joining me now barbara mcquade and joyce vance, former u.s. district of alabama and a professor at the university of alabama law school. they were both msnbc legal contributors and co-hosts of the podcast "#sisters in law." great to see you both. barbara, i'm going to start with you. will the supreme court even take up the appeal case by the trump legal team? >> i think it's very unlikely, jonathan. i think that the decision that the court of appeals made, which affirmed the trial court in this case, really got it right and had a very lengthy and well-reasoned opinion. and essentially what they said is it is the incumbent president other than joe biden who gets to decide whether there is privilege that should be asserted because executive privilege is a qualified one. and while a former president can give his input and his advice, ultimately the decision belongs to the current president. i think that's a very sound decision. it's based on supreme court precedent, and so it seems to me very unlikely that they'll take it up. as congress has requ

attorney and law professor, barbara mcquade, "washington post" white house bureau chief ashley parkery. the build back better bill was supposed to be, according to chuck schumer passed by christmas, but right now according to a lot of reporting, joe manchin asked the republicans to ask for another cbo score on it, and they came back with if you factor in inflation and also not sun setting a lot of these provisions but renewing them, yeah, i guess renewing them, that it would cost $3 trillion, twice as much. so manchin now has been singing signaling now he's opposed. >> senator manchin, not just because he has concerns about things that are actually in the bill, you know, some of the specifics on the substance, and then he has broader concerns about the cost of this bill, especially in light of inflations. so you summed that up very well. the problem for the white house is president biden is someone as a former senator who never really likes and has made clear, he never really likes to drop the hammer, to do that sort of all right, here's the moment you're with us or against us and app

. >> joining us now are barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney in michigan and a law professor at the university of michigan law school. and joyce vance, former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama and a professor at the university of alabama school of law. they are both msnbc legal contributors. barbara, i hear these judges, and it's hard to understand how nobody who assembled the attackers on january 6th has been charged with a crime. >> yes, jonathan. i think that is something that is disturbing to everybody. and i would add the word after your sentence, "yet." i don't know this is the end of the road to investigate something of the magnitude of what we're seeing from the january 6th committee with plots and e-mails and power points and other things like that would take many, many months to investigate. so the fact we have not seen people charged yet does not mean they won't be charged ever. i understand the frustration we haven't seen charges yet, nor have we seen any inkling of charges. but that's the way it's supposed

joining me now is barbara mcquade. she's a former u.s. t the university of michigan law school, also an msnbc news analyst. so, barbara, given roger stone's history, did you think he was going to say anything? did you think he was going to walk in and cooperate? >> no. i mean, he has shown himself to be an obstructionist. when he has testified, he's been convicted of lying. the goal there would be to at least lock him into a story or force his hand and see what he's going to do. now he's invoked his fifth amendment rights not to testify, okay, and now they know where they need to go from there. i think it was an important step in the process. >> what kind of information do you think they want or need from him because it is interesting to me that he's like i wasn't there, but then it's like, no, you were there. you were there the fifth and the sixth. i mean what kind of information could they potentially get either from testimony had he testified or from other witnesses as to what he was doing on january 6th? >> so the goal of the congressi

ali vitali, barbara mcquade, thank you both.e it. >>> coming up, we'll talk to a doctor on the front lines of minnesota who says her hospital is bursting at the seams. we'll be right back. plp blpñrÑiearn about covid-19, the more questions we have. the biggest question now, what's next? what will covid bring in six months, a year? if you're feeling anxious about the future, you're not alone. calhope offers free covid-19 emotional support. call 833-317-4673, or live chat at calhope.org today. [crowd cheering] i'm not a coach, but i invested in invesco qqq. which gives me access to next-gen statistical analysis software. become an agent of innovation with invesco qqq. (swords clashing) to next-gen statistical ana-had enough?re. -no... arthritis. here. aspercreme arthritis. full prescription-strength? reduces inflammation? thank the gods. don't thank them too soon. kick pain in the aspercreme. >>> welcome back. as many americans get to return home after holiday travel, the latest uptick in cases is already putting a strain on hospi

i want to bring in now barbara mcquade, professor at the university of michigan law school. also served as u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan. and on this question of privilege, barbara, i want to read to you the headline that politico wrote. now, we should say, questions during oral arguments don't always correlate to the opinions. but the write-up today, "appeals court judges poised to reject trump's efforts to withhold jan 6 documents." if you listen to the audio it sure sounded like it. how do you sound to you? >> i agree with that, chris. skepticism, the degree to which they seemed downright hostile to this argument. you played a clip there of a judge cutting off the lawyer for president trump who not only were advancing losing arguments but they were also trying to stall. they were saying things like this court should look at each individual document, document by document, and that's when the judge said whoa, whoa, whoa, we're not looking at these individual documents, which would take months and months and months. what she said was the question here is

attorney barbara mcquade.does raise some important constitutional issues. what are the chances here that the court will decide to hear arguments in the case? if they do, what exactly will they be ruling on? >> i think it's slim in terms of the chances that they'll take up this case because it seems very clear that president trump has not raised any legitimate issues of executive privilege. he is correct in one thing. this question has not been squarely presented to the court before. for that reason, i say it's not 100% likely that the court will let the appellate court decision stand. i think there's a slim chance. i think it's only slim, and i think it is more likely they'll simply decline to take the case and let the lower courts hear it. if they do take it up under the ordinary schedule, it wouldn't be argued until later on the merits and it may not be until june that we get a decision, which is why the committee is asking for this rapid decision and turn around time so they can get on with their work. >> t

attorney barbara mcquade, she's also an msnbc legal analyst.his ruling, pete. >> well, the trump lawyers have already filed notice that they will appeal. their next stop is the federal appeals court here in washington. if they lose there, they can try the supreme court. but this involved a request from richard neal, chairman of the house ways and means committee. he wanted copies of mr. trump's tax returns for all four years he was in the white house plus the year before and the year after. the committee said it wanted to see how the irs was carrying out a policy that requires automatic audits of a president's taxes. neal invoked a federal law that requires the treasury and the irs to turn over any person's tax returns when demanded by congress. mr. trump's lawyers said the real reason congress wanted his returns was to look for something embarrassing, that this was a strictly political exercise and the committee had no legitimate legislative purpose. but the ruling by the judge who was appointed by president trump, by the way, said it's undoub

joining me now is tim miller, writer at large at the bulwark, and barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst. and i'm going to start with you, barbara. this is wild. this story of miss freeman, who had to change her appearance because she was afraid, her photograph was widely circulated by right-wingers after the election, to interview her reuters had to agree not to describe the way she looks today. reuters has also documented more than 850 threats and harassing messages to election administrators including about 100 that legal experts say could be prosecuted under federal law, but almost no one so far has been held accountable. how is it possible, how is it possible that this woman could be essentially tortured and tormented by someone who is kanye west's publicist and it not be a crime? >> well, certainly, joy, it's very disturbing that people who are the backbone of our democratic process, the people who work at our elections, i think about my own polling place, it's mostly senior citizens that go in there and work those long days to make sure that everybo

attorney barbara mcquade.ood to have you here so let's begin with this new york civil investigation into the trump organization. explain to us what information the attorney general wants to get from donald trump, and is there any way trump can get out of testifying? >> well, ordinarily, in a civil case, alex, it's really quite common to take the deposition of people who were involved in the investigation. in a case about fraud, about inflating or deflating property values, a really important part of the case is determining whether the person knew they were making false statements and whether they had an intent to defraud, and so taking their deposition is the best way to get that information. the reason the stakes are so high is because it's donald trump. he's given tons of depositions in his past as a businessman, and now, his deposition is being sought again in his capacity as a businessman and so these theatrics about it being a witch hunt -- in case there is some concern that the statements that he makes a

that's why the supreme court should strike down roe. >> pete williams, thank you, ken dilanian, barbara mcquade, yasmin vossoughian, thank you all as well. we're going to be listening live to those arguments when they happen in just about 50, 45 minutes from now. i want to bring in a guest that's with me in front of the supreme court, the president and ceo for the center of reproductive rights, nancy, thank you for walking over and being with us this morning. >> absolutely. >> we'll get into legal piece of it here. give me your big picture. this, i know, has been the work of your career. what are the stakes in your view? >> the stakes are huge. i mean this is actually the fourth the time the center has been arguing in the last six years. every case is because the state has been in open defiance of the protections under the constitution by roe versus wade. so we are back hear again today, i mean, four times is too many, but we are here. we are ready. we will be making the case to the court that there's only one outcome here consistent with their precedence, the rule of law, gender equality, and

prosecutor and hosts the podcast, "sisters in law" along kimberley atkins, jill winebanks and barbara mcquade. good to see all of you. we again seem to be at the receiving end of confusing messaging from the cdc and biden administration as they try to combat this omicron variant. what do you think is going on here? could we be doing better? >> yeah, we could be doing better. there is a continued amount of confusion because the science or data coming in is causing there to be changes in how we're managing people who are positive. the messaging is very confusing. they need to get their act together. i understand the science. it is basically what dr. fauci said which is the point you get infected yourself and would be positive you would be able to carry that infection a few days before and after. once you've been positive and you've waited five days, you are now okay to go out and about without getting another test as long as you continue to wear face masks especially indoors. that is the sum and substance. >> so what you are saying is you are confident the science is leading this? i'm thinking

-- donna edwards, a former democratic member of congress, now washington post, columnist and barbara mcquade, a federal prosecutor and former united states process -- she worked for the department of justice, during the biden transition. she's a professor with the university of -- she host the podcast, sisters in, law along with kimberly atkins, and joyce vance, -- good evening to all of you. peter baker, let's start with you. rough week in general for the white house, particularly with the collapse of build back better unexpectedly on the news last sunday, but, the omicron virus in the testing requirements that it calls for our something the white house has been behind the curb on all week. >> yeah, look, the one thing that president biden promised as a candidate last year for office, he would tackle covid, and help us get through this pandemic. now, through fault of his own, or no fault of his own, were not there. a year later, we seem to be back -- at least when it comes to. infections not in terms of the same level of severity, as with the doctors are telling us about omicron, but for a

professor barbara mcquade.ing us understand all of this news. please stay safe. have a great weekend. >>> coming up, a surprise show of support for the january 6th select committee from mitch mcconnell? did i read that right? we'll talk about that right after this break. snacking can mean that pieces get stuck under mike's denture. but super poligrip gives him a tight seal. to help block out food particles. so he can enjoy the game. super poligrip. fine, no one leaves the table until your finished. fine, we'll sleep here. ♪♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. people, with quickbooks live someone else will do your books for you. they'll even pair you with an expert bookkeeper like me, who knows your business. knows your business! expert bookkeepers who understand your business. intuit quickbooks live bookkeeping. get help managing your money for the life -- and years -- ahead. with fidelity income planning, we'll look at what you've saved, what you'll need, and build a straightf

she hosts the podcast, sisters in law, along with kimberly stork joan wine base, and barbara mcquade. good to see all of you on this very busy monday night. joyce vance was your biggest take away from all that we heard from the committee today? >> the biggest take away came during les cheney's statement. it was clear that she was trying to really speak to the justice department and explain why meadows should be prosecuted. many people had thought that steve bannon was in a category of one with his flagrant failure to comply with the subpoena. cheney makes a very compelling so -- she said there were some issues. where he didn't turn over documents, but that is not about this vote tonight is about. she said the vote is about areas and she divined three categories where meadows can see that there is no privilege where he turned over documents. and he now simply refuses to come and testify. since she makes this compelling case that were trump failed to act,, as rioters, stormed the capitol. the efforts to change votes in states like georgia. and this plan that was apparently afoot to chan

white house correspondent for "the new york times," sam stein, white house editor at pilot cowand barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan, worked with the doj during the biden transition, a professor at her alma mater university of michigan law school who wants you to know they beat ohio state. she has a podcast sisters-in-law. good evening and welcome to you all. indeed, counselor, i'd like to begin with you. what signals did your trained ears pick up listening to oral arguments this morning? >> well, brian, i appreciate the chance for a chuckle. i think that's the last laugh for a while in light of the arguments that we heard today. i think all ears were on some of the justices who might be swing justices, maybe chief justice roberts, maybe justice kavanaugh, maybe justice barrett, but all of them signaled very strongly they would be willing to uphold this mississippi abortion ban after 15 weeks, which of course is much more stringent than we had under roe v. wade, which is the previability standard of 22 to 24 weeks. it's not clear whether they are willing to

in august, our next guest cole wrote an article with former federal prosecutor barbara mcquade and joyce vance, laying out a roadmap for the justice department to follow in investigating donald trump. professor laurence tribe co-wrote the article, quote, if we were to maintain our democracy and respect the rule of the, law efforts to overturn a fair election simply cannot be tolerated. one possible charges conspiracy. it is a federal crime for individuals to agree to defraud the united states by interfering with governmental functions. in the financial times today, he writes that, history tells us that democracies the field to protect themselves with the full force of the law are flirting with extension. the article quotes washington's governor saying that, the american psyche has not recognize that we are one vice president away from a coup. leading off our discussion tonight is laurence tribe, university professor of harvard law school. he has won 35 cases in the united states supreme court. professor, thank you very much for joining us tonight. i have been wondering this week what the

and barbara mcquade, veteran federal prosecutor and former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of miss chicken. she worked with the department of justice during the biden transition. peter, i have got to start with you. because your colleagues at the new york times write this about efforts by mark meadows and republican house members to keep trump in the white house. quote, the group settled on a strategy that would become a blueprint for mr. trump supporters in congress. hammer home on the idea that the election was tainted, announced legal actions being taken by the campaign, and the case with allegations of fraud. peter, i want to talk to us about how they hope to do that. how unprecedented it is. and how the white house chief of staff was involved in all of this. because to fight the fact that joe biden won the election and is in office, those efforts were successful. they are continuing these nonsense voter fraud claims. and the last people they found to actually try and vote twice with three people died in the villages in florida, they we

. >> barbara mcquade, thank you as well. >>> still to come, ghislaine maxwell will not take the standher trial draws to a close. what she says about her decision not to testify. >>> plus, closing arguments expected on monday in the trial of a former police officer be kufd of killing daunte wright. how her emotional testimony could impact the case. >> and then i remember yelling taser, taser, taser, and nothing happened. and then he told me i shot him. it's the most joyous time of year. especially at t-mobile! let's go to dianne. i got the awesome new iphone 13 pro and airpods, and t-mobile is paying for them both! and this is for new and existing customers. upgrade to the iphone 13 pro and airpods both on us. only at t-mobile. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list event. ♪ limu emu... & doug ♪ ♪ superpowers from a spider bite? i could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance so they only pay for what they need. (gasps) ♪ did it work? only pay for what you need ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

she hosts the podcast sisters in law along with kimberly atkins, joe wine-banks and barbara mcquade. good evening, thanks for joining us tonight. what is the level in fear and concern in the white house and for in terms of stuff. >> it is really incredible timing for the president as you mentioned he is set to deliver remarks tomorrow about the latest strategies on covid. as you mentioned, he tested negative yesterday. he tested negative today. he will be tested again on wednesday. but we will continue with his daily schedule because the cdc guidance doesn't require fully vaccinated individuals to quarantine after an exposure. and i think that underscores a point that we will hear him make tomorrow. and it's even if you're vaccinated, even if you are boosted you could get covid. but that is the best form of protection against hospitalization and deaths. if you are vaccinated the symptoms are likely to be mild. and that is a message that he is only going to drive from tomorrow. it's a shift from earlier this where when we saw the white house emphasized the breakthrough cases are rare.

and barbara mcquade, former united states attorney for the eastern district of michigan. she worked with the department of justice during the biden transition. she's a professor with the university of michigan's law school, and she hosts the podcast sisters in law. good evening to all three of you. peter, let's start with you. rough week in general for the white house, particularly with the collapse of build back better unexpectedly on the news last sunday. but the omicron virus and the testing requirements that it calls for are something the white house has been on the curve. >> one thing biden promised as a candidate last year for office was he was going to tackle covid and help us get through this pandemic. now, through faults of his own or no fault of his own, we're not there a year later. we seem to be back to step one, at least in terms of infections. but for a lot of americans, it feels like we have yet to kind of move past this two-year crisis we've been living in and there's a lot of exhaustion and a lot of it is being taken out on the president. you see that in

with me to discuss, barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan and an msnbc legal analyst. tyler page, white house reporter for "the washington post," and juanita toliver, democratic strategist. john eastman, who helped former president trump to pressure vice president pence to overturn the 2020 election, plans to plead the fifth before the january 6th commission. jeffrey clark, who missed a deposition yesterday due to health reasons, has indicated he plans to do the same. kyle cheney of politico who broke the story called eastman's position extraordinary. what do you expect to happen, barb, now that these two have pleaded the fifth? >> the fifth amendment is a much stronger privilege than some of the others we've heard about. executive privilege is one that can yield if there is a more significant public interest, like joe biden has found with regard to the documents in the archives. attorney/client privilege is also out there. but the fifth amendment is strong, it's a right that all of us have. i do

barbara mcquade is here, former u.s.fellow at the foreign policy research institute and curt anderson author of about a million books. the most recent one "evil geniuses." barbara, i want to start with you about this subpoena thing. we keep saying that it's a rubicon to cross for the -- this committee to decide they're going to subpoena a sitting member of congress. is that as big a deal as we think it is? not only is it unusual, but like what are the actual practical implications and consequences of that as we look at them? >> well, john, as a matter of professional courtesy, members of congress are always very careful about how they treat their fellow members. the idea of questioning a fellow member of congress was already kind of out there. subpoenaing a fellow member of congress may strike some as a bridge too far. but i think, you know, the time has come and gone for niceties. we saw what happened on january 6th. and there are genuine reasons to believe that scott perry has information that is relevant to this commi

let's turn to barbara mcquade. people who are targeted and now we may see legal consequences for it. >> yeah, it's really important that people being held accountable. one of the main purposes of legal accountability in our criminal and civil justice system is deterrence, not only making people whole, to defend this lawsuit that was filed by trump's lawyers but to deter all people who are out there watching the copy cats, those who may be incline to mountain these frivolous challenges. the point is people are listening and this has a frivolous effect on all of them as well. nicholas wu, your thoughts in terms of the process here trying to investigating this and climbing up on people with executive privilege. >> my colleagues and i reported yesterday one thing that they have taken is the book coming next week by former white house chief of staff mark meadows and his discussions with former president trump around january 6th, some of these committee investigators we have talked to see it, his discussion could constit

thank you wanna bring in more mcquade, professor them university of michigan -- on this question of privilege, barbarant to read to you the headline. we should say, questions in arguments don't always coral relate to the opinions. the right of today, appeals court judges poised to reject trump's efforts to withhold jansing documents. if you listen to the audio it sure sounded like it, how did it sound like to you? >> i agree with it. skepticism on the states, the degree to which they seem downright hostile to this committee. we played a clip there of the judge cutting off president trump -- who not only was against losing arguments. but we are also trying to stall, they were saying things like this courts look at these individual documents by documents. and they said whoa we're not looking at these individual documents which will take months and months. what she said was, the question -- is who gets to the side? is it the current president, or former president? she very skeptical from the idea that the v of the side -- also suggesting that even the court shouldn't be deciding in this case. simply conf