♪♪ ♪♪ hi there, everyone. here we go. it's 4:00 in new york. a watershed moment today for the january 6th select committee pep the congressional panel tasked with investigating the insurrection has taken the extraordinary step of issuing subpoenas to five of their own republican colleagues including the leader of the republican caucus in the house, kevin mccarthy. in a letter the committee says the refusal of all five member, mccarthy, jim jordan, scott perry, andy biggs and mo brooks to voluntarily cooperate with the investigations has forced their hand. they write there, quote, before

we hold our hearings next month we wish to provide members the opportunity to discuss these matters with the committee voluntarily. regrettably, the individuals receiving subpoenas today have refused and we are forced to take this step to make sure the committee uncovers facts concerning january 6th. we urge our colleagues to comply with the law and do their patriotic duty and cooperate with our investigation as hundreds of other witnesses have done, and the committee lays out in clear detail just why they need the testimony of these five congressmen pointing to their roles in multiple aspects of the trump coup plot. the committee writes this about jim jordan, representative jim jordan was in communication with trump on january 6th and participated in meetings and discussions throughout late 2020 and early 2021 about strategies for overturning the 2020 election. regarding scott perry, the committee says, he was, quote, directly involved with efforts to corrupt the department of

justice and installed jeffrey clark as acting a.g. in addition, mr. perry had various communications with the white house about a number of matters relevant to the select committee's investigation including allegations that dominion voting machines had been corrupted. for congressman andy biggs, questions about his role in an effort by house republicans to seek a pardon for trying to overturn election results. in a statement writes this, quote, former white house personnel identified mr. biggs as potentially being involved in an effort to seek a presidential pardon for activities connected with the former president's effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and just in the last hour nbc news caught up with january 6th committee vice chair liz cheney. when asked about why the committee took the serious step of issuing subpoenas to members of congress, cheney said this, quote, it's a reflection of how important and how serious the investigation is, and how grave the attack on the capitol was.

the january 6th select committee throwing down the gauntlet by house republicans by issuing subpoenas to members of congress is where we start today. new york trends congressional reporter broadwater is here, associate editor and columnist for real clear politics joins us, also joining us eric swalwell of california with the house and judiciary committee. s with at the table is msnbc dan goldman for the southern district of new york and former majority counsel during donald trump's first impeachment trial, congressman, i start with you. the committee has made clear in the letters to these gentlemen that it already has a lot of testimony implicating their participation in a plot to overturn the election result. how do you see today's subpoenas which are a tactic and as an investigator seem pretty necessary to their probe. >> nicole, the subpoenas absolutely are historic, but so

was the insurrection that donald trump incited and these witnesses are relevant. they all communicated in a way with donald trump or his legal team and you really have to ask yourself why would they not want to cooperate? if you could help your country, if you truly believe in america first, doesn't america first mean that you work with the committee, the bipartisan committee that is being looking into what happened that day and to ensure that the next time we have to do this, a day like that never happens again. >> and they each have very specific pieces of the investigation that the committee is seeking to press them on and this is scott perry. they have received evidence from multiple witnesses that you had an important role in efforts to install mr. clark as acting attorney general. we are also aware that you had multiple text and other communications with trump's

former chief of staff regarding mr. clark, and we also have evidence indicating that in that timeframe you sent communications to the former chief of staff using the encrypted signal app. in addition, we have information indicating that you communicated at various relevant times with the white house and others involved in relevant topics including regarding allegations that the dominion voting machines have been corrupted. i guess i go back to the original letter because it's clear that these letters went out in january and the request for voluntary conversations with the committee. the evidence about these five gentlemen's conduct is known to the committee. what is the subpoena for? >> the subpoena is to get their first-hand account, nicole. they worked with the legal team and communicated with donald trump and we heard in kevin mccarthy's own words that he was calling donald trump to tell him that he thought he should resign. what did donald trump say when kevin mccarthy called donald

trump? also, kevin mccarthy said donald trump acknowledged he did bear responsibility and to have that first-hand account would be incredibly helpful. also, nicole, kevin mccarthy famously bragged and put together the benghazi committee and we're not seeking and what makes him think that he's more important than those witnesses and he has special privilege that those witnesses did not. this comes down to do you want to help your country or not, do you have something to hide or do you have something to be helpful. >> the inconvenient truth for kevin mccarthy, if he wants to hide something we've got the tapes and here he is telling "the new york times" reporters that donald trump was responsible for january 6th. >> let me be very clear to all of you, and i am very clear to the president.

he bears responsibilities for his words and actions, no ifs, ands or buts. i asked him personally today, does he hold responsibility for what happened? does he feel bad about what happened? he told me he does have some responsibility for what happened. and he needed to acknowledge that. >> and then we've all witnessed the excruciating exercise of kevin mccarthy putting his dignity back in the tube of toothpaste. let me play that. >> would you personally reach out to the president for more support? >> i've already talked to the president. >> what did the president say to you when you called him? >> he put out a tweet, as well. >> you said you spoke to the president. what did the president say he would do? >> i know he had put a tweet out there. >> i was the first person to contact him when the riots were going on, he didn't see it. he ended the call and said he put something out to stop this.

he put out a video out later. >> later. are other people more concerned about the election than you are. >> my conversations with the president are my conversations with the president. >> i mean, we all know that he saw and he was watching and it's been reported and confirmed from evidence that we've learned about and when he put out to the insurrectionists, we love you. we love you. that's what he put out. why is it as important to you, at least, why kevin mccarthy changes his tune? do you want to know when he learns between saying that donald trump bears responsibility for what happened? he needed to acknowledge that and talking about the 25th amendment and impeachment and resignation and not leaving the door open and having these mealy mouthed performances and interviews where he refuses to say anything. do you understand if there is an intervening event there? >> then he went to his old ways

of lying and pledging his allegiance not to america, but donald trump. what happened? what did donald trump tell him? did donald trump threaten him? we know that mccarthy is laser focused on becoming speaker and that's about it, and so is this about having trump support for speaker and that if he was to speak out he wouldn't have that support. it's about making sure, we know what happened that day and we can guarantee to the american people because we did an investigation we're not going to let something like this happen again and either you want to help or you want to hurt this investigation and it looks like kevin mccarthy and others want to hurt the investigations. >> stay with us if you're able to. i want to bring dan goldman and the others in. so the only response from these five republican, they're all men, congressmen, has been to call the probe itself illegitimate. the problem with that is it's a talking point, i suppose, but it's not a legitimate argument, if you will. and the investigation itself has

been before countless judges now who have deemed it completely legitimate. where do they go other than a talking point objection. >> oh, they don't have anywhere else to go. they have their own right-wing ecosphere which will play that up, but it is completely baseless and there are a couple of components to this. first of all, a number of judges has found that this is a lawfully and duly authorized committee and so their subpoenas are valid and that argument is out the window, but think about this. first of all, it's pretty remarkable that you would have five and there are actually more congressmen who refuse to voluntarily give information to another committee of their own body, but it is even more ridiculous for them to defy subpoenas from their own body. they are undermining their own authority going forward by defying these subpoenas and we know they've made a lot of threats including to congressman

swalwell about how they're going to investigate all of the democrats if they are given subpoenas. one, first of all, i say bring it on. there's a lot more bluster and puffery from the republican side than there is actual substance, when it gets to the substance, they don't have anywhere to go because it is all bogus, but two, is that -- how are you going to enforce subpoenas if you have just defied them. >> right. luke, i want to pull you in on some of the specific aspects of the coup plot that they'd like to speak to these individuals about. i mean, it is every sort of known prong of this investigation from the meetings in the white house, from the effort to get pence to throw out and not certify the count to the pardon play. just talk about how much of the investigation now includes testimony about republican members of congress.

>> sure, yeah. there are so many tentacles to the investigation to the plot to overturn the election, but it's become very clear from what we've been able to do, the reporting and what the committee has been able to uncover that the key republicans in congress functioned as donald trump's foot soldiers, whether it was through a campaign to put out information to undermine confidence in the election, whether it was planning the objections on january 6th, whether it was communicating about plots for fake electors out of different state legislatures or even participating in the rally on january 6th and plans to encourage people to march to the capitol on january 6th. so you can see how these congressmen were involved in various aspects of the plan to keep donald trump in power despite losing the election and

so, you know, we do know a lot about what they did. we've gotten testimony from other people, sometimes they've spoken about it themselves, but they -- none of them has done it under oath, and none of it has done it under intense questioning over a period of hours and so we don't know exactly what we don't know about what they did, and what donald trump did and his conversations with them, and you cannot have a full and comprehensive report into january 6th, without their part of the story. i think the committee was left with no option after they refused the voluntary interviews. >> amy stoddard, this was in a letter to kevin mccarthy where they first are seeking his participation as the leader of the republicans of the house of representatives. this is from his speech on january 6th on the house floor. kevin mccarthy said this. the president bears

responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. he should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. these facts require immediate actions by president trump except to share responsibility and ensure president-elect biden is able to successfully begin his term. what we saw last week was not the american way, neither is the continued rhetoric that joe biden is not the legitimate president. let's be clear, joe biden will be sworn in as president of the united states in one week because he won the election. so a.b., i was startled reading that again, and i don't know that kevin mccarthy has said that since then, and i think what is in these letters and when you read through them carefully it's clear that the committee has a lot of information about what republican members of congress have done. i understand a lot of members of congress on the republican side have lawyers already so they must know that the committee knows a lot of what they have done. how do you see today the move to

subpoena them? >> so i know this was a subject of debate within the members of the committee for a while. what we don't know about the terms and the challenges ahead for the committee which we expect all five to refuse and if they don't comply what the course of action the committee plans to pursue is, and whether or not they want to get involved in going after contempt for the five or for any of them. so yes, we know they have a lot of information. goodness, mel brooks has told us himself since donald trump dumped him in alabama that the president asked him several times in overturning the election and afterwards, in helping to rescind the election not only in 2021, but recently, and help place him back in power. so we do know not only from the things that mccarthy has said on tape, to the things that the committee already knows about banks on jordan and perry and mo brooks. we know they have a lot.

we know that they asked them, as they point out to participate, they would have. now they will defy a subpoena. so it is a dramatic statement to the public about members of congress refusing to honor congressional subpoena and take part into the investigations into an assault on their body of government. i wonder, like i said what the plan is for the commit. they don't want to run out the clock and they want to get the hearings and they want to get this moving forward. maybe they don't pursue this any further and they let it hang out there. as daniel points out, the republicans are boxed in. if they want to investigate hunter biden or anyone who has ever been a democrat next year and they want to throw subpoenas at nancy pelosi and everyone else, if they say this is unconstitutional they're not going to get any response to their subpoenas either.

>> congressman swalwell you served in the second impeachment. as dan goldman pointed out, republicans make no secrets about having you in their sights politically speaking. what is your sense about how to proceed if they decide to defy these subpoenas? >> well, there are a number of options, right? there could be criminal contempt referral as has been done with others, you know, there could be a referral to the ethics committee. i'll leave it to the committee to decide, but you would just, at the end of the day, as i said, over 1,000 americans saw it as their patriotic duty to cooperate with the committee investigating this grave attack on the capitol, you would just hope that they would do the right thing and you wouldn't have to go to those lengths and you can only deduce that because they won't do the right thing that they have something to hide and they have a guilty conscience and most courtrooms, a civil courtroom that is what the inference would be. we asked donald trump during the second impeachment to come

forward and offer testimony, he refused to do that and we really hammered that home during the impeachment trial that an innocent person would have shown up to defend themselves, and so that's the only conclusion that could be made and for history, that is the conclusion that will be drawn. >> eric, i have a quick question for you because you are in the sights of the republicans, mccarthy has said that he will try to remove you from the intelligence committee and he has said that they will investigate you if they are subpoenaed and potentially subpoena you. what's your reaction now that the committee has gone forward to subpoena the republican members of congress knowing that they have you in their sights if they are to take over the majority? >> you know, dan, i was worried as they were deliberating about whether to subpoena mckarthy and others that they were worried about setting a precedent that mr. schiff, and myself and others would be target in the

future and i had conveyed, for what it was worth don't let that hold you back because they're going to go after me and adam if they have any way to do that. we have no intention of them ever being in the majority, by the way. as you said earlier, bring it on, and it also is going to make it a lot harder to make a case, one that is a substantive reason to do so, and two, that it's for anything other than retaliatory purposes. the right thing to do was to call the relevant witnesses and what they didn't want to come forward voluntarily, the next thing to do was to put them under subpoena, because they would have a subpoena put on this and they think they're better than ordinary americans and that the rules don't apply to them. >> do you think any of them have criminal exposure. >> they were meeting in the

white house, and they were giving speeches in body armor. ? they may because they don't want to take the fifth which is what you would do if you were to testify and worried about criminal exposure. i think scott perry probably has some exposure because he was very involve in the effort to fake electors and doj removing both the attorney general and the deputy attorney general in order to install jeffrey clark so that he could write those bogus letters asking the state legislature to rescind it. i mean, look, criminal exposure is a very broad term. a lot of people, if you are touching upon something could have what is called criminal exposure, and for that reason, the fifth amendment right is very broad, and so if you think that what you say may have a tendency to incriminate yourself

at all and sometimes you don't even know whether it would so you take the fifth, but there's no question that these congressmen were involved in the coup plot, and you know, to my mind, as i look at it, that is a very likely crime that was committed. so i would say as a prosecutor i would say they have criminal exposure. >> i mean, luke, you had the reporting on the committee reaching an evidentiary hearing to make a hurdle and we all presumed that was from donald trump, and when liz cheney read from the statute of obstructing a proceeding is there any way that they'll look at members as potentially guilty of that crime? >> we know from the grand jury subpoena that the department of justice investigation that they are looking at the legislative branch, and specifically with the fake electors plot because if you have people that forged

documents and falsified documents when another was true and sent those to the national archives and if members of congress had any hand in that at all, that could be a matter for investigation, and we know according to the committee that they have some testimony that there was a request for members of congress about a potential pardon and potentially that the congressman biggs was involved in some way in that request and that's one thing that the committee wants to ask them about and minority leader mccarthy has been consulting with an attorney so he may be concerned enough to certainly seek legal counsel. >> you know, a.b., it does require you to examine all the adaptations that we've made over the last five years, right? it was a story when donald trump talked about grabbing women between the legs and every republican basically shrugged their shoulders and did not

rescind their support of donald trump ahead of the november election and when the republicans managed to look away when he did all of his heinous bullying from the country's bully pulpit, we have adapted so completely to the republican party doing nothing that the there really is -- it is a difficult pivot to make. it's like turning around a very large ship in the middle of choppy seas to turn the focus back on what they did and this moment does require you to stand back and say my god, what they did was so awful and a bipartisan committee including liz cheney and adam kinzinger have subpoenaed the republicans of the house of representatives about a coup plot. here we are. >> yeah. that's what i said in the top of my last answer, and just step back and really integrate this, that they are -- they were asked to -- to come and voluntarily discuss what they but so they were entangled in this to begin

with, but now that they have -- now that they are complicit enough in a two-month coup plot or attempt of that day and the cover-up after ward to be subpoenaed by congress for people to subpoena their colleagues is incredibly consequential and incredibly scary and again, when these five tell the public, look, this is unconstitutional and this is a partisan committee. a, they had a chance to support a bipartisan commission. they did not. they opposed it. they were voluntarily invited to share their stories. they did not. now they've been subpoenaed and they are members of congress and they're likely to defy this. so that even if they're not -- if they're not vulnerable to contempt or criminal contempt and the committee just blows past this and goes to the hearing, of course, there's stuff that they know, the investigators about what these

did and think, it will be revealed and it's incredibly stunning what we've said all these years. we were shocked, but not surprised and i do think that this is not going to affect republican voters, nicole. it never does. it will affect the pem that might be turning away who thought, my goodness, we'll be brought relief about just how many people earn involved in a crime to overturn a legislature and in the department of justice and various pentagon and the white house, and it's appalling, and i think people are -- those are the people that will be appalled by it. people who might have been really fired up to oppose trump in '18 and '20 and then turned away thinking it was behind us.

>> thinking it was over. it is so not over, thank you all so much for starting off on this extraordinary news. dan, stick around. when we come back, that is more breaking news to tell you about this afternoon. doj is moving forward with the grand jury investigation into how donald trump and his close aides mishandeled classified materials that somehow, somehow ended up at mar-a-lago. subpoenas have been issued and interview requests have been made. the reporter on that story is next. plus how these sprawling investigations are moving inside merrick garland's justice department. do today's breaking news headlines reassure his vocal critics that justice will eventually be served. later in the program, january 6th committee member is live for her republican colleagues and all those stories and more when "deadline white house" returns after a quick break. don't go anywhere today. r a qui. don't go anywhere today.

-dad, what's with your toenail? -oh, that...? i'm not sure... -it's a nail fungus infection. -...that's gross! -it's nothing, really... -it's contagious. you can even spread it to other people. -mom, come here! -don't worry about it. it'll go away on its own! -no, it won't go away on its own. it's an infection. you need a prescription.

nail fungus is a contagious infection. at the first signs, show it to your doctor... ... and ask if jublia is right for you. jublia is a prescription medicine used to treat toenail fungus. its most common side effects include ingrown toenail, application site redness... ... itching, swelling, burning or stinging, blisters and pain. jublia is recognized by the apma. most commercially insured patients may pay as little as $0 copay. go to jubliarx.com now to get started. san francisco is getting back on its feet. people are heading back to the office and out with friends across the city. prop a ensures that muni delivers you there quickly and safely. with less wait time and fewer delays. and a focus on health and safety in every neighborhood through zero emissions fleets. best of all, prop a won't raise your taxes. vote yes on prop a for fast, safe, reliable transit. vo there are lots of choices when it comes to your internet and technology needs. but when you choose comcast business internet,

you choose the largest, fastest reliable network. you choose advanced security. and you choose fiber solutions with speeds up to 10 gigs available to more small businesses than any other provider. the choice is clear: get unbeatable business solutions from the most innovative company. get a great deal on this limited time price with internet and voice for just $49.99 a month for 24 months with a 2-year price guarantee. we need to reduce plastic waste in the environment. that's why at america's beverage companies, our bottles are made to be re-made. not all plastic is the same. we're carefully designing our bottles to be 100% recyclable, including the caps. they're collected and separated from other plastics, so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles. that completes the circle and reduces plastic waste. please help us get every bottle back. what's it like having xfinity internet?

it's beyond gig-speed fast. and it can connect hundreds of devices at once. that's powerful. unbeatable internet from xfinity. made to do anything so you can do anything. and there's more breaking news. another big story reverberating likely inside trump world, a grand jury investigation by federal prosecutors is probing whether classified documents and classified material from donald trump's white house that ended up at mar-a-lago was at any point along its journey mishandled. this according to a brand-new scoop published in yoet the new york times" this move that according to the times reporting that the justice department is examining the role of donald trump and other white house officials in handling of sensitive materials as trump's time in the white house drew to a close. in recent days, the justice

department has taken a series of steps showing that its investigation has progressed beyond the preliminary stages. prosecutors issued a subpoena to the national archives and records administration to obtain the boxes of classified documents. this according to two sources and as donald trump faces a swirl of compounding legal problems in the wake of his fraught election loss and the coup attempt the times points out this key implication of today's breaking news, quote. the prosecutor's moves in the case shows that the justice department under attorney general merrick garland is at least willing to examine a matter that may ultimately touch directly on the president's conduct. joining us now, one of the reporters, mike schmitt and msnbc national contributor, take us through what you guys are reporting. >> for us, i think the most significant thing is since trump left office the biggest question

is what is the justice department going to do about him? and most of those questions have been about january 6th. >> right. >> he's been criticized by democrats and anti-trump republicans that really want the justice department to do something. here the justice department is doing something in regard to donald trump and to conduct that went on in the white house in the final days of the administration about how these documents made their way out of the white house into mar-a-lago. so you know, for all of the critics of the justice department who have said, hey, where's the justice department on this issue, they are going full bore to try and figure it out. now, i would just say, just a note of caution on this is that these are very difficult cases to be made. we obviously know that from the hillary clinton stuff, but the government often has to run this stuff down. they have to do a full

investigation to understand what happened to the materials. so were those materials compromised? could some foreign actor or someone have access to them? if they did, does the government have to go back and change its sources and methods? it's a national security issue that is caused by the mishandling of these material. >> so i guess what you're siing it may not necessarily look like a prosecution, a national security one and there is an aspect to what doj will have to do and if anyone followed the last five years, and mar-a-lago isn't exactly locked down. what is the operational security at mar-a-lago. >> i think these were sitting in cardboard boxes. what happened to those boxes? who had access to them? these are things that the department wants to know because they're going to look at the information that was in the documents and they're going to say, okay, and i'm just making this up, this came from the cia and this came from here. we need to tell them that their

materials were in these documents because who knows what happened with these boxes that were -- these boxes. it's not like these boxes were missing for a few days or for a few weeks. they're missing for many months. they didn't go back to the national archives for almost a year after they were down there. so the justice department will want to understand where those documents went, who had access to them, why were they taken out of the white house, were they declassified as they went out of the white house? what is it that happened to them? >> it's been a busy time for the national archive and the post-trump presidency and something stuck out to you. >> yeah. mike and maggie said in their reporting that this was one of several requests that the department of justice has made to the archives and presumably i would guess as a prosecutor you only make one request for these classified documents. so that would be one of them, but i'm curious as to what the

other requests are from doj to nara and the reason i'm drilling down on this is of course, the ar kwiefs would have emails, documents and other materials from the time, from the election into january 6th and they may be making requests to the archives for some of those bad information that would be relevant to the department investigation of the coup and it is pure speculation. >> it's like the smoke. >> and there are some other requests and it doesn't make sense that it would be related to the classified material. so one question for you, mike, is to try to figure out what it is. >> if we knew we would have written it. it's a great question. >> as we know, the national archives have been asked by congress for those documents and the trump court went to block it

and they have failed. has the justice department basically headed down and what have the trump folks done about that? did they go to court to try and fight? it's a great question. >> i mean, isn't some of the vehicle for our knowledge of this that congress wanted to know what was in the boxes and doj in some ways is confirming because we are. isn't that a position? >> that could be the counterintelligence national security aspect where they have to do their due diligence and figure out what exactly was compromised and whether it was compromised. a sort of separate and parallel investigations would be what happened? how did these classified materials end up in mar-a-lago. i dealt with classified materials every day on the house intelligence committee. they are extremely, extremely sophisticated and complicated and onerous procedures that you have to deal with when dealing with classified information. these are not just documents

that are thrown around. they are put in lockboxes when you go somewhere and the other thing that jumps out at me is when the reporting about the gap in january 6th of the president's phone calls, was there a lot of reports about who might have known and one of the things that jumps out to me they also experienced with impeachment is the lower-level staff members generally try to do their job correctly and they will abide by those restrictions. so the real question is how did 15 boxes that include classified information get from the white house to mar-a-lago, who did donald trump have unpacking the boxes, but did he say i want to bring this with me or did he have someone else say and that's what this investigation is and the other key point is that they're also starting to talk to people. it's not just the records. they're interviewing witnesses. >> the key here in this kind of investigation would become a problem, and from the hillary

clinton email investigation. if there was an instance in which someone said to donald trump you cannot take these to donald trump, that's a problem because then he knowingly is taking these things. >> who wouldn't say that? who was left? oh, the coup plotter mark meadows? i mean, who was around? i'm serious. who was around in the end? who packed him? not melania? >> i don't know, but if these documents were sort of hastily leaving the white house and there was stuff that he had up there and they kind of threw it all in boxes and it went, that's one thing. if he was specifically told you cannot do this, you should not do this, that's what would move the ball and that's what would be a problem. >> and those kinds of people are national security types who would seem to me in trump world to be more likely to cooperate

with an investigation. i can't remember what real people were around. >> they all will cooperate. >> national security types? >> for sure, and the lower level staff members will cooperate. >> they don't have deep cover and they don't have political cover. >> right. >> and i mean, not for nothing, i asked you guys at the break. lock her up was about this. trump's campaign was about two things, building a wall and locking up hillary clinton for mishandling classified information. it's amazing, no room for irony in trump world. thank you for coming here and talking about your story. slow and stead, our next guest says the justice department is moving ahead in building a solid case albeit slowly to make sure trump and his allies don't ultimately escape criminal accountability and criminal scholar lawrence scribe is our guest. don't go anywhere. e is our guest. don't go anywhere.

♪♪ hi neighbor. did you switch to t-mobile home internet yet? trim your hedge. it's $50 bucks a month, with no price hikes. bam! ♪♪ it runs on t-mobile's wireless 5g network so all you gotta do is plug in one cord. t-mobile 5g home internet. just $50 bucks a month. no price hikes. no hidden fees. i did it. i switched to t-mobile home internet and i am loving it. don't sneak up on me like that. why didn't you tell me to switch earlier? ♪♪ your heart is at the heart of everything you do. and if you have heart failure, entrust your heart to entresto. ♪ ♪ it's the number one heart failure brand prescribed by cardiologists. entresto was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. heart failure can change the structure of your heart, so it may not work as well.

entresto helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. and with a healthier heart, there's no telling where life may take you. ♪ ♪ don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure. entrust your heart to entresto.

being connected. it's vital for every student. so for superintendent of public instruction, tony thurmond, it's a top priority. closing the digital divide, expanding internet access for low-income students and in rural areas. it's why thurmond helped deliver more than a million devices and connected 900,000 students to broadband over the last two years - to enable online learning. more than 45,000 laptops went to low-income students. re-elect tony thurmond. he's making our public schools okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete balanced nutrition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals.

and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪ on this day of truly historic escalations in those investigations into the ex-president and his inner circle questions arise about how the justice department will juggle all of it and weather all of it. the five sitting house republicans and close allies of the ex-president are the first members of congress to receive subpoenas from the january 6th select committee and the doj moving ahead with its probe of donald trump's sensitive including sensitive government documents. our next guest says we should see all of it and reassurance

that attorney general merrick garland is taking steps to hold trump accountable. joining me is lawrence tribe professor of constitutional law in harvard and has argued and won 35 cases in front of the supreme court. professor tribe, let's separate the two stories and tell me your thoughts of the story from "the new york times" that there is indeed an investigation into donald trump's handling of classified information. >> nicole, i find that quite reassuring and it really brings back memories back from 2017, i think it was, when donald trump right after firing the fbi director called sergey lavrov and sergei kislyak into the oval office by revealing the identity of a mossad israeli agent who was involved in an undercover

operation to discover an islamic plot to create methods of going through american airports without detection and carrying bombs. so we know we're dealing with a guy who is not particularly careful about classified information and if he can get some bragging rights by sharing it with adversaries he's willing to do it, now when we find all of this apparent top secret information finding his way to unsecured boxes to mar-a-lago, it's very encouraging that the department of justice isn't simply asking who packed the boxes, but what did the president then of the united states on his way out of the oval office have in mind in taking that information? did he use it for his own benefit? that would be a serious crime of espionage so there is both a

national security angle and a potentially criminal angle and the most encouraging thing to me, because i'm worried about accountability so that we don't have a repeat of all of these things in 2024 of the attempted coup and insurrection, what is most important to me is that no one should be above the law and the attorney general and his top deputy and associate attorneys general, people like lisa monaco should be taken at their word when they say they're going to follow the evidence wherever it leads right into the oval office, right into the former guy so stay tuned. i think this is an important development. it's interesting. there's an echo into what former attorney general eric holder told us yesterday. let me play that for you. >> if you look at the evidence that has been reported and i think remarkably well by members of the media and it is pretty

compelling the things that we have seen come from the january 6th committee and the things that i expect we will see come from the january 6th committee. i think all of the things that push me toward the distinct possibility of an indictment of the former president, people around him, cabinet members and people who serve at the justice department has to be seriously considered. >> do you -- do you share his assessment that from the evidence that's been gathered and some of it has been made public. not all of it yet, that doesn't start in earnest until next month gives him such confidence that an indictment of the ex-president and perhaps his cabinet member and closest allies is in his words, a serious possibility? >> i think that's right. a lot of people and including the former attorney general and remarks he made right after what you put on air expressed the view that you have to be very careful in not set a precedent

of going after former presidents the way some banana republics do, and i agree we have to be careful and that's why it's reassuring to me that merrick garland, the current attorney general is carefully dotting his eyes and crossing his ts and moving methodically right up the chain and possibly to the former president, but we have to be careful not to establish the president, but someone who is defeated in a fair election and should be leaving in a peaceful transition. instead, tries to create phony electoral slates and work with people around him in order to launch a coup and when the peaceful attempt to do that fails, incite violent insurrection. those are serious federal crimes and the important thing is they

not happen again because we were lucky the first time the former president did not succeed in overturning the election accidental though he appears to have told mo brooks very reesencely that he still wants to re-run that election and seize power, but it could happen again and it's very important that we establish a deterrent and the only way to do that is to pursue the possibility of an indictment, however unusual it would be. >> when you see the house select committee take this unprecedented move of issuing subpoenas today to five members of their own body and the instantaneous reaction from those five members is to de-legitimize a bipartisan investigation as part of their own chamber. do you worry that the disinformation has gone too far and corrupted whatever the 30% to 40% of the american people are? the 1/6 committee hasn't begun a

public presentation to the public yet and the reflexive response from mccarthy and others is to call it illegitimate. >> there are those who heard the big lie over and buying it. there may be some people that just can't be reached. but we haven't tested that proposition yet. the committee has done its work, the january 6 committee, they've investigated as eric swalwell pointed out, they've interviewed something like a thousand people. those who have a lot of information right now, members themselves of congress who as he pointed out if they didn't have something to hide, would not be acting to harm the country and harm the investigation but would rather cooperate, i do worry that people will by now have beenancet thettized and say there must be something in their

claims even though every court has agreed this is an legitimate and urgent investigation. so i think that the committee had no choice but to issue these subpoenas even if it is predictable that the people subpoenaed will thumb their noses at them and simply stonewall. the fact that they stonewall is going to itself be a bigtory when the committee begins to lay out the details in very full technical really in the eight hearings that will be held in june. >> and it will be remarkable moment to hear what the evidence is that implicates all of these gentleman. professor lawrence tribe, thank you for talking time to talk to us today. >> great to talk to you, nicolle. >> thank you. a quick break for us. we'll be back with the last word for dan goldman after a quick break. don't go anywhere. r dan goldman break. don't go anywhere.

it's time to get outdoorsy. it's hot! and wayfair has got just what you need. we need a rug. that's the one. yeah. yeah we're getting outdoorsy. save on outdoorsy furniture, decor, and more. you're so outdoorsy honey. what are you... spend less on everything outdoorsy at wayfair. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ hepatitis c? don't just treat it. crush it with mavyret. conquer it with mavyret. cure it. with mavyret. mavyret cures all types of hep c.

in only 8 weeks. the virus multiplies daily and can damage the liver over time. mavyret stops hep c and cures it. if you've had hepatitis b, it may flare up... ...and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hep b, a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems... ...hiv, other medical conditions... ...and all your medicines. do not take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin. report right away yellow skin, stomach pain or swelling... ...confusion, and bleeding or bruising. hep c? crush it with mavyret. conquer it. cure it. in only 8 weeks. see hep c gone with mavyret. ask your doctor about mavyret. abbvie could help you save. we need to reduce plastic waste in the environment. that's why at america's beverage companies, our bottles are made to be re-made. not all plastic is the same. we're carefully designing our bottles

to be 100% recyclable, including the caps. they're collected and separated from other plastics, so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles. that completes the circle and reduces plastic waste. please help us get every bottle back. i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! (sighs wearily) here i'll take that! (excited yell) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein,

one gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health. one gram of sugar, andrea: this is the hardest thing we will probably ever have to go through. st. jude has given us transportation, treatment. to know that we don't have bills, they take every other stress off of your shoulders. we're back with dan goldman. it strikes me whether we're covering the war in ukraine or the january 6 committee, any effort to hold donald trump accountable, it is because none of them have succeeded and you made the most valiant one that claim the closest in impeachment one. what are your thoughts as the two big pieces of the puzzle fall today. >> i think the best way to hold donald trump accountable is through criminal prosecution. congress can do whatever they could do. but i think we have learned that especially from impeachment that

it is not a viable path to any accountability. so, the fact as professor tribe said that, we are now starting to see some movement in doj around the white house, i do think it is encouraging. we're not seeing that same kind of movement and i believe we would about january 6 and about the coup attempt. and one of things that i keep coming back to is when lisa monaco relatively recently made their budget request and asked for 130 new prosecutors and a lot more money. and if congress, anyone in congress that -- democrats in congress want to see accountability for donald trump, beyond what january 6 has -- the committee has said, they need to give doj what they need so they have the resources to go after this. >> but there is no indication that budget is what is holding up. there is no indication they are

moving in that direction. >> i think it is. i think the january 6 prosecution is almost 800 cases. that is a tremendous amount and they're operating on a continuous resolution where they don't have a lot. this is such a massive undertaking and it is a complicated case and they need the resources to aggressively do it. >> we'll just assume that is what they want to do. dan goldman, thank you. up next for us, january 6 select committee member zoe lofgren will be on the extraordinary step her committee took against five republican colleagues. don't go anywhere. don't go anywhere.r a serious business woman! i'm always a mom- that is why you are smart and chose the durable fabric. perfect. i'm not a chef- and, don't mind if i do. but thanks to wayfair, i do love my kitchen. yes! ♪ wayfair you got just what i need. ♪ we need to reduce plastic waste in the environment.

that's why at america's beverage companies, our bottles are made to be re-made. not all plastic is the same. we're carefully designing our bottles to be 100% recyclable, including the caps. they're collected and separated from other plastics, so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles. that completes the circle and reduces plastic waste. please help us get every bottle back. this tiny payment thing- is a giant pain! hi ladies! alex from u.s. bank! can she help? how about a comprehensive point of sale system... that can track inventory, manage schedules- and customize orders? that's what u.s. bank business essentials is for. (oven explosion)

what about a new oven, can u.s. bank help us there? we can serve loans in as fast as 12 minutes. that would be a big help! huge! jumbo! ginormous! woo! -woo! finding ways to make your business boom. that's what u.s. bank is for. we'll get there together. >> tech: when you have auto glass damage, trust safelite. in one easy appointment... ♪ pop rock music ♪ >> tech: ...we can replace your windshield and recalibrate your advanced safety system. >> dad: looks great. thanks. >> tech: stay safe with safelite. schedule now. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

we have subpoenas involved

now and we would hope though that they comply with the subpoenas and they don't fight those sfeen subpoenas. they understand the relevance of their testimony and they should do the patriotic thing and come and share what te know. >> hi, again. it is 5:00 in new york. continuing our coverage of the breaking news from the house select committee investigating the january 6 insurrection, the decision to subpoena sitting members of congress as well as the stunning reporting in "the new york times" that federal prosecutors have started a grand jury investigation into whether the ex president mishandled white house documents including classified materials when he took them to his home at mar-a-lago. who remarkable develops in the efforts to hold republicans accountable for the efforts to overturn a free and fair election and disregard for sensitive material. the subpoenas issued today mark a significant step in that panel's investigation which is set to commence public hearings next month. they target five republican members of house, kevin

mccarthy, scott perry of pennsylvania, jim jordan of ohio, and andy biggs of arizona and mo brooks of alabama. all of whom did not comply with earlier requests from the committee to share what they know voluntarily. in the announcement today they note why testimony from these five is so important. quote, these members include those who participated in meetings at the white house, those who had direct conversations with president trump leading up to and during the attack on the capitol and those who were involved in the planning and coordination of certain activities on and before january 6. whether these five republican congress men ultimately comply is at this point uncertain. as questions now swirl about the long-term implications of today's decision. politico writing this, quote, members were mindful that demanding testimony from lawmakers would potentially set a precedent while house and senate enlices committees have subpoenaed members ab staff before. there is lel police dent for an

investigative committee guided by the majority party turning subpoena powers on fellow members of house. it is where we start the hour. joining us now is congresswoman zoe lofgren of california and we appreciate you being here on such a significant day for the committee. first tell me, you could sort of quantify how long and how intense the deliberation were about whether to take this step today? >> well, we didn't do this lightly. we've had a discussion among the members and as with every decision it was not a contentious discussion. but we had hoped that these members would come in upon request. if you look historically mostly if committees want to talk to a member of -- a fellow member and they ask them and they come in. that didn't happen in this case. now we have information from

other sources that lead us to believe that each one of these individuals who are colleagues have information the committee needs to tell the full story and so we felt at this point an obligation to issue these subpoenas. now they have a legal obligation to come in and tell us what they know. and it's, as you mentioned, subpoenas have been issued in the past primarily in the ethics context, although there is some historical precedent for subpoenas outside of the ethics context. but it is unprecedented that a violent mob would attack the capitol and try to overthrow the government as well. so, extraordinary events may call for extraordinary efforts. >> one of the things that is striking is that at least in the case of mr. jim jordan, it's --

you have evidence that tied him to the planning and the whole coup plot and i wonder how much of this is really an opportunity for these members to come in and put their own side of the story on evidence you've already collected from other witnesses? >> absolutely. i mean, we have interviewed over a thousand people. we've got hundreds -- over a hundred thousand documents, we have a lot of information that leads to certain conclusions. but these members were in the meetings. they were the ones that had the conversations. we want them to come in and tell what they know. this is a great opportunity for them to do that. and now it is a legal obligation for them to do that. >> when you look at the all of the people that the committee had access to, donald trump jr., kimberly guilfoyle and a dance

going on with rudy giuliani. are there any private -- in the body to have private conversations so say why rack up the legal bills. don jr. came in, why not you. is there a behind-the-scenes effort that is hey, kevin, in the gym or something, are there conversations where we don't see. >> we don't go into the men's gym. >> fair. in the dining room or -- or is there anything that happens that isn't so nasty where you just say come on, we all know that you were on the phone -- jim jordan told a reportner ohio he talked to him ump teen times. is there any private discussions with them or are they so paralyzed by fear of trump? >> well, i don't want to categorize what is motivating them. there is communication among members on business for example i'm on the judiciary committee, we were in mark-ups of bills all

day long until almost midnight last night and jim jordan was there and we discussed various matters but we did not discuss this. of course, he didn't receive his subpoena until today. i would hope that they will come forward and, you know, when we became members of congress we took an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the united states and that implicates a lot of things but one thing that comes with that is being part of a law and order body. making sure that we do what is necessary uphold the law. and even though i have big disagreements with these members on policy issues, i wouldn't want to assume that they will, because we disagree on issue x or y, that they'll simply defy their legal obligations an refused to come in.

i expect them to come in. >> i want to read what the "new york times" writes just sort of a summary sentence of some of the evidence that you are already aware of when it comes to mr. perry. the times said in the weeks after the 2020 election mr. perry, a member of congress since 2013 who is close to mr. jordan compiled a dossier of voter fraud allegations and coordinated a plan to try to replace the acting attorney general who was resisting trump's attempts to overturn the election with a more client official. that is jeffrey clark. mr. perry also endorsed the idea of encouraging trump supporters to maven on the capitol on january 6. has the committee ruled out criminal referrals for members of congress? >> well, we haven't discussed any of that. right now we want to hear from them. we have a lot of information that we put in these letters, we didn't put all of the information in the letters, but this is a serious matter. this is a plot to overturn

essentially the constitutional order as judge carter said in the eastman evidence case, it is more likely than not that fraud and crime was committed here. the threat to our system of government was very large. and we need to hear from all of the parties who have information so we could get the complete picture so we could protect our country going forward. i know there is a lot of interest in the world, in what is the department of justice going to do, what will the prosecutors, that is not the committee's job. we're a legislative committee and so we need to get all of the facts, and then we need to lay out what laws and procedures could be changed to make us safer and all of the parties to have responsibilities will do their job, the committee, it's job and the department of

justice its job and hopefully even one of the members of congress will do their job which is to comply with their legal obligation and to come in and truthfully say to the committee what they know. >> we know that you know that ronny jackson, republican member of congress ronny jackson was discussed by extremists in some encrypted messages. will he be subpoenaed? >> i won't get into who will be asked or requested or subpoenas. i think the process we've outlined is that the chairman will make any announcements. but obviously we've had to release some information in court filings to make the case as to the committee's process and the like and so there has been some information. and unfortunately, a few things have leaked. i don't know how and in some cases there have been filings in

criminal matters in the department of justice, information has come out. so a lot of information has come out to the public but certainly far from all of it. >> i mean, should we be -- could there be more subpoenas for other members of house and/or senate? >> it is possible. >> it's possible. so not to rule that out. i want to ask you, if you sort of step back from where this started, it started with kevin mccarthy sending his colleague john katko out to negotiate the terms of a bipartisan commission to investigate the deadly insurrection on the u.s. capitol and it is my understanding that congressman katko shared subpoena power an then something happens and they pull the plug out from under him. scalise whips votes against the commission that he was sent in to negotiate. is the understanding that republicans were at one time interested in that and then suddenly tried to kill it and

smear all of it and call itil legitimate. is it irrelevant? >> it is not the mission of the committee. but i thought it was odd. i mean, bennie thompson who is chairing this committee is chair of the homeland security committee and john katko is the senior republican on that committee. and john katko is a serious guy. he was given an outline he had to get everything and so -- and he did get everything he wants. and then mrs. mccarthy couldn't take yes for an answer. and i never understood that. but there you have it. >> yeah, and i mean i guess just ask because we hear kevin mccarthy on and around january 6 but liz cheney on the call. so obviously you're privy to everything she heard and saw. trump had to go. the 25th amendment was too slow for him. he to go be resignation or

impeachment or the 25th amendment and now he's unwilling to share anything he knows with committee. i wonder how aggressively you'll speak to enforce his subpoena. >> well, it is not just the leaked telephone call when i only heard on tv just as you did. but as a public statement, he went to the floor and denounced the entire matter and was very harshly critical of then president trump as was leader mcconnell. so i don't know what happened to mr. mccarthy. it is a mystery to me. >> well we're looking forward to those public hearings going along way toward solving some of these mysteries. zoe lofgren, i know it is a busy day so thank you for starting us off to thhour. wee grateful for the time. >> thank you. good to see you. >> joining us coverage, frank figliuzzi, also joining us msnbc

legal analyst joyce vance, former u.s. attorney now a law professor at the university of alabama, harry litman is here, also the host of the podcast talking feds and tim miller is here, writer at large and author of a new book, why we did it, as travel log why the republican road to hell and donnie deutsche is here. and this is fun. frank figliuzzi, let me start with you on the evidence. congresswoman lofgren seemed to be known how much we know because of the evidence in a the committee has to present and the various court filings, whether to enforce their subpoenas for emails or records or what not. but we know that they know a lot about the five members that were subpoenaed today and it falls into the prongs of the fake electors plot and aforeknowledge of violent. i think mo brooks was asked to participate in reinstalling

donald trump as someone's president and kevin mccarthy has such an expansive view of donald trump's criminality that he said i don't want to talk about the p-word, pardon. and toward the assumption of the office of the presidency in no uncertain terms. it is not if, it is when. tell me the significance of today's subpoenas and what this committee want is their testimony. >> yeah, so it is hard to actually not -- not overemphasize or underemphasize the gravity or the gravity of today's decision. this has to go all the way up. there is separate reporting that i'm hearing in the last hour that reportedly this went up to the speaker's office for approval. you understand the myth odd cal nature in which this committee is operating so this means it is very hard for anyone with a straight face, they're going to try it, but it won't have

credibility for anyone to say hey this is just a phishing competition. they're just trying to cast a wide net. no quite the opposite. for each individual there is facts that lead to this decision to subpoena them. this is serious business. they have a role to play. in fact i'll go a step further and would be very curious to here, we have a couple of prosecutors with us in the form of joyce and harry, i think what these five members need to do if they haven't already is get them sfz some serious criminal serious criminal defense council. i say that because the decision they have to make here is whether or not they expose themself to this line of questioning whether they themselves may have criminal exposure for thur role in january 6. i think their counsel would think twice before growing to this. i think it is very unlikely that we'll see all of them show up. i think we've already heard them claim about the illegitimate asy

of this committee and without a separate deal being cut with doj, saying, hey, are you okay with me testifying over here. wink, wink, nod, nod. will i get a deal over here. absent that, i'm not sure i'm going to the committee. so we've got the facts, it is not a phishing expedition, it is a very gravely serious decision. and maybe we could hope that someone like kevin mccarthy who has hopes of becoming speaker of the house some day will have respect for the institution and look forward to future compliance from others but i doubt it. i don't think these guys will show up. >> i don't think they'll show up. i think finding donald trump's favorite star burst flavor provides you from finding your spine in subsequent years. let me start with one example of what frank is talking about with you harry. they have the evidence they have on congressman andy biggs and his involvement with what appears to be a case that involves attempts to obstruct an official proceeding.

just based on the public utterances of the committee members. so this is what the committee knows about andy biggs. and i'm just going to dig into one of the members subpoenaed with the five pieces of evidence that they have that they want to talk to him about. one, we're aware of your participation, andy bigs, in certainly plays meetings in person at the white house and remotely regarding various aspects of planning for january 6. on december 21st for example you and several other members of house freedom caucus participated in an in-person white house meeting suggesting that the discussion that day and in subsequent meetings addressed among other things a plan that vice president pence as a presiding officer of the joint session on january 6 would refuse to count certain states' votes. second, we're aware that ali alexander, now an extremist who is cooperating with the 1/6 committee has stated publicly that he along with you and two other house members came up with

the idea, the idea to bring protesters to washington. it was one that you, andy biggs and ali alexander came up with on january 6 for the counting of the electoral votes. ali alexander is an early proponent of the stop the steal movement who called for violence before january 6. we would like to understand precisely what you knew before the violence on january 6. about the purposes and planning and expectations for that march on the capitol. third, we have information regarding your efforts to persuade that the election was stolen to seek assistance from those efforts to overturn the election. certain communications you had with mark meadows relate to that topic that we already have. finally, fourth, recent information from former white house personnel has identified an effort by certain house republicans after january 6 to seek a presidential pardon for activities taken in connection with president trump's efforts to overturn the results of 2020

election. your name was identified as a potential participate in that effort. we would like to understand the details of your -- of the request for a pardon. i mean, harry it sounds like representative andy biggs might be in trouble. >> yeah. fifth. get a lawyer. sixth. don't talk under oath. so agree with frank. i want to point out one thing. we're assuming that they're all going to be in lockstep. think of a guy like biggs. all of them have a prisoners dilemma. because one reason that they're served with a subpoena is to try to make them rethink voluntarily cooperation. so his lawyer will sit him down and say look, maybe give this thought to this. you won't be saying anything under perjury that would get you perjury charges and save certain legal fees and you'll probably get convicted of attempt and might even do some time, et cetera. i think one of the hopes to peel

off one of the five to get some voluntarily cooperation. why are we here in the first place. we need biggs because they have neither trump nor meadows. if you think about historically parallels, where say ronald reagan spoke about iran/contra or the people that knew the most that would have been cooperative, this wouldn't be happening. but we're starting here at this very point. because the two people who do know everything to construct the whole scenario have -- are from the start, nonstarters thumbing their nose at the committee. >> joyce, i want to ask you about the attempted corruption of doj because that makes a -- that is a threat in one of these members would were subpoenaed today's original invitation to come chitchat with the committee back in december. this is the letter to congressman perry. it said we have received evidence from multiple witnesses that you had an important role in the efforts to install

jeffrey clark as acting attorney general. and rosen have provided evidence regarding these issues an we have received evidence that others who work with clark were aware of these plans. we're also aware that you had multiple text and other communications with president trump's former chief of staff mark meadows regarding mr. clark and we also have evidence indicating that in that time frame you sank communications to the former chief of staff using the encrypting signal app. mr. clark plans to invoke his fifth amendment right against self incrimination. when clark decided to invoke his 5th amendment rights he understands that we stand to pose questions among his interactions with you among a host of other topics. it feels like they're all just buying time. when they have all of the evidence from the named witnesses do we not get to the truth about what scott perry did to overturn the elections and

corrupt doj. >> you know, it was very interesting, something that representative lofgren said to you very clearly is we know a lot more than the public is already aware of. and that is the threat that these members of congress face if they don't testify. if they don't comply with these subpoenas. jeffrey bossert clark, knew enough to take the 5th amendment and if he testifies under only he would incriminate himself. and that is maybe the north star other folks need to look at. something that i think about as we head into these hearings, nicolle, is that you don't have to have the individual themselves talking about what they did. right, we know that the committee is likely prepared to tell the story of what each of these representatives did through their staff, perhaps through documents, text messages and other information that they have and that compelling picture will appear. and if it is damning for these members of congress, what won't be present when the committee holes its hearing is their version of the facts.

maybe their efforts to save themselves. in a criminal case prosecutors are forbidden to tell the jury that a person failed to make a question because it looks so bad and it looks like you have something to hide. it makes you look guilty. but there will be to prohibition like that in these committees and in the hands of skilled interlocketers they will talk about the members of congress does not show up when issued subpoenas and they will look terrible. i think that backfires on this. let me make one quick point. i think we're so in the weeds that we forget what is going on here. if there was a plain vanilla investigation, say a theft into members desks on the floor of the house, and say a congressional committee was holing an investigation to determine do we need safer desks, do we need more security guards, all of these members who

had been present who had knowledge, they'd be following all over themselves to testify to help congress make itself safer. it is really odd that in such a serious situation involving a coup that these members are doing everything that they can do to avoid testifying. we don't have to leave our common sense at the door when we consider what went on here. the fact that they're avoiding voluntarily testimony and appear to avoid subpoenas, that tells us all we need to know. i hope doj is getting that message loud and clear as well. >> i want to follow up on that. it is a great analogy and all i that wofr if donald trump were the one that pill ferred through all of the desks, they would not participate in any investigation into how to make the desks safer. i'll ask you to stick around. i've saved best for last for tim and donnie. when we come back, we'll turn to the reaction from capitol hill where republicans are promising revenge, retribution when they

take control of congress. and the other big breaking news, doj is now known to be ramping up an investigation into how classified white house documents wound up at the golf club of the disgraced ex president. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere today. after a quick break. don't go anywhere today. it's the number one heart failure brand prescribed by cardiologists. entresto was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. heart failure can change the structure of your heart, so it may not work as well. entresto helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. and with a healthier heart, there's no telling where life may take you. ♪ ♪ don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb.

the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure. entrust your heart to entresto. it's time to get outdoorsy. it's hot! and wayfair has got just what you need. we need a rug. that's the one. yeah. yeah we're getting outdoorsy. save on outdoorsy furniture, decor, and more. you're so outdoorsy honey. what are you... spend less on everything outdoorsy at wayfair. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ i've got moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now, there's skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months, after just 2 doses. skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis.

tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches, or coughs, or if you plan to, or recently received a vaccine. ♪ nothing is everything ♪ talk to your dermatologist about skyrizi. learn how abbvie could help you save.

we continue to follow today's big breaking news from capitol hill. the january 6 select committee has issued subpoenas to minority leader ken mccarthy and four other members of congress. let's bring in correspondent who today helmed a fantastic hour of coverage, garrett haake. so i want to read from the mo

brooks letter. because this is what they want to know from mo brooks and like down on planet earth where up is up and down is down and someone whose salary is paid by taxpayer, we write today regarding conversations from former president trump. you recently made the following public comment in a till vised program, that president trump has asked me to resigned the election of 2020. he always brings it up. quote, we have to rescind the election. we have to take joe biden down and put me in now, end quote. likewise in a recent press release you made the following statement, president trump asked me to rescind the 20 to elections to remove joe biden from the white house. and immediately put president trump back in the white house and hold a new special election for the presidency. as a lawyer i've repeatedly advised that january 6 was the final election contest verdict and neither the u.s.

constitution or the code permit what president trump asks, period. so you've got mo brooks for woman january 6 wasn't a deadly insurrection, maybe, but it was also, quote, the final election contest verdict, whatever that means. would said bafta, enough, donald trump wants many me to resigned, and maybe they come in and say, all right, the joke is up. here is what i know. but it doesn't look that way, doesn't it? >> it didn't look that way at all. and to the conversation that you were having with your other guests, i think the lawmakers will decide whether they want to hang together or separately and i think the politics is clear. they've going to hang together and not show up and i think the ball ends up very uncomfortable in merrick garland's court if democrats take this to the logical conclusion of trying to hold members in context when they don't show up. you could find yourself in a situation come midsummer where members of congress voting to hold other members of congress in contempt for refusing to

respond to a congressional subpoena and then a doj that as fried very hard to be as apolitical as possible it is an absolute potential mess here. but i don't think there is any scenario in which mo brooks decides to come in and detail the rest of his conversations with donald trump and i would say he's probably most likely of the zero percent chance group here because of the falling out he's had with the former president over the pulled endorsement of his senate candidacy again in alabama. >> so let me come in at another direction, garrett, because it also strikes me and zoe lofgren just made this point, you don't know what we know. she put it more nicely than that. because she's nicer than i am. but neither do these five members know what they already know. 1,000 people, a thousand people have come in talked. there are reports they're on tape. and we know that right under the senior folks are some of the

most forthcoming witnesses to the 1/6 select committee. what if they play hours an hours of tape that show what mo brooks and kevin mccarthy and all of the other members did. how do you counter program that. >> that might change their legal options but it is not going to change their political optionsch you make a good point about a number of witnesses. a thousand of witnesses are done. as we learn from the mccarthy tapes, on every phone call where there is members there are also staff. there are witnesses and people listening to every conversation that happened on capitol hill. you can't have a private conversation on capitol hill or between members, it almost isn't done. and those kind of things will come out. and will potentially cause perhaps legal problems if there is laws that were broken for any of members. but i could tell you, there is probably nothing that would help kevin mccarthy's chances of being elected speaker more than

being held in context by this committee. and so whatever might come out about them, i think there is a political calculation made a long time ago and we saw it today in the statements from all of the members using very similar language that they will tweet this committee as a partisan endeavor and call it illegitimate and even though court after court has upheld the legitimacy and that is how peel play it from now until election game. >> how could they play it. some of them may have some criminal exposure. are any of them retaining real lawyers to your knowledge? >> well, look, i think all thex have retained some form of counsel and the variety of exposure here probably varied by members. the person i'm most interested in is scott perry. he's involved in some of the doj pieces of this that came out in ray senate report. he seems to be most actively involved in the early stages of what became january 6 and what was the president's efforts to

over turn the election based on what we've seen publicly. so i think that is one of these that i'm watching most closely. but in terms of actual legal exposure, or criminal exposure, on any of the other members i'm not sure how much is there. the committee said they know and i guess we're all going to find out. >> we'll keep watching. garrett haake, thank you for being part of our coverage. tim miller, let me bring you in on that. your book opens a harrowing tale of a close friend. am i being a spoiler here. >> that is okay. >> and a close friend who was once and every republican has a story like this and what which we used to know and like and think is normal planned the insurrection pre-party. >> yeah, and she was subpoenaed by this committee. and went and testified. carolyn wren. so that has been in the news before. we are close friends and had worked together on a number of

campaigns and i tried to understand what was going through her head when she's making these decisions and explain that in the book which is like it is easy to you know sort of paint all of these picture as sociopaths and racists and bigots, but beneath all of that are real humans that are making descriptions an they're making different judgment calls based on sometimes misinformation they've been fed from people in their eco chamber, sometimes because out of naked political interest, sometimes out of greed and i just wanted to explore all of this in the book and i it is very relevant to the decision these five members have to make. because they had different degrees of exposure to how they participated in january 6. some of them just kind of went along with it because they thought that there could be no harm, no foul. and i'm just going aaround with crazy mr. trump and he's going to be gone on january 20th and then perry and brooks were

active conspirators to attempt to over turn the election and attempt to prevent joe biden from taking power peacefully. that is unprecedented, right. and so understand -- and so this committee is -- it is incumbent upon them to understand what motivated them to do that. i tried to get into that with caroline and some of those who were involved at the staff level. but i think the unprecedented part of this is how high it went. that there are people that are actual members of congress who are involved in the scheme and so i think that they have some very tough choice as head of them as they try to balance their political interest versus this legal and historic exposure they face. >> and donnie, i'm sure garrett is one of best reporters on capitol hill and i'm sure he's right, sticking a thumb in the nose of the committee is great for his speaker candidacy. but not everything is reductive in that way.

and we don't know about what we don't know about how people will process this sort of constant thumbing of nose in the face of what will be a televised case. the difference between what the 1/6 committee is going to put on an mueller and everything that the mueller report, the 1/6 committee is not. it is existing only on television. all of the testimony has been recorded and it is a story that will be told in prime time night after night after night. and we know that donald trump will be watching. so, what do you think about these sort of hardened positions about not trying to explain what they were doing on the phone with the right-wing extremists like ali alexander? >> you know, you said we're not quite sure how people will process this. i actually do think that we have a preview to it and we have a preview in three quarters of republicans think it was a big lie. that the election was stolen. regardless if they were presented night after night 60 court hearings and so many

republican court justices that have said his old head of justice said that there was no -- nothing inappropriate in this election. yet, it is a fact that they don't want to absorb. and they're going to live in their own truth. so my concern is as we go forward with this, because you could figure out what happened already, even before this, we don't know what went down. it is just enough out there. and we're so entrenched now in and big part of the republican party, three quarters them and we see what is happening in the primaries are going to believe their truth, not the truth. so despite it being televised, what we've seen in the last year, in the last two years, and in this maga world that we live on, that the presentation of the reality is not the reality that people absorb. and so i'm a little skeptical, obviously this all needs to get done and we'll see where it goes from merrick garland point of view but as far as swaying hearts and minds, i'm skeptical. it is sad.

it is sad but i -- because you could present these facts. i do it every day. we're all talking about the relationships that we have with people. and it is just we're living in this world now, particularly because of this, that you could find any justification for any truth or any set of nonfacts that you want. so i just wonder how much heads will really turn. >> i guess matt dowd would say that you don't need to change the minds of the republicans who believe in the big lie. it is sort of the people that have tuned out politics in the intervening years thinking it was done to see this emerge in the worlds of donald trump's closest advisers, it is an open question. we'll keep at it. when we come back, the other big story that broke today. remember lock her up. it was donald trump and mike flynn and all of those guys chanting about locking up hillary clinton for her handling of classified information. well, federal prosecutors are now investigating the ex president's handling of, you

guessed it, information and how six boxes from the white house ended up at his golf club. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. k break fors k break fors we'll be right back. that's right, jamie. but it's not just about savings. it's about the friends we make along the way. you said it, flo. and don't forget to floss before you brush. your gums will thank you. -that's right, dr. gary. -jamie? sorry, i had another thought so i got back in line. what was it? [ sighs ] i can't remember. it's still the eat fresh® refresh at subway®, and now they're refreshing their classics... with a classic! [ refresh] because their classic sweet onion sauce is getting refreshed on the new sweet onion steak teriyaki. couldn't get brady this time, huh? subway® keeps refreshing and refre- ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ introducing the all-new infiniti qx60. take on your wild world in style. ♪ my a1c stayed here, take on your wild world it needed to be here. ruby's a1c is down with rybelsus®. my a1c wasn't at goal, now i'm down with rybelsus®. mom's a1c is down with rybelsus®. (♪ ♪) in a clinical study, once-daily rybelsus® significantly lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction.

serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? (♪ ♪) ask your healthcare provider about rybelsus® today. we got the house! you did! pods handles the driving. pack at your pace. store your things until you're ready. then we deliver to your new home - across town or across the country. pods, your personal moving and storage team.

[ crowd chanting ] >> lock her up.

it was disgusting, chilling and silly and stupid all at once. and he reveled in it. it was a campaign slogan repeated at rally after rally, call an answer between his supporters and as saw there. even after donald trump became the president of the united states, in 2016. what is the irony of that today is obvious and likely lost on him. they wanted to lock up former secretary of state hillary clinton for mishandling classified information. it is a lot like the subject of today's breaking news in "the new york times" earlier today. having to do with trump himself this time. news that federal prosecutors have begun a grand jury investigation into whether white house documents brought to mar-a-lago were mishandled. we're back with the panel. fig, what are your chain of custody into the classifying of this material. >> nicolle, i want to kind of

clarify this and put context around the gravity of this grand jury that we're learning about from mike shmitt's reporting. just a national security question alone would not lead to a grand jury. i hear folks talking about this is probably just a security inquiry. it is not. it is certainly that, you want a damage assessment, who had access to the boxes and who looks at what and do we have to return it or notify those agencies. that is what happens with a spill or a leek investigation. but the fact that we've learn today that a grand jury is sitting tells me that doj has some inkling or some knowledge or some evidence to think a crime may have been committed. and here is why that is really significant. the president of the united states is what is called an original classifying authority or a declassifying authority. i was an original classifying authority within the fbi recording fbi related

information but the ultimate declasfying authority going through the proper procedures is the president of the united states. and doj must be looking at that authority and going, he's going to claim this. he's going to claim this as a defense. he's going to say that he did some magic things on his way out of the door and he declassified these documents. so for them to overcome that, they've got something else. someone they think has committed a crime here. and they're so sure of it that they're willing to say, i don't think his defense of declassifying is going to hold. >> i'm so interesting. harry, i'm curious about your insights on one, as frank said, the grand jury is looking at evidence in this case, and, two, because of a president sweeping authority to declassify things that is something as frank is saying, that rises -- above that bar. >> i agree with frank. but it zp mean a file was opened and that mean itself it goes up to at least lisa monaco, the

deputy attorney general to approve it. but second, i have heard some people saying they don't normally charge this or care much about it. my experience has been other wise. they do care about, at least about potential criminal liability. and it is very possible that the immediate target here is not trump but somebody on the staff and they would go forward with that and in any event. it is hard to see this as actually putting the target on the forehead of this one being the one that goes for trump himself. so i would think that the target here is someone beneath him. >> i don't think anyone thinks that trump packed his own boxes but the times does go to sort of -- makes a point of noting that it is the first known example of a garland just department looking at evidence that could ensnare trvp donald

trump by what is not an investigation into trump's inner circle. because we know how they react. we watched them during mueller and during impeachment. they squeal like stuck pigs under scrutiny or investigation. what do you think the significance of is this in terms of all of the pressure that seems to be bearing down on the garland justice department to make sure that the message is conveyed that the rule of law zp apply to trump. >> sure. i mean. news flash here is that doj is not afraid of investigating a case where donald trump could end up right in their sights, the reason you have a grand jury investigation in a case like this because you don't know all of the details. frank is right, you could only use a grand jury for a criminal investigation so we know that there is some investigation going on here. it is likely into conduct. they know that these 15 boxes ended up at mar-a-lago. they need to figure out who was involved. who knew what.

did anybody know for -- forrin tans there was classified information and were there conversations about taking the boxes to mar-a-lago my way. that is what doj will try to figure out. they have no way of knowing up front if that will lead right to the lead to the former president or not. the fact that they're willing to do that i think tells us a lot in term of what doj's level of commitment is when merrick garland makes statements like the one he made in regards to the january 6th investigation, that he'll follow the evidence no matter where it leads. i think that's important. when we look at the criminal conduct here, harry's right to say the fact that a case is open doesn't mean trump himself is a target of the investigation. but it could get there pretty quickly. and the bookend cases are hillary clinton, where there wasn't a prosecution because she didn't know that there was classified material. what prosecutors have to prove

so not that the defendant should have known the material was classified they either took away or retained. they have to prove they actually knew it. and the book end case is general he petraus and he was prosecuted. he pled guilty to a misdemeanor. it's hard to imagine donald trump ever acknowledging liability and pleading guilty to a misdemeanor. if it identifies him as a defendant it could ultimately be a felony prosecution under us covid 18-9-24, but it's a jump that far. >> political hypocrisy kicks you in the teeth, tim.

>> every accusation is a projection with the trumpers. that's been clear from the start just another example of -- from the recent news. in addition to the classified information about clinton, the other part of the crooked hillary, if you remember, was the favor trade with the clinton global initiative. that was the underlying substance of that critique. so, you know, that was -- we should remember, a charity. that was actually going to help -- that was helping people. that was the accusation that there was favor trading going on with the charity. now today to the recent news. the saudis paid kushner $2 billion despite the fact that he has no experience as a money manager. this gets lost. there's $2 billion. the a bet. there's no way to look at this other than as a bribe and a bet that trump and kushner could be

back in power and that mbs who's a murderous autocratic thug wants to have more friendly people back in the white house next time, so he's working this deal behind the scenes -- or not behind the scenes -- now in public with kushner. we could go on and on about all this. it's similar to the testimony, right? all these guys are not testifying. remember what hillary clinton did? she had to go and testify at the benghazi hearings. look, a lot of stuff that was bad faith nonsense. each of these occasions, their accusations is really a confession of something they're undergoing in trump world. >> donny, with all that stipulated i'll give you the last word. >> democracy's in play. when you open the seeingment with trump doing lock her up, sometimes we're a couple years removed how heinous he was in office. as of right now we have 19 secretary of state races in play. 19 believe the big lie.

our democracy is in play. no mistake about it. >> donny you have to come back and write the ad to make people care, because i think anecdotally democrats aren't sure that matters. mat toerg everybody if they believe what trump just said, trump has two dozen secretary os state who may not honor the results of the will of the voters. thank you so much for spending the hour with us. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. us a quick break for us we'll be right back.

we need to reduce plastic waste in the environment. that's why at america's beverage companies, our bottles are made to be re-made. not all plastic is the same. we're carefully designing our bottles to be 100% recyclable, including the caps. they're collected and separated from other plastics, so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles. that completes the circle and reduces plastic waste. please help us get every bottle back. okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete balanced nutrition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪

growing up in a little red house, with 30 grams of protein. on the edge of a forest in norway, there were three things my family encouraged: kindness, honesty and hard work. over time, i've come to add a fourth: be curious. be curious about the world around us, and then go. go with an open heart, and you will find inspiration anew. viking. exploring the world in comfort. hey businesses! you all deserve something epic! so we're giving every business, our best deals on every iphone - including the iphone 13 pro with 5g. that's the one with the amazing camera? yep! every business deserves it... like one's that re-opened! hi, we have an appointment. and every new business that just opened! like aromatherapy rugs! i'll take one in blue please! it's not complicated. at&t is giving new and existing business customers our best deals on every iphone. ♪ ♪

hi, i'm steve and i live in austin, texas. i work as a personal assistant to the owner of a large manufacturing firm. i've got anywhere from 10 to 50 projects going at any given time. i absolutely have to be sharp. let me tell ya, i was struggling with my memory. it was going downhill. my friend recommended that i try prevagen and over time, it made a very significant difference in my memory and in my cognitive ability. i started to feel a much better sense of well-being. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

following the scene today at the capitol as the members of congress take a moment of silence to mark the grim milestone we've passed. 1 million coronavirus deaths in the united states. sad day. we'll be right back. 1 million coronavirus deaths in the united states. sad day. we'll be right back. rious busin! i'm always a mom- that is why you are smart and chose the durable fabric. perfect. i'm not a chef- and, don't mind if i do. but thanks to wayfair, i do love my kitchen. yes! ♪ wayfair you got just what i need. ♪

when traders tell us how to make thinkorswim® even better, we listen. because platforms this innovative aren't just made for traders —they're made by them. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade under district attorney gascón, i prosecuted car break-ins. all repeat offenders, often in organized crime rings. but when chesa boudin took office, he dissolved the unit and stopped me from collaborating with the police on my cases. now home and car break-ins are on the rise because repeat offenders know they can get away with it. chesa boudin is failing to do his job. there's a better way to keep san francisco safe. recall chesa boudin now.

>> thank you so much for letting us into your home on this thursday. we are grateful. both beet with alicia menendez in for ari melber starts now. >> thank you so much. welcome to "the beat." i'm alicia mendez in for ari mel berp it's unprecedented the january 6th committee subpoenaing five sit lawmakers for the first time. that is a huge deal. lawmakers rarely subpoena their own colleagues. clearly kevin mccarthy gop leader