed episodes of bipolar i in adults. full-spectrum relief for all bipolar i symptoms. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles or confusion which may mean a life-threatening reaction, or uncontrollable muscle movements which may be permanent. high cholesterol and weight gain, and high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death, may occur. movement dysfunction and restlessness are common side effects. sleepiness and stomach issues are also common. side effects may not appear for several weeks. you are greater than your bipolar i. ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie could help you save. >> dana: check on wall street ahead of the fed meeting wednesday. what economists expecting the central bank to raise interest rates. right now the dow down 764 points. fox news correspondent ed lawrence is at the white house. >> the president and secretary -- he talked to a dnc fundraising event friday saying we'll live with this inflation for a while. it is going to come down gradually but we'll live with it for a while. the expectations from the market is the federal reserve will raise interest rates more than expected. the commerce and former tresh rear secretaries from republican and democrat administrations are saying a recession could be unavoidable. what we hear out of the white house is stay the course and blame. >> president biden: we've never seen anything like putin's tax on both food and gas. america should also understand our economy has unique strengths we can build on. the job market is the strongest it has been since world war ii. >> republicans saying there is a simple fix the president refuses to do. change course on energy policy. >> we have increased our dependence on foreign oil including russian oil because our lack of domestic energy policy under this administration. it is all tied together. this started when president biden took a negative view towards domestic energy production. that's just a fact. >> tomorrow the president will address afl-cio conference on his public schedule. the message in that address he is creating an economy that rewards work, not just wealth. we'll see how that message goes. >> dana: the dow now 750 down. >> bill: bring in connell mcshane from fox business. we save the best news for you. so you are the guy, all right? on screen stocks this year s&p down 20%, dow down 9, nasdaq 8%. don't look at your 401k now. red arrows across the board. total inflation 8.6% groceries, 12 and can be put lipstick on this bad boy. >> no. it is rough. the 8.6 on inflation. today is really more fallout from friday, right? the dow was down 880 and put 750 on top of that, s&p 500 broadest measure on the market is a bear market if it closed at this point. 20% off its high. what the 8.6% inflation told us is that inflation did not peak say in march because it is not like going into friday nobody thought inflation was a problem. the best case scenario was maybe it peaked. we saw the worst of it and it would level off slowly as the fed gradually raised interest rate and engineer what they describe as a soft landing. now we know that peak inflation is off the table completely and the soft landing will be much harder to engineer. >> dana: one of the things the white house keeps saying is it's not just president biden, it is other world leaders dealing with inflation. they point to europe saying it's not just us. how do you see that? >> well, it's not. both things can be true. what edward was reporting on in terms of what the white house could have done increasing domestic oil production is a fair criticism and backward looking. the comments you've seen recently are a concession that at this point there isn't much they can do. they won't come out and say that maybe we should have done more in the past which would be fair. bust -- but it is largely in the hands of the federal reserve now. will they raise interest rates by half a point as everybody expects or more aggressive and raise their key rate by 75 basis points? the market is pricing in a 1 in 4 chance of that unheard of just a few weeks ago. now that tells you where people are. they think that the fed needs to be more aggressive. >> bill: on this inflation question. i know europe is going higher just like we are. we were also told last week we're doing better -- our increase is much greater than europe. is that true? >> the increase in the inflation rate is much greater? >> bill: correct. >> they already had elevated inflation and gas prices. something they have come to be aware of and get used to over time. so the rate of increase we're seeing, i believe, is what you alluded to is probably greater here in the u.s. in terms of how everyday americans deal with it. think about it. we got used to relatively low inflation for a relatively long period of time. it has been a long time in this country for us to not have to deal with something like this. the shock to the system i think is a fair point can be a little greater when the rate is as sharp an increase especially if you are looking at the gas pump and what everybody the dealing with here. >> dana: you heard the president say when he spoke on saturday the unemployment rate is at record lows. while that's true, i understand that's something you want to promote. the fact is there aren't enough workers and we aren't growing and inflation is taking a bite out of things. if you have wages versus inflation you have wages increasing 5% but inflation at 8.6%. even i can do that math. >> the big thing most of the numbers we look at in economics are backward looking. we measured something that happened a month or two months ago and tell you what happened in that month. the qu