i'm daniel lurie and i've spent my career fighting poverty, helping people right here in san francisco. i'm also a father

raising two kids in the city. deeply concerned that city hall is allowing crime and lawlessness to spread. now we can do something about it by voting yes on prop e. a common sense solution that ensures we use community safety cameras to catch repeat offenders and hold them accountable. vote yes on e. xfinity rewards presents: '1st and 10gs.' xfinity is giving away ten grand to a new lucky winner for every first and ten during the big game. enter daily through february 9th for a chance to win 10gs. with the ultimate speed, power, and reliability the xfinity 10g network is made for streaming live sports. because it's only live once. join xfinity rewards on the xfinity app or go to xfinity1stand10gs.com for your chance to win.

>> this is cnn breaking news. a furious president biden is now being forced to confront a key vulnerability facing his 2024 re-election bid, his age. special counsel robert hur released a scathing report on biden's handling of classified documents, and while trend of 25 decided not to bring charges against biden, throughout the report, he called into question the president's memory and mental sharpness. we actually just heard a long briefing from the white house, and now democrats are rallying around the president, slamming special counsel hur. here is vice president kamala harris just a short time ago. >> the comments that were made by that prosecutor, gratuitous, inaccurate, and inappropriate. the way that the president's demeanor in that report was characterized could not be more wrong on the facts, and clearly

politically motivated. >> all right, let's break this down now. cnn senior political analyst gloria borger, cnn legal analyst elliot williams, and cnn political will and director david charlie and. i want to start with you, elliott, because what you're hearing from the white house is that this was gratuitous, inappropriate, and inaccurate. it's hard to judge if it was inaccurate without having the transcript, right? but talk about whether it was inappropriate, and whether it was gratuitous, in your opinion. >> so the rules that lay out the special counsels report are very vague. they just say they special counsel needs to lay out his or her reasons for the prosecution or the defamation. why we're choosing to prosecute, or why we're not, right? now, the mental acuity, or the memory of a witness is certainly relevant to the question of, can we bring this case? can we put this in front of a jury? that extra bit of stuff about,

well, he's older and we think he's a sensitive but sympathetic, i mean, come on, it's stepping a little bit into the realm of, gratuitous is a decent word to use, because you don't need that in order to establish that you have a proof problem at trial. you don't need to actually talk about the witness himself. and i think it's sort of stepped up to the line now in terms of attacking the prosecutor himself. i don't know if you really gained yourself many points from that. it's happened to me as a prosecutor, it happens to everybody. >> and i think it's interesting that vice president harris did that, calling him politically motivated, but the white house counsel spokesman, ian sanz, was asked multiple times at this briefing just in the last hour if he agreed with the vice presidents were mark that hur was a politically motivated prosecutor. he wanted repeat the words. he adjustably said that i thought the vice president spoke very forcefully and strongly, i thought the vice president stroke very forcefully and strongly. he would never repeat from the white house podium the accusation that it was politically motivated. >> and frankly, in the justice department guidelines, prosecution manual, prosecutors

should remain sensitive to the privacy and reputation interests of uncharged parties. this is a party that they chose not to proceed, you know, with criminal prosecution of, and that's fine. you have to be sensitive about how you are speaking about that person in public in a manner that doesn't tar them up, particularly when that person is a candidate for office. >> as a nonlawyer, let me say, the way that i read this was, and parts of this report, and they kinda set it in two different ways, as ian sams pointed out. they said there had been a, you know, that the president had willfully kept documents, and they had to find some reason to justify if the president willfully kept documents when he was vice president, then why did they not prosecute him as donald trump is being prosecuted? and sort of in a cya mode, i think they went overboard and said, you know, a serious felony requires a mental state of willfulness, which is a big slap to donald trump, saying, you know, he, he, it wasn't no

state of mind or, or could not be a, be on the witness stand and could not recall things. and what they were doing was covering themselves and saying, okay, this is, this is why, because we're going to get this backlash. we know we're going to get this backlash from republicans. and so we're going to put this out there as a way of explaining it. >> but in fairness, it is entirely -- willfulness is an element in statute, it has to be proven. it's entirely fair to say we believe that this conduct have been met, but we don't think we would get it passed a jury for any number of reasons, some of them being, we think the witness was cooperative, but many of them being we adjustably don't think we can prove it for this reasons. and so, at the risk of getting into it and trying to divide the motivations of the prosecutors -- >> but the details of not recalling the day of his son's passing is something that, that is gratuitous, and did, and did

not need to be included in a report. >> and the white house described as being mischaracterized. they could easily point that out and prove that if there were transcripts as well. they could easily prove that if there were transcripts, or perhaps a video of the interview being discussed by robert hur. is not likely to ever be released? >> perhaps, in redacted form. now, certainly, if, in fact, this is dealing with classified or sensitive information, obviously the government is going to have interest in protecting some of it, but perhaps, perhaps they do. i don't know. >> and the white house made clear today that that, a process of looking at the classification that's inside of the transcript is underway. they didn't promise that they would release it, but he certainly didn't say that the president would be opposed to releasing some form of a redacted transcript. and we don't know if there's a recording. i thought this was really interesting, that in this briefing with the white house, ian sams took pains to say to a

reporter, i'm referring to a transcript, not a recording. i don't know if there's an audio or video recording. i don't think we know that yet. >> wouldn't it likely that there would be a recording if there's a transcript? >> it would. >> is it that normally how it works? not necessarily. >> it might be transcribed but not recorded. >> and maybe the white house prefer that it not be recorded. >> fair. to a point that gloria made just a moment ago, robert hur details the differences between this investigation and into joe biden and the trump investigation, and he points out that we likely wouldn't even have seen an investigation had joe biden not raised his hands, his attorneys had raised their hands to say we found these documents, we want to make sure we get this right. nevertheless, for my public perception standpoint, it's going to be difficult for the white house to make the argument to voters that not only is there a difference there, but that the memory issues invoked in this report aren't pertinent to president biden when he's struggling, at

times, to answer questions. >> i think those are two totally different things. i don't know that it will be difficult. i know that, obviously, donald trump is already well underway trying to muddy the waters between the two investigations. i actually think this report may help the white house make the distinction between these two cases, because this republican appointed prosecutor makes that distinction for them in this report. so i don't know if the public will buy into the goal of muddying the waters. on the issue of the perceptions of age, which, again, the white house says are inaccurate, but there's no way for us to judge the underlying assessment that hur made here, other than, we see joe biden all the time, and so the american people are going to make a judgment for themselves over these next many months, and we know already in public pulling about the real concerns the american people have about the presidents ability to serve as a full second term, about his age. there are real questions there. and so the white house can say all they want, that they think hur assessment is inaccurate. that is, it would be a mistake

for them, i think, politically, to end it there. they know they had to deal with this issue, with this perception among american voters about the presidents stamina to serve. >> and when the public is an overwhelming majority of the public is predisposed to believe that joe biden could not serve out a term, his, you know, final term, and believe that he suffers from some kind of mental problems, it's very hard to turn a battleship around when you have, i think, the nbc poll said 76% of americans feel that way. so what does the white house do to try and counter this? i mean, you know, in my reporting, there's talk of putting him in smaller groups, showing the old joe biden who does very well that way, but, you know, it's very, very difficult when you have republicans pounding on this every day. my question is, what is donald trump going to do? because donald trump, while he does talk about biden in many

ways, deranged, et cetera, whatever, whatever he uses, hasn't been pounding on this the way one might expect. and i'm wondering what the calculus -- there's got to be a calculation there, and the question is, is the calculation, because trump knows that he's an older person as well, and he doesn't want it to backfire, and he makes those same kind of mistakes himself. i don't know the answer to that. >> no spring chickens in this race, except for nikki haley, but she is trailing quite now in the polls, and that is another david charlie and segment for another time. david, thank you so much. elliott and gloria, thank you to you as well. i want to bring in democratic congresswoman debbie dingell of michigan to speak with us here, and i first want to speak with you about the special counsels report here. are you worried about the effect that this may have on voters? >> look, i'm going to react to this in two different ways. i am not a lawyer, haven't been a prosecutor as many as the people that you've been talking to, and i had not read the

report last night. but bottom line, he didn't find enough evidence. there was no reason for him to go forward. and i think, i'm going to use the vice presidents were there, and a lot of gratuitous cheap shots that are in this report. and the more the day has gone on, i'm just getting madder and madder. and i'm going to give you a very personal story, and i mean personal, and when i wasn't going to share, because it's nobody's business, but apparently everybody's business is everybody's business. i went to michigan with the president last week, and he was very close to my husband, very close to me. he was there, at one time, when the night after john finished serving, and they thought that john might die the next day. joe biden and jill were at the hospital in two minutes flat. he remembered last week. bo's birthday is february 3rd, and john died february 7th. and he knew on the plane that i was heading into this very tough, awful week that i was going to have, and nobody's

reminding them of that. that is something that's very personal that he and i talk about. so for people to take these kind of cheap shots just really angers me, when i know joe biden is, and the person that he stands for. we had to worry about it politically? they're sure going to make people try to worry about it politically, and i want to know why we're not talking about, we're talking about joe biden's age and not the 91 felony counts that donald trump has against him. >> well, i thank you for sharing that personal story, and also, the humanity, i think, too, of some of this, which is that this is a difficult time, and you certainly drive that home. we hear the white house here saying that this is inaccurate, and we know there's a, a transcript of the interview. do you think that it should be released to make that point that they're saying, from the white house, that this is inaccurate? >> look, i listened to the same press conference that you did. i don't know what's there.

i don't know what kind of reports there are. i have nothing to do with what, you know, we're all learning at the same time. i didn't want to make comments last night because i didn't even know what they were talking about. i think i will a lot of people like to talk about a whole lot of stuff that they know nothing about. if there is solid evidence, and shows what the interviews are, i think the lawyers who know what they're talking about need to do it. but i know what i'm talking about. i know joe biden. i was in michigan with him last week, and we were talking about issues. all kinds of issues. issues that matter. and i'll tell you, we were talking about the mideast and arab-americans, and we had some of the blood test, and i mean blunt conversations. this is a man that's on his game. >> let's talk about that, because i remember talking to you during the hillary clinton campaign when i was covering hillary clinton, and you were sounding the alarm for her campaign about michigan, where

she lost in the primary, unexpectedly, to bernie sanders. i'd say less surprising to you. and then she lost in the general election to donald trump there. you are sounding the alarm, clearly, to president biden. what is your worry as we look at administration officials going there to michigan, talking to the arab-american population that is so concerned about how the u.s. and biden is supporting israel in its prosecution of its war? >> look, it's taken too long, i'm going to tell you that, but i will say you saw him come this week after he came to michigan last weekend, and we talked. people don't understand how this community is hurting, how many innocent people have died. i have wrens on both sides, and i think a whole lot of america believes israel's got a right to exist, that what hamas did was wrong, palestinians have a right

children die. somewhere between 25 and 35,000 innocent civilians have died. they've been forced into areas that, that are being bombed again. people are dying. these are human beings, and this issue is going to have to be dealt with. there needs to be a cease-fire, and this community is not going to really be open to listening or talking or to understanding until they see the people they know, they have families. i've had so many people that have lost family members, or talking to people there who have nothing to eat, nothing to drink, no medical care. i, i do believe -- i don't think the -- i think that sometimes, people don't get to tell people directly how people are hurting and what is happening, and i think a lot more of those conversations have been happening.

>> yeah. well, they certainly need to. congresswoman debbie dingell, thank you so much for being with us. we really appreciate it. >> thank you. and still ahead, a climate scientist tried to warn the world about global warming. skeptics attacked him, but he found a way to fight back, and he made them pay. we're going to speak with him about his fight, and a million- dollar verdict. plus, vladimir putin sitting down for a two-hour interview, if you can really call it that, with right-wing media host tucker carlson, walking away with a propaganda victory. and then later, with credit card debt reaching record highs, more americans are failing to make minimum payments, and experts are now making an alarming prediction about credit card delinquencies. those stories, and much more, coming up on cnn news central.

spit now to moscow, where former fox news host tucker carlson

held a controversial interview with russian president vladimir putin. it's the first time a western media figure has been allowed to question the russian leader since the invasion of ukraine nearly two years ago. carlson didn't press putin unelected war crimes or jailed journalists, but allowed the russian leader to rent, at one point giving a 30+ minute revised history of russia's relationship with ukraine. here's a clip. >> so twice you've described u.s. presidents making decisions and then being undercut by their agency heads. so it sounds like you're describing a system that's not run by the people who are elected in your telling. >> translator: that's right, that's right. >> joining us now in the studio is the former u.s. about that or to ukraine, bill taylor. he's also the vp for russia and europe at the u.s. institute of peace. ambassador, thank you so much for being with us.

what was your reaction what was your reaction, what are your takeaways? >> what struck me was, as long as you put it, inaccurate historical rent by president . he wants to make the case. he tries to make the case that ukraine is not a real country, and it turns out, even if you go back in history, go back to the ninth century as president putin did, the original people living there in caves, the ukrainians, they're older than the russians. kyiv was there much before the russians. and so president putin has a history wrong. not only that, we know, the world knows that ukraine is a real country trying to separate itself from the russians that have tried to dominate it for three centuries. so him trying to make that case, i think he failed. >> what is the fact that he did this interview with tucker carlson tell you? like, what audience do you think vladimir putin is trying

to reach? >> vladimir putin clearly wants to make the case that we should not be supporting ukraine. there are some people's in this country who don't believe that we should be supporting ukraine. and that's, i guess, who he was after. >> putin did revealed during the interview that he and president biden had not spoken since the invasion of ukraine began. he recounted the historic warning that he gave to biden before the invasion. let's watch. >> translator: but i talked to him before the special military operation, of course, and i said to him then, by the way, i will not go into details. i never do. but i said to him then, i believe that you are making a huge mistake of historic proportions by supporting everything that is happening there in ukraine by pushing russia away. >> putin also indicated that he'd be open to negotiations toward ending the war . if he were to negotiate directly with the united states. is that bluster, is that real?

what do you make of it? >> if not real, it makes no sense. the russians invaded ukraine. the russians have waged war on ukraine for nearly two years. an agreement to end that war is going to come between the russians and the ukrainians. we've been supporting the ukrainians as they've tried to defend themselves, but this is the russians and ukrainians who will end this war. >> so is that a way, by also referencing the meeting they had the invasion, was a way for them to sort of callout ortiz president biden? >> president biden, in that phone call, and in several meetings, told president putin what a bad mistake it would be for russia to invade ukraine. our intelligence was pretty good on at least one aspect, going into that war, and that was, we knew, u.s. intelligence knew that the russians plan to invade. president putin said that's

not happening. we're not going to invade. his foreign minister said it's, it's the west being hysterical, this business about us invading, and, of course, they invaded. president biden was very clear about what would happen if they made this mistake and invaded, and that's what they did. >> the kremlin, not historically known for telling the truth. but if you were the president of ukraine, and you're sitting there watching this interview, watching some of the political division here in the united states, knowing that it is long jammed in congress, how are you feeling right now? >> president zelenskyy clearly needs the u.s. assistance. he needs the u.s. military assistance. he needs the european assistance. europeans, he's actually, president zelenskyy is pleased that the europeans are stepping up, providing, indeed, more than we are. but he knows that our assistance is key, because it's the military assistance. it's the bulk of the military assistance. he needs that in order to

defend what he's got and eventually pushed back the russians. so he is worried about this assistance package that here in washington. >> former ms or bill taylor, great to get your perspective. so there is a renewed, or renowned, i should say, climate scientist who sued after being compared to a convicted child molester, and he's delivering a major victory today, fresh off a court decision. he's joining us live right after the break.

this ad? typical. politicians... "he's bad. i'm good." blah, blah. let's shake things up. with katie porter.

porter refuses corporate pac money. and leads the fight to ban congressional stock trading. katie porter. taking on big banks to make housing more affordable. and drug company ceos to stop their price gouging. most politicians just fight each other. while katie porter fights for you. for senate - democrat katie porter. i'm katie porter and i approve this message.

a major victory for a prominent climate scientist. michael mann. he won his long-sought legal battle against two conservative writers. in 2012, the man falsely claimed that mann had manipulated data in his research that showed a dramatically warming planet, and they compared him to convicted child molester jerry sandusky, saying that instead of molesting children, mann was molesting data. juries in d.c. found that the pair made their statements with maliciousness, spite, ill will, vengeance, or deliberate intent to harm, and they awarded him more than $1 million in damages, and here he is now with us, michael mann, presidential distinguished officer, director of the center for science, thinking ability, and the media at u penn. also the author of the book our fragile moment. michael, 12 years is a long time to have to fight here. how do you feel today? >> yeah, it is. it's good to be with you,

breanna. and i feel good, and i'll tell you why. it isn't just about me and defending my science from scurrilous attacks and defamatory claims. it's really about the defensive science. you know, it's appropriate to debate science, to challenge other people's scientific findings. that's part of what carl sagan described as the self- correcting machinery of science. but that doesn't mean that you can lie about scientists. it doesn't mean that you can defame the and make false claims about them. and in today's world, you know, we see so much disinformation. we see attacks on science and attacks on scientists, and i, and i think it was an important message, at this moment in time, that it's not okay to make false claims about scientists, and to make defamatory accusations against scientists. that there is a limit to what

is protected speech. >> and climate science has come so far. belief in climate science has come so far. you attracted skeptics. really, it was after you became famous for your so-called hockey stick graph that was published in the journal in nature. that was back in 1998. it showed the rapidly warming planet, really raised the alarm on the situation. here we are, you know, 26 years later. what is your message, now, to people, so many of whom have really woken up to this since then? >> well, i'll tell you, my message is this. you know, once again, open debate is a good thing in our public discourse, in our scientific discourse. but it is not okay to make false accusations and defamatory accusations against scientists as part of an

ideologically driven agenda, to discredit science that might be inconvenient to your political views. and we see that with climate science, but we see that today with public health science. when it comes to the science of vaccines. and in fact, i'm now undertaking a project with my good friend peter holt has, which is one of the leading public health scientists in the country, who has also been subject to all sorts of scurrilous attacks and false allegations because of the vaccine work that he has done and that he is doing, and the fact that his work, again, is opposed by some people who harbor political views about vaccines and about covid-19. you know, it's okay to be skeptical about science, to be skeptical about scientific claims, and the more, you know,

the more -- the stronger those claims, the more skepticism that is warranted. but it's not okay to, again, to attack scientists and to make defamatory claims about them because of your political opposition to, to their scientific findings. >> michael, what do you worry is the effect on whether it's public health, or even, you know, global health, the health of our planet, which affects us all, when you have people making bogeymen out of scientists like yourself? >> well, i really worry about that, right? especially young scientists, who see the attacks on scientists like myself, scientists like anthony fauci and my good friend peter protests. they look at that, and, you know, that shows the discourse.

that potentially leads them to sort of withdraw into their laboratories. they don't want to get involved, get into the fray and to be part of the effort to communicate their scientific findings to the public, out of fear that they will be attacked, that they will be viciously attacked, again, by those who have vested interest in discrediting science that's inconvenient to their economic interests or their political viewpoints. and so this is a message to my fellow scientists, that, you know, that it is not okay for people to attack you, to make false allegations against you, to defame you. and hopefully, that will create some space where scientists feel a little bit more, you know, that they're, they're more comfortable in leaving the laboratory, in communicating their findings to the public, because we rely upon, you know, the best available science, as you said, both when it comes to our own health, and the health of this planet. what could be more important than the health of our, you know, of us and, and our fellow

human beings, and the planet that we live on? that's, those are really the stakes here. >> yeah. we don't want there to be that chilling effect. michael, great to have you. thank you so much, and congratulations. we appreciate your time today. >> thank you. and when we come back, fighting inflation in the housing market. how one company is making it easier to find individual rooms online for those who are looking to share living expenses with a roommate.

zillow is taking a step to combat rising housing costs. the real estate giant is going to start letting homeowners list individual room rentals instead of only entire homes or apartments. the company says the move is a win-win for renters and homeowners. cnn's matt egan joins us now. matt, what's behind this new housing option? >> well, boris, it is tough out there for renters and for homebuyers. so tough that zillow, a company that is known for letting people list their homes, is actually going to let people start to list individual rooms as a way to try to fight back. now, as a lot of our viewers out there know, rent, it spiked after covid. the housing market went on fire. before covid, to comfortably afford to rent in the united states, you needed to make about $60,000 a year. now, $78,000. that is quite the jump.

and that is why zillow is letting people who want to rent start to look for individual rooms, and this could be especially helpful in some of those cities where it's really expensive to rent, like los angeles and seattle and right here in new york. but it's also tough out there, of course, for homebuyers. first they were hit by record high home prices, and then they were hit by very high mortgage rates. and so what's happened is paychecks are being swallowed up more and more by monthly mortgage payments. this chart shows that. the higher the chart, the line goes, the more unaffordable this housing market has gotten, and right now, it is historically unaffordable. and some of the people who have been lucky enough to buy in this market, they are now struggling to make their monthly payments. and zillow is betting that some of them might just be willing to have a roommate to try to get by right now. it could get a little awkward

for some of them, but i guess that beats running out of money. and, you know, all of this is part of a, it's a broader trend. it's known as house hacking, where people are coming up with ways to try to make money off of their home. so, for example, some people, they are renting out parking spaces in their driveways. other people are renting out their pools. and there's even a trend where people are renting out their fenced in yard's and turning them into dog parks. i think all of this just shows how people are trying to get creative right now as they, they try to make ends meet, and i don't know, boris. maybe this is all just an elaborate way for me to ask you, next time you're in town, can i interest you in renting a room in our house? >> definitely not a room, but that pool, maybe in the summertime, matt.

i'm coming back for that will. matt egan, thanks so much for the update. now to some of the other headlines that we're watching. more americans are struggling to pay credit card bills with dealing with the rate hitting a 12 year high of 8.5% in 2023. the moody's ratings agency expecting the trend is going to worsen, reaching 10% by next year, citing what it believes would be a cooler job market. car loan defaults also expected to peak between 8% and 9% this year. also, the fcc is outlawing robo calls that use voices generated by artificial intelligence. the ruling allows states to take legal action against bad actors during this year's election. and an emotional, bittersweet moment in los angeles on thursday. vanessa bryant, the late, the wife of late basketball star kobe bryant, helping unveiled the first of three statues honoring the lakers legend. bryant is the seventh player in lakers history to be commemorated with a statue. both bryant and his daughter died in a helicopter crash in california just over four years ago. his wife saying he chose this

pose for this statue. coming up, a look at the bizarre conspiracy theories behind the taylor swift and travis kelce pop culture phenomenon. you've got to hear them to believe them, just ahead.

is it possible to count on my internet like my customers count on me? it is with comcast business. keeping you up and running with 99.9% network reliability. and security that helps outsmart threats to your data. moaire dida twoo? your data, too. there's even round-the- clock customer support. so you can be there for your customers. hey billy, how you doin? with comcast business, reliability isn't just possible. thanks. it's happening. get started for $49.99 a month. plus, ask how to get up to a $1000 prepaid card with a qualifying internet package. don't wait, call and switch today!

she didn't dance to it this time. every time the stinger comes on, she dances to it. this year's super bowl could score monster ratings, thanks

in large part to taylor swift, who i have never heard of until very recently. fans are not only bidding on which team will win, but they are also betting on how many times they will catch a glimpse of the pop singer on camera. there is a brush of right- wing conspiracy theories that have emerged, including a claim about the nfl scripting her relationship with travis kelce for views. i am chuckling, but i shouldn't because people believe this. something this is to help president biden's 2024 campaign. here to break down is an six. it plays into a bigger issue that we are seeing. these conspiracy theories. there are some professional choices that these two have made that, right or wrong, they are going about their lives.

it has embroiled them in these culture wars. >> you have two people at the height of their powers efficiently. taylor swift has proven to be able to draw people to register. that happened last fall, when she did and instagram post and something like 30,000 people registered to vote. she has demonstrable power there. the white house is reportedly pursuing her endorsement. travis kelce has done commercials for bud light, and also for state farm. also for pfizer. if you think about it, these are all companies that have been ensnared, and people who are concerned with ansi woke politics.if you think about it, vaccines. that issue is also very vulnerable to conspiracy thinking. it is the kind of thing where, people who are into this, you can pull a lot of tweaks and stuff to feather your cuckoo's nest of conspiracy theories and they neatly fall in the center

of that circle. >> this is the latest round of conspiracy theories, the sort of thought connecting that we saw explode in the political sense back in 2020 with q1 on. >> absolutely. the pentagon released a statement saying, no, she is not part of a psychological operation. that was a few months ago. this idea that the broader culture is forcing on people a kind of agenda, a cultural agenda, and that it happens through maintain -- mainstream entertainment -- that is the root of the concern for people thinking this way. >> why is there such an appetite for that kind of conspiracy theory, that mythmaking and meaning making out of things that are innocuous? >> wake up, sheeple. we are in that kind of age in our politics. the reason why i wanted to dig into this is because no one is immune. you know, the nfl has struggled

the last couple of years after the colin kaepernick spectacle, after on and off the field violence issues and cte, this is a good moment for them. they are cutting to her. people are shaking it off. the idea is look at us. this is good news. but because of these little sand traps, cultural sand traps, you can still face a backlash. one of the things these people are on the verge of is overexposure. i would hate to be taylor swift if kansas city did not win. >> they are going to win. it is written. >> i said they will. >> it is happening. >> this is been my most controversial lists story. these are the most rapid fan bases of all. they all come together this weekend. >> guess we have a prediction. do you think the chiefs are going to win? >> i think taylor swift is going to win. >> we all win. audie cornish, thank you so much. check out the podcast, the assignment with audie cornish,

streaming on spotify and apple podcasts. we will be right back.

before we go, we would like to introduce you to the newest member of the cnn family. meet baby eleanor murray. she arrived to alan -- alex fonseca and one of his -- big sister cecelia is excited and cannot wait to play and dance when her baby sibling is old enough