next over to chuck rosenberg. let's talk about this committee and the levels at their disposal that they can pull. the engaged left, let's call, it to you using a steve bannon freeze. they want to see action, and they wanted yesterday. here is former senator claire mccaskill on our network today. not sounding bullish on the ability of the committee to get this done in a timely fashion. >> i think we may be watching this low move of inevitable destruction of the ability of congress to do meaningful oversight. my message to the department of justice is get on it. do not act like feds here. act like state prosecutors. go fast. if they don't get moving, this is all about running out the clock. and i say to the january six committee and doj, get going guys. quit stalling and threading, go. >> so counselor, one of former senator talks like that it is bound to get attention. take on her point in chief and to your knowledge are their levels open to them that they are not pulling for those people who want to see consequenc

chuck rosenberg, a legal question. when bannon raised the notion of privilege, everyone said right away, well, you weren't with the government. he had long since left on his journey of personal growth and personal grooming. mark meadows, however, was right there, and if he was right there in the oval office alongside the president up to an including january 6th, does he have a different privilege case? >> he has a different case. but there are two issues here, brian. when is, there is a former president, does he have residual privilege? the answer is yes, according to a 1977 supreme court case. well practically, no, because the court also said that in that case, whatever residual a former president enjoys, it's really determined by the current president. we'll to that person because that person speaks for the republican makes decisions on his behalf. that's issue number one. because the really important second issue is that if bannon or meadows or anyone else, for that matter, you or myself, rely on the advice of an at

chuck rosenberg, danny cevallos said it would probably be a long time in prison. is there any chance they'll get out of prison, given that they were found guilty of all these very serious charges? >> not by serving the remainder of their sentence. but people need to be ready for the fact that there will be appeals and possibly the problematic citizens arrest statute in georgia and the jury instructions ultimately given to the jury could be fertile ground for an appeal. after all, that statute was repealed after this incident. so to say it was problematic is almost established. and the judge eventually didn't -- chose not to fashion any kind of remedy but essentially read the statute verbatim. drafted in the mid-1800s, it is as confusing then as it was just before it was repealed. >> explain that to me. the statute was repealed. what was it repealed to, what's the difference between then and now? >> so first, i would just say, jury restrictions are probably the most common ground for appeal. but this particular statute, it looks to me, and this is just my observati

and chuck rosenberg, former u.s. attorney, former senior fbi official who notely happens to be the host of the msnbc podcast "the oath." are we going to find out if this committee is contempt curious or how serious they are? because if you are mark meadows, don't you have reason to think, oh, i don't know, maybe let's -- let's try our hand at beat the clock. it looks like bannon is going to take his time going through the halls of justice. >> well, based on my conversations with sources and based also on just public comments of the lawmakers that are on this committee, they're very, very serious about trying to make sure these subpoenas are in force. let's remember that steve bannon who is now indicted on federal charges, he's in a different category because he wasn't working at the white house. in some ways we have mark meadows trying to claim executive privilege. another person that could be used as an example for a lot of people they subpoenaed who were working in the white house. from my understanding, we're not

and chuck rosenberg, former u.s. attorney, former senior fbi official, and now an nbc news contributor. leigh ann, i want to start with you and start right there. here we are, all of this back and forth. meadows officially refusing to cooperate today. so where does this go next? >> yeah. the committee in a letter to mark meadows' attorney yesterday threatened that they would move forward on a referral to criminal contempt, sending that to the justice department, if mark meadows did not comply with the subpoena. we now know that meadows has not complied with that subpoena. he was scheduled to appear this morning at 1:20 a.m. something that he did not do, our sources tell us, so now it is up to the committee. we have not heard officially yet from the committee, but we do know that they have threatened this referral for referral for criminal contempt. we don't know the timeline when they're going to do it, if they are going to follow through. but we -- this is becoming a pattern for people who are very close and very lo

chuck rosenberg, kim, thank you both so much. >>> and the booster solution.n new england despite high vaccination rates, how far are states going to expand boosters to all? this is "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. o all? this is "andrea mitcllhe reports" on msnbc. bipolar depression. it made me feel like i was trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of people living with bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place... ...and be hard to manage. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. latuda is not for everyone. call your doctor about unusual mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children, teens, and young adults. elderly dementia patients on latuda have an increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about fever, stiff muscles, and confusion, as

. >> leeann caldwell, kelly o'donnell, pete williams, chuck rosenberg. thank you. >>> new details about the investigation into the deadly astroworld festival, with the fbi, the feds now stepping in to help in the criminal investigation as on the civil side, you have lawsuits piling up and the county judge calls for an independent investigation. houston's fire chief is talking with nbc news about questions over the roll of travis scott, who you know was on stage at the time, suggesting he could have stopped, he could have paused the concert when he started seeing signs that something was wrong. watch. >> at one point, there was an ambulance that was trying to make its way through the crowd, and he's got the artist has command of that crowd. >> is there any evidence that you've collected that suggests in any way he initiated this? >> no, not at this point. i'm not prepared to say that. i'm not prepared to say that he was fully aware of what was going on. >> travis scott's girlfriend kylie jenner said she and travis "were not aware of any fatalities" until

. >> chuck rosenberg, they've got a federal case, these three men, that they're facing, coming relativelyt's exactly right, katy. there is in the fifth amendment of the constitution a prohibition against double jeopardy. you can't be tried for the same offense twice. but you have two different sovereigns. you have the state of georgia, the sovereign which tried the men for murder, successfully so. and you have the federal government, sovereign, which is going to try them for hate crimes. you don't see this very often, katy. but here i think it's entirely appropriate. the crime was so heinous, the evidence so compelling, and the federal interest in the case not fully vindicated because the state case was a murder case. the federal case will be predicated on hate crimes, on a civil rights violation. and so, completely appropriate here for the federal government to proceed even though they already have a conviction in state court. whatever happens in the federal system, these men are going to jail, very likely, for the rest of their lives. >> so what happens if they are found guilty federall

legal analyst, melissa murray, chuck rosenberg, brittany cunningham and natasha brown., let me start with you. we heard from the head of the naacp, the attorney for wanda cooper jones, the family attorney, reacting to this. it was nearly unanimous. that what we heard was celebration of relief, you could call it, and as we talked about earlier, the difference between being relieved and rejoicing. but the need for this to catalyze next steps moving forward. from a legal perative here, can you talk about the way the rhetoric we heard from the defense teams might have played into what we're seeing today and the way that the need for those next steps has been highlighted. >> sure. i think most lawyers looking at the defense lawyers would have been rightly appalled. i am someone who believes firmly in the right to counsel, but some of the tropes that were advanced by the defense team were frankly, deeply concerning. i think what we saw here was the jury being forced to confront whether or not they would be complicit is in advancing this narrative. they said that not on their

attorney and senior fbi official chuck rosenberg. great to see all of you on this day before thanksgiving. so garrett, i guess we've got about 50 subpoenas that have gone out so far. now the committee wants to hear from groups that were involved in storming the capitol. where do things go from here? >> well, we've seen subpoenas go after the leadership, the organizers, the financeers and the people behind the stop the steal movement, the rally on the ellipse and so forth. the latest batch is for the foot soldiers, the organizations that provided, we believe, some of the most violent members of the mob who were here at the riot on the capitol. the oathkeepers, the proud boys, another group called first amendment pretorium. these will be more granular part of the investigation by the committee. we've seen a lot of what has been going out from the committee in terms of subpoenas they have sent out, interviews they have requested, documents they are seeking. we're getting for little guidance about what is coming back in. the committee sa

attorney and msnbc legal contributor chuck rosenberg. gentlemen, it is very, very good to see you. matt, i want to start with what we just saw there. the lawyer arguing that steve bannon enjoys executive privilege because the former president invoked it. what do you make of that? >> first of all, welcome back, katy, it's great to see you again. as to your question, look, his attorney is trying to muddy the issue in the same way his defenders are trying to muddy the issue when this indictment has handed down last week and the same way all of of these people who have been subpoenaed by the january 6th committee has been trying to confuse the public about what's actually going on. they tend to treat this as if executive privilege is just this magic wand that when a president or former president waves it, it makes all questions go away and alleviates the need for a witness to respond to any questions about anything or provide documents about anything, even those which aren't plausibly covered by executive privilege. the difference between the way this has been handled by previous admin