joining us again is chuck rosenburg, forrer u.s. e eastern district of virginia, chuck, thank you for sticking around to help me with this. >> my pleasure. >> i understand contempt of court in a control questional sense meaning you've been told to do something by the court and you're not doing it. in this case, the court holding mr. mueller, ruling he is in contempt for defying the subpoena, what's the consequence of this? does this mean mr. miller is going to go to jail. >> conceivably. i'm going to get a little nerdy on you. >> yea. >> there's two types of contempt. there's civil contempt in which case the judge, judge howell simply wants miller to comply and as soon as he cop applies, as soon as he testifies, as soon as he follows her order, the content is lifted. there's also criminal contempt. that's designed to punish, not to enforce compliance. it seems to me she head him in civil contempt meaning testify and you're free to go. all you need to do is comply with my order and we're square. he has an easy out. if he doesn't compl

. >>> joining us now, chuck rosenburg, former u.s. district of virginia where the manafort case is taking place. also a former justice department and fbi official. thank you for being here. >> my pleasure. >> the jury came back after deliberating for just under eight hours today and they had four questions that they posed to the judge in note form. first of all, do juries often ask questions of a judge early on in the deliberations? >> they ask questions all the time. it is reasonably common for jurors to ask questions and always in note form. >> that doesn't -- does that necessarily indicate good news or bad news for the defense or prosecution? >> so it is a parlor game. we have little information to go on so we overindex on the information we have. we study the notes and we look at their faces when they walk back if and we try to divine some meaning from notes and dresses and all those things that provide little meaning. >> we do know the content of the four questions. the jury asked, not in order but they asked for a definition of

attorneys' offices around the country and face the consequence of their actions. >> chuck rosenburg,mer u.s. attorney and senior fbi official, jeremy bash, former chief of staff and cia in the department of defense, taking me to law school. i'm grateful to you both. thanks for being here. coming up, president trump's new best friend is reportedly still working on missiles that could reach all the way to the u.s. more on that with one of my best friends steve schmidt after the break. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? it's a high-tech sleep revolution. the sleep number 360 smart bed intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts. so you wake up ready to run the world. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. tired of constantly battling lingering smells in your home, like pet, shoe, and

chuck rosenburg is with me now. chuck rozenburrosenberg, msnbc contributor, also a former u.s. attorney, former fbi official. worked there for the department of justice. tim carney, commentator editor for "the washington examiner." also joining us as well. tim, thanks for your time. chuck, let's talk about both of these stories. we'll talk about sessions and we'll talk about this news as it relates to mr. pecker here. let's start with sessions because, again, you were there at the department of justice. how significant of a development is this? that you've got a senior senator suggesting that the president has decided that he is going to fire his attorney general? if the president does that, what then, chuck? >> well, it's significant, craig, no question. by the way, with respect to the attorney general's statement, you know, a cheap shot would be to say it's about time. i don't want to take a cheap shot. i just want to tell you, i'm glad to see that the attorney general did this. i'm glad to see he's standing up to the men and women of his department. i've been a part of that

i heard chuck rosenburg on the network earlier tonight.could be one juror who came in today and said, your honor, i looked at a device, i saw television coverage, someone talked to me. i talked to another juror which will still take a lot of time to churn through, correct? >> absolutely. it could have been a juror riding on the subway or commuting or seeing a newspaper and glancing at it or overhearing another juror. either way, this process takes a long time. they have to take the juror aside in the presence of council remove the other jurors and ask him what did you find out. a lot of time gets burned up as the attorneys huddle and decide not really so much whether or not the juror did or didn't do something but how can we spin this to our side's favor? do we like this juror? there may not be a consensus on the team whether they like the juror. one member might say that's a good juror, the other might say we've got to get him out of there. it's a lot of back and forth just because a juror might have flipped on the tv at the wrong time. >