>> norman clark, love sports. his mother estella says that he was a top athlete and a good son too. >> he was a loving, hard worker, caring person. >> as a boy, norman had dreams of playing in the nba, then studied sports management in college. but by his mid twenties, he was working here, vanderbilt mortgage and finance. 23 year old britney eldridge started the very same day. >> she was very beautiful but it was her smile that really got me. >> that winning smile got to a lot of people, britney's big brother jeffrey said she embraced life with a contagious enthusiasm. >> she liked to cheer lead and she liked to play soccer. she was a girly girl and a tomboy at the same time. she was really big about living in the moment. >> at vanderbilt mortgage, they were collectors. calling people to make sure they kept up with their house payments. what was it about brittani that you formed this instant connection with? >> she was very good at the job. actually used her as a tool to teach me at first, she help me out a lot. t

without further ado, general clarke. gen. clarke: good to see you again. thank you for the intro. it is great to be here. i wouldn't say it is initially great to be in d.c., coming from tampa, but having come from the pentagon, it is somewhat like coming back home. i'm honored to be here. i'm appreciate of of this association and what you do. and for what you all do. because all of you could have chosen to take a different path in your careers and interests. but i think by being here, you are telling some of the military story that needs to be told. i know there are some students and interns that are here. i think your interest in this now, whether it is boating or fully baked in, is also important that you are considering this. i encourage you to come along on this ride with us. it has been a good one. but most of all, when you embed, and you come with our men and women, and you tell stories about what they are doing in combat, in the cold, in the wet, in the heat, the lack of sleep, the conditions. none of those stories would be told in the way they could be without your being t

in fact when tom clark came to him, when tom clark came to the oval office with a list he had a list of catholic nominees. his going to have a catholic nominee and harry truman did not even look at said no, no, no prime going to nominate you. he had it in his own mind of who was going to be the nominee to the court. they were going to be men they were all men at this time. they were men he knew and trusted. [laughter] one has got to count. it is incredible. >> throughout you leave two great narratives about how truman is the court. a couple of cases relate to unions and a couple create civil rights. we really do not have time to get too much into those. please buy the book or get it from the library, whatever. it is a fantastic read and you will learn so much. i'm wondering if you could, enclosing, summarize how truman used the supreme court to advance his civil rights agenda? >> truman was the first president to address the naacp. he became convinced particularly after the blinding of sgt isaac ordered, that something had to be done at the federal level to protect the rights of amer

, and tom clark had good people. and they were all on the side of the administration, pushing forward, not just defending what the president had done, but pushing forward to move the country forward by common law, which is what we call it, it's common law, building on common law, in the federal district courts, the federal appellate courts. he realized in order to bring that to true fruition, he would need to eventually end up at the supreme court. on that, we get back to it, the man got lucky, and he got four nominations. he got four men on the court who in this respect ended up not just going with his administration but helping to lead their fellow justices to do what was right. there are still questions about vinson, in dealing with brown versus board of education in 1952, '54. but truman was not in office at the time. during the truman presidency, the courts unanimously, consistently, without equivocation and very clearly written opinions that any literal american could understand, argued to their fellow citizens

clark's complete failure to cooperate today is unacceptable.hat he is withholding and we are willing to take strong measures to hold him to his obligation. we have a national correspondent of politico who has been reporting on his deposition and she joins me now. betsy, do you have any sense of how the deposition itself went after the letter? >> that's right, the deposition clearly went quite badly. clark was in that room with his lawyer for no longer than 90 minutes. we know clark and his lawyer delivered this letter that i obtained to members of the committee and we can say with a high degree of confidence that committee investigators were not particularly impressed. the gist of this letter that i read and that we have published at politico is that because trump has tried to use executive privilege to block other people from playing ball with the select committee, that means that jeffrey clark, additionally, shouldn't have to play ball with the committee. but there's one hiccup, which is on august 2nd of this year, trump's lawyers sent out a

clark and the former president.s mouth. >> except that jeffrey clark never gave that deposition. he showed up, but he didn't cooperate. in response the chairman of the committee, bennie thompson, issued the statement the next day. quote, he has a very short time to reconsider and cooperate fully. we need the information that he is withholding and we are willing to take strong measures to hold him accountable, to me his obligation, and quote. well, it appears that jeffrey clark's time is up. on wednesday, the committee plans to vote on wednesday night, whether to recommend a criminal referral for contempt of congress. joining us now is katie benner the justice department reporter for, and an innocent bc contributor. jeffrey clark is the most famous person that nobody had ever heard about, before people like you, wrote about him. to the extent that there was a mastermind of the clown car dumpster fire of an insurrection attempt. he was it. he is important for them to hear. from what happens now? >> so they are going t

clark never gave that deposition.cooperate. in response, the chairman of the committee, bennie thompson, issued this statement the next day. quote, he has a very short time to reconsider and cooperate fully. we need the information that he is withholding and we're willing to take strong measures to hold him accountable to meet his obligation, end quote. it appears jeffrey clark's time is up on wednesday. the committee plans to vote on wednesday on whether or not to recommend a committee referral tore congress. katie is an msnbc contributor. jeffrey clark is someone no one has really heard about before. to the extent there was a mastermind of a clown car dumpster fire insurrection attempt, he was it. he's important for them to hear from. what happens now? >> sure, so they're going to vote to hold him in contempt and it will go to the justice department. it's very likely the justice department will look at the case, and much like in the situation with steve bannon, they will choose to charge him with contempt. they'll t

clark's letter is unusual and surprising to make the case that clark cannot testify to the january 6thlly said the former president would not try to block clark's congressional testimony. despite trump's effort to assert privilege to bar his white house records, a move that a federal judge seemed highly inclined to reject, he has not done so in clark's case. is clark just doing this, betsy, using this caveat of attorney/client privilege to not speak at all? is that what's happening here? >> it's clear that clark has no intention of cooperating with this committee, and he's doing everything he can to try to make a legal case for why he shouldn't have to play ball. but as you just detailed, it's a weird one because the last time we know of when trump directly communicated to clark about what he wanted him to do, trump said that he would not stop clark from testifying. we have no indication that trump has subsequently followed up with clark. in fact, multiple other former top doj officials are in the same position clark is in now and have testified to the select committee. what they've in

i'm jeff clark.d of the civil division. >> reporter: jeffrey clark, a former trump-era department of justice official, was seen in this exclusive video friday morning entering a house office building to answer questions from the committee. the meeting did not last long. committee chairman bennie thompson said clark did not answer any questions. >> my understanding is he did not cooperate. and we will look forward after our meeting this afternoon as to next steps. i have as chair the ability to rule on some of the issues that were raised. >> reporter: one of those steps could be a criminal contempt referral of congress. clark is a key figure in the january 6th probe. a trump loyalist, who peddled false claims about election fraud within the department, with the goal of getting the v agency to investigate the claims. clark had a lot to do with this plan and he was apparently making a play to become the attorney general. >> reporter: clark's efforts were rebuffed by the two men running the doj at the ti

they got jeffrey clark in room today, which they haven't been able to do with others.ency of this committee cranked up a lot after the election this week, a double-digit turn toward republicans for the 2020 election. the reason is, if the midterm landscaped looks anything like it did this week, rep will take control of the house. one of the first things they're likely to to do is shut down this investigation, so they functionally have a year to get this done, before they face a serious risk of rpg dissolving this investigation. >> sahil kapur, thank you. betsy woodson-swann, thank you. >>> another matter, the debate ready to get going in the house on the build back better act, the $1.75 trillion climbed and social spending bill. as we told you, you saw it break, live on the air, you watched the sausage go ahead made. nancy pelosi is moving ahead. congressman allred told us it is his understanding that those moderates you now on board. president biden pointed to the better than expected jobs report as a reason to get this done, as a reason to pass these bills, a reason

i'm jeff clark.head of the civil division. >> reporter: jeffrey clark, a former trump-era department of justice official was seen in this exclusive video friday morning entering a house office building to answer questions from the committee. the meeting did not last long. committee chairman benny thompson said clark did not answer any questions. >> my understanding is he did not cooperate. and we'll look forward after our meeting this afternoon as to the next steps. i have, as chair, the ability to rule on some of the issues that were raised. >> reporter: one of those steps could be a criminal contempt referral of congress. clark is a key figure in the january 6th probe. a trump loyalist who peddled false claims about election fraud within the department with the goal of getting the agency to investigate the claims. >> clark had a lot to do with this plan for january 6th. and he also was apparently making a play to become the attorney general. >> reporter: clark's efforts were rebuffed by the two men

clark. the only real difference is that mr. clark can say, well, i didn't work for the government.non couldn't even say that in terms of the questions he was going to be asked. he wasn't even a government employee. but that doesn't make this a valid defense. >> got i. maya wiley, as always, thank you, my friend. great to see you. i hope you come back a lot more on my program. great to see you back on the air doing what you always do. thank you. >>> all right, truth, lies, and home remedies, everybody. nfl star aaron rodgers taking hits for misleading comments about his vaccination status. what the league knew and when. we're getting destroyed out there. we need a plan! right now, at t-mobile, customers on magenta max can get the new iphone 13 pro... and t-mobile will pay for it! upgrade to the iphone 13 pro... on us. ♪ ♪ ♪ hey google. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ tonight, i'll be eating lobster ravioli with shaved truffles. yes! you look amazing! no, you look amazing! thank you! thank you! thank you! thank you! thank you! thank you! haha, you're welcome. wondering what actually goes into your multi

clark is in a really odd spot here. the committee expects they will have significant leverage in trying to push him to play ball. of course, the piece that makes this challenging is the committee went about as far as they can go in trying to force steve bannon to testify. the justice department has yet to send up any smoke signals as to whether or not they are going to prosecute steve bannon for defying that subpoena. it's a lot of moving pieces, a lot of different characters to keep track of. each of these folks, particularly steve bannon, jeff clark and john eastman, have important, significant visibility into the president's efforts to overturn the election. if the committee can somehow get them to testify, we expect them to get substantial new information. it's just a question of whether or not they can actually get these men to sit down under oath and answer questions. >> betsy, you know so much about this. i think there are a lot of viewers are saying, why can't they get them to testify? why can't someone who is c

take jeffrey clark. the former senior doj official to validate the twice impeached ex-president's lies about the election results. making him someone who congressional investigators want to hear from. he did show up for his scheduled deposition before the house select committee but did not offer up helpful information. the panel says he refused to answer questions during the deposition. instead, clark delivered a letter from his attorney defending his refusal to testify citing potential executive privilege. the select committee is threatening to take strong measures against clark, his shaky defense is working for now. it prevented him from being held being accountable. almost none of the ex-president's cronies have been dealing with the consequences. some republicans who did not bow to the ex-president's pressure campaign. you probably forgot this chapter because 96,000 other things have happened since. before january 6th, georgia and other key swing states were in the middle of certifying the election r

. >> good morning i'm jeff clark. >> reporter: clark is a trump loyalist who worked inside the doj toe lies about the 2020 election results and attempted to convince his superiors to use the power of the agency to investigate the false claims. clark will join steve bannon as the second trump ally referred to prosecutors to decide whether to pursue charges. unlike bannon who ignored the committee's request for an interview clark showed up but refused to answer questions, citing executive and attorney-client privilege. >> all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. >> reporter: the case against bannon is making its way through the courts and the podcast host has vowed not to stay quiet. >> we are going on the offense. we are tired of playing defense. >> reporter: prosecutors have asked the judge to limit what bannon can reveal publically arguing he is attempting to try the case in the media instead of the courtroom. allowing the defendant to publicly disseminate reports of witness statements will have the collateral effect of witness tampering because it will expose witnesses to public c

now clark was subpoenaed by the committee several weeks ago.clark did appear and he did come for his deposition. but as soon as he walked into the room, he and his attorneys attempted to claim executive privilege, they also attempted to claim some for the of attorney/client privilege that they said would prevent clark from testifying or answering any questions to the committee. and he abruptly left that meeting. the committee did not accept those claims that he and his attorney made and made it clear that they were willing to take whatever steps necessary to get them to comply. it seems as though they feel that clark is unwilling to do so and that is why they're taking this step. so what this means in terms of a timeline, anna, the committee will meet on wednesday night, they will read the resolution that will set in motion this criminal context referral and vote it out of the committee and it should probably pass unanimously, from there it goes to a full vote in the house of representatives. we don't have an exact date on that. but the last ti

lenny clarke. and a special appearance by bill murray. plus music from the kid laroi. and now, jimmy kimmel! [ cheers and applause ] ♪ >> jimmy: thank you, thank you. welcome. very nice. thanks. hi, i'm jimmy. i'm the host. thanks for watching. thank you for joining us. please relax. i'm happy you're here. i'm kind of happy to see no one's wearing a costume tonight. although there's a guy in a gold gym tank top that may be in costume, i'm not sure. [ cheers ] this is that magical time of year when adults who have no business being in costume get in costume. i am not a halloween kind of guy. you know, i carry myself with a quiet dignity. [ laughter ] like a young sidney poitier. but there are some men, 60-year-old men, who apparently cannot resist. and one of those men is the mayor of new york. bill deblasio got the holiday off to an early start by boldly going where no politician belongs. >> now i'm switching to another important topic, halloween is almost here. and it's time to choose your costume. i've chosen mine. this is my homage to captain kirk. >> jimmy: yeah. o

. >> good morning, i'm phil clark, i'm ahead of the civil driggs. >> reporter: jeffrey clark, a former was seen in this video enter ac house office building to answer questions from the committee. the meeting did not last long. committee chairman ben my thompson said clark did not answer any questions. >> my understanding if he did not cooperate, we will look forward after our meeting this afternoon, i had a chair the ability to rule on some of the issues that were raised. >> one of the steps could be a criminal contempt referral of congress. clark is a key figure in the january 6th probe. a trump loyalist who pedals false claims about election fraud in the department with the goal of the agency getting to investigate the claims. >> clark had a lot to do with this plan for january 6th and he also was apparently making a play to become the attorney general. >> clerk's effort for ebuffed by the two men running the deal at the time. acting tomorrow jeffrey rosen and his deputy richard donahue. both men have sat before the committee for lengthy interviews. clark's current attorney is harry

jeffrey clark. he refuses to answer questioning about the attempts to use the doj to push the big lie. a senate judiciary report, clark was instrumental in that effort. a contempt referral would make him the second person after steve bannon to potentially face criminal charges for defying congressional investigators. one member of the house leadership says the committee has no choice but to move against witnesses. who themselves refuse to cooperate. >> you have to use every tool we can to get to the truth. there has to be a consequence. to the failure to follow the law. >> the committee has yet to announce action against former trump chief of staff. for that matter. mark meadows who failed to comply. however one of the two republicans serving on the panel predicts he may not have to wait long to find out where the members stand. >> i expect there is going to be movement particularly on mark meadows that we'll know about shortly. in the next day or two. or so. this committee is going to get to answer

clark of -- ms. clarke of new york, i inform the house that ms. clarke will vote yes on the motion to table. as the member designated by mr. meeks of new york, i inform the house that mr. meeks will vote yes on the motion to table. as the member designated by ms. sewell of alabama, i inform the house that ms. sewell will vote yes on the motion to table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by mr. donalds of the state of florida, i inform the house that mr. donalds will vote nay on the motion to table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by mrs. mcmorris rodgers, i inform the house that mrs. mcmorris rodgers of washington will vote nay on the motion to table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. franklin: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. steube of florida, i in

the clark case is of a different character.otiate his privilege and insist that he testify. >> when you call this argument -- is there anyone that believes it is valid or is it all just about slowing down the process? >> it is really about delay. for one thing, former president trump hasn't asserted the privilege here and in fact he permitted the acting attorney general, jeff rosen, who would have been mr. clark's boss to testify. it is really tough to maintain that there is any sort of a privilege. clark talked about attorney client privilege but he wasn't president trump's lawyer or alone in the room giving legal advice. so clark really gives every appearance of someone that just does not want to talk to the committee and forces us to contemplate the question what is it he is trying to hide. >> there is so much news it would have been easy to miss the steele dossier -- >> i would defer to joyce for that. one media pundit made a comment saying one person that was a contributor to the christopher steele dossier, may have misled

clark did, but was not always forthcoming on information. why clark and not meadows.ng on this? >> yeah, i've talked to sources on this. there are a couple reasons. one, meadows, there is an executive privilege here that is being litigated. if any of the potential witnesses beyond president trump is covered by this, it would be mark meadows. s he was the white house chief of staff. there is an issue there. like you said, he didn't show up for his subpoena, but he has engaged with the committee. there's been some engagement with the committee, he and his lawyers have engaged somewhat with the committee. now, clark is a completely different level as far as the committee is concerned. as you noted, he showed up for his deposition and didn't give them anything. he's claimed a lot of blanket, you know, just immunity from having to testify. so i think the way the committee looks at it, they're not on the same level, so they're going to move forward with clark. we expect that vote will happen wednesday night in the select committee, the contempt referral vote. it could be on

so there's no legal basis for clark's claim, right? >> thanks for having me back.tly right. there is no basis for him to refuse to answer questions. he got a lawful subpoena like anybody else in the united states. if they receive a subpoena, they have to appear and answer questions. he claim he is exerting executive privilege and other privileges. but we only have one executive in the united states. the one who decides whether or not there is a privilege, whether information is confidential and questions have to be answered or not is the current president. joe biden. so when biden has said that through his justice department, that there is no privilege as to clark. clark must answer. >> the bottom line is steve bannon has been fighting this and doj is now looking at the situation. doj has not done anything though. as far as we know. are you surprised that we don't have anything from doj about whether or not they'll prosecute for not complying with the subpoena? >> i'm not surprised. it has only been a couple of weeks. this is a momentous decision and i think that t

clark and the former president. and now we need to go straight to the horse's mouth. >> let's listen to what chairman thompson said today in this interview with leanne caldwell about additional subpoenas that he's already signed. >> i signed the subpoenas. >> you've already signed. have they gone out? >> no. >> will they probably go out tomorrow? >> you know. >> how many? >> probably about 20. >> probably 20 subpoenas that have already gone out. what could you tell us about those subpoenas? >> i can tell you that with respect to some witnesses we're going straight subpoena, where we don't expect they're going to cooperate. and in other cases where we've been trying to engage in counsel and making too little progress, or we think that individuals are holding back we're providing subpoenas and demanding information. so we're moving very quickly using all of the compulsion we have. we hope and we urge the justice department also move quickly on the prosecution of steve bannon. we feel that will be very important in its

this next time, it's going to be jeffrey clark.al who, with trump reportedly cooked up a plan to try and use the power of the justice department to block the election result from being counted. on top of the charges, already, pending for bending and the charges it looks like are about to be reprimanded for jeffrey clark. congressman adam schiff, is part of the investigation said this week that members will, also this week, consider a criminal contempt referral for trump white house chief of staff, mark meadows. who, like jeffrey clark and steve bannon has refused to cooperate with the investigation. joining us now is pete, democratic of california, he's a member of the january six investigation. congressman, a pleasure to have you here, thanks for making time. >> thanks for having me. >> so we've got these oral arguments at the d.c. circuit court, how important are president trump's white house records to the investigation, there is no way to know how the courts are going to handle this from here on out, particularly if this goes t

what do you think the select committee is going -- why are they going after jeffrey clark? we know officials who worked with him at the doj like jeffrey rosen have already been talking to the committee. so what are they after here, john? >> well, they do know a good bit about what he did and apparently why he did it. he expressed himself in a letter very clearly as to how he wanted the states to impose their own will on electors. it was an outrageous plan that he tried to get his superiors or colleagues really at the department of justice to sign on to. i think what because he dealt directly with the white house the committee would like to fill that gap and know exactly what he was doing and with whom at the white house and get that into the picture. we don't have that information now and he's probably the only person that can really supply it. >> john harwood, members of the select committee are telling cnn they'll likely make a decision this week on what to do about mark meadows. what are you hearing about this? he played a key role leading up to the january 6th but his s

former trump doj official, jeffrey clark. committee says he refuses to answer questions about the attempts to use the doj to push the big lie. according to a senate judiciary reported, clark was instrumental in that effort. a contemporary referral would make him the second person after steve bannon to potentially face criminal charges for defying congressional investigators. one member of the house leadership says that the committee has no choice but to move against witnesses who themselves refused to cooperate. >> we have to use every tool we can to get to the truth, there has to be a consequence. a failure to follow the law. >> the committee has yet to announce any action against former chief of staff, former member of congress for that member, mark meadows. who has also failed to comply. however, one of the two republican services for dixie may not have to wait long to find out where these members then. >> i expect that there's going to be movement particularly that we're going to know about shortly in the next day or so t

tom clark is 45.clark had been an unexceptional law student and actually he was in washington by accident. they wanted to hire tom clark's older brother who was a big shot lawyer and by all accounts he was doing brilliant things tom clark's older brother says no, i'm in texas so the senator from texas says will you take him and he says send him a. they gave tom clark initially something of a rotten job in the department of justice so clark might have lacked in perhaps academic ability, he certainly made up for it in work ethic and he became attorney general and became very successful in being an aggressive attorney general. important because he recognized that he was not the best man in the building. he managed the department of justice and said what's the best thing we can do to advance the administrations agenda and we expect that of our attorneys general . and certainly of the attorney general that at the time the attorney general had generated what we think of now as the solicitor general, this th

clark used his justice department position to try and launch a coup.ing attorney general. clark was a relatively low-level person but he tried to angle with trump to replace and run the justice department, and indeed so much so that it said that the entire senior leadership of the justice department voted for him to resign because of clark and what he was trying to do and steal the election. so when you look at madison and the federalist paper, about how men aren't angels, there's a picture of jeff clark. i mean, this is someone who has really got to go and tell the truth about what happened because his role looks really, really serious and it's certainly not something protected by executive privilege. >> and then there's the structural questions. do you see anything coming out from all of this that suggests there should be some more concrete reform so that the doj is not as contactable, persuadable from a tyrant who wants to use it? >> there is a structural set of rules and one of my first jobs at the justice department was to draft those rules, and t

this time it's jeffrey clark. you might remember clark. and trying to weaponize the justice department to help trump undermine the 2020 election. ryan nobles joins us now. clark did appear for an interview with the committee, unlike steve bannon. so why is the committee moving forward with this vote to hold him in criminal contempt of congress? >> it's what happened behind those closed doors when clark appeared for the deposition. he basically didn't answer any questions. he told the committee he didn't have to citing executive privilege and attorney/client privilege because of his relationship with the former president donald trump. but the committee just isn't buying it. they believe that clark has no privilege protections and that he needs to answer their questions and provide the documents that they are looking for. that's why they are taking this step of referring him for criminal contempt to the justice department. the committee is set to meet on wednesday. they'll vote on a resolution from that committee. it will then be voted on, o

next time it will be jeffrey clark.s the justice department official who with trump reportedly cooked up a plan to try to use the powers of the justice department to block the election results from being counted. on top of the charges already pending for bannon and the charges it looks like that aren to be recommended for mr. clark, adam schiff said they'll consider a criminal contempt referral for former white house chief of staff mark meadows who has also refused to cooperate with the investigation. joining us now congressman aguilar. appreciate you making time. >> thanks for having me. >> how important are trump's white house records important to the investigation? there's no-noing how the courts are going to handle this, particularly if it goes to the supreme court. would it be a critical factor for your investigation if ultimately you weren't able to get these trump white house records? we've said all along we want to tell the full and complete story, and in order to do that we're going to need documents and interv

clark's role in delegitimatize the election results.chool bus share what he knows. >> did you say over 250 people communicated with the investigation at this point, either given you documents or testified, 50? >> 250 interviews. there has been a ton of activity that's going on. 25,000 documents the committee is sorting through and has sorted through. there's a lot of activity, and i know that some of these names that are in the news, obviously, but an overwhelming portion of the people who we have asked to sit for interviews and folks who we have subpoenaed have come forward and have been interviewed. so we continue the make progress. chairman thompson and vice chair cheney continue to guide and lead our group in our pursuit of the truth, and we just want to make sure our fundamental goal is that this never happens again. so in order to do that, we're going to need documents and testimony and we're going to need to tell the story. >> congressman pete aguilar, democrat of california, member of the january 6th investigation. sir, thank yo

official, jeffrey clark.im, trying to curry favor with the former president, buddying up to him about all these baseless allegations of voter fraud. the committee is now mulling a contempt citation for him as well. just remind our viewers, though, why he matters. what would be the impact of his testimony? >> reporter: that's right. so, clark is someone that was a top official at the justice department. he was the number three essentially, three or four at the justice department. >> right. >> reporter: he was apparently believing that the justice department should investigate election fraud as a way to give cover to trump. he made all kinds of proposals his superiors shot down. those people have gone in to congress already to the house and spoken to them about what clark was doing that trump wanted to make clark the attorney general. now, why clark is important here and why the committee wants to talk to him, even if they've already talked to the people around him at justice, is because he would have had direc

and, paula, what more are we learning about clark's stonewalling tonight?ning, erin, well this did not go according to plan sources familiar with his appearance say clark presented lawmakers with a letter from his attorney saying he will not cooperate until a court declares that his interactions with trump are not protected by attorney-client privilege or executive privilege. now, cn n has obtained that letter where trump is asking a federal court to block lawmakers from accessing more than 700 pages of white house documents related to january 6th. now, just yesterday, a federal judge heard arguments in that case, and, erin, she appeared deeply skeptical about trump's claim that he should be able to block lawmakers from obtaining evidence that is relevant to their investigation. now, the chairman of the committee, representative bennie thompson, says he rejects clark's claim of privilege and he suggested that contempt is an option on the table. now, of course, the committee recently referred longtime trump aide steve bannon to the justice department for cri

natasha clark, the sun. he -hased it. natasha clark, the sun. phased down on the path to phasing out and this is the first time we have got the coal language in. it is worth reminding colleagues, cops are building posts. we have had cop26 and the next one will be in egypt. at future co ps we and the next one will be in egypt. at future cops we can push further on that issue. you raised this thing that i was emotional and there was a range of reasons for that. it was relief we have got this deal over the line. i genuinely believe this is a historic thing the uk government has helped to pull off and i had had about six hours sleep in three days. the prime minister has thanked all the key people here, but i want to thank the civil society, the youth groups. they have applied enormous pressure to ensure we were able to get countries to make those commitments and they will continue to play a key role as we go forward and get better commitments from countries. to forward and get better commitments from countries.— from countries. to reinforce that, wh

i want to go now to democratic congresswoman katherine clark. she is house speaker and a member of the democratic progressive caucus. when will there be a vote? >> we are working every minute of every day to get to yes on this vote. here's what i can tell you, erin. i am confident we are going to leave d.c. with a bill. because it is what the american people need. every call that i get, every time i'm out in my district, people are concerned about the future. the pandemic has been a time of loss and challenge, and it has bred anxiety. as we see rising costs at the grocery store, at the gas pump, people want to know that they are seen and we are working for them. that is exactly what the build back better agenda does. we are going to reduce their taxes, reduce their costs and increase jobs in this country. that is worth fighting for, that is worth staying here and getting this job done. >> okay, so i quoted congresswoman abigail spanberger, you saw that yourself in the "new york times." she's a democrat, she's in the swing district in virginia. s

>> parts of it will be classified. >> general clarke, thanks for being here. i'm james meek with abc news. to follow on sean's question, during the evacuation in kabul, former veterans, americans in ad hoc groups worked very hard for shepherd afghan special operations forces, intelligence officers and others out of the country. away from the harm and threat posed by the taliban. a at different phone calls -- will be hunted down. those retirees answered the call and formed ad hoc groups. but most asked a very blunt question, which was where were the generals. where was socom? where was centcom? and their perception, it appeared that the command, particularly socom, sat this one out. that individuals within their own command who were retired in many cases to help one of their friends, and afghan. and people answered those calls and did her best to help shepherd those folks. those calls came from the pentagon. my question is why did they perceive that, what did your command do, if anything and why not? >> i can tell you i personally answered hundreds of calls. hu

it does sound like that is what clark is claiming.ing attorney/client privilege, he as part of doj is not the president's lawyer for the purposes. it sounds like he's purposing the executive privilege claim. many others have been pushing and trying to not testify with the committee. >> and of course, jeffrey clark is the person who drafted that letter that he wanted doj to send to the georgia state legislature to delay the certification of the vote and we've learned that the criminal probe that's happening down there, led by the d.a. willis, that every kind of incremental additional letter that comes from trump attorneys, statement that's made is part of this larger investigation. how do those subsequent actions play into that investigation, jennifer? >> well, it depends what the d.a. is considering charging, you know, if she is looking at a conspiracy, then the conspiracy continues until someone is caught or someone leaves the conspiracy. even after the election is over, even after joe biden takes office, that conspiracy can continue

welcome back, walk us through jeffrey clark's role in all of this.pened? because he showed up, but he didn't answer any questions. >> reporter: that's right, jeffrey clark showed up yesterday for a deposition we think at o'neal office building and he was there to answer questions posed by the select committee. we understand that he at least showed up so as not to immediately face the same fate as steve bannon who was held in contempt for not showing up at all, and in that sense was trying to give it the gesture of, you know, cooperation in some sense. but you know, jeffrey clark was this guy at the trump doj who was instrumental in helping or trying to advance trump's effort to subvert the election. you know, he was the one who kind of co-oped the acting attorney general and the doj to subvert the election and pressure states and lawmakers to return to trump to office. >> look, yeah, he showed up, but it's my understanding he brought a 12-page letter from his attorney, so basically shows up and says, yeah, i'm here. here's what i'm going to say, whic

but the jeffrey clark part of this i think is really important. senior justice department official, headed 9 civil division. had nothing to do with election fraud. or ballot, you know, vote counting anywhere. wasn't his per view let started pressing acting attorney general, jeffrey rosen, to tell the states, georgia and other states, you guys shouldn't say you're not going to certify the election, and different electors meaning trump electors, and state there was corruption. he was doing this in league with trump. so -- >> yeah. >> to get that full story out there, they need his testimony. and the idea that he can hide behind executive privilege, that trump himself has not invoked. you know about this being a lawyer. i mean, trump put out a statement saying he wouldn't block jeffrey clark's -- interview with the committee. but yet here clark saying there may be executive privilege. a bogus legal argument. highly, highly important for us to know what went on there. and the committee only has a year to do this. in case anything happens mid-terms, be

clark. no i can't. judge said she agreed with donald trump's lawyer and one point, when she said, some of these requests are alarmingly broad. but, some of them are very specific, in our specifically geared or targeting events from january 6th. the judge then cited a supreme court decision, which she says, held quote, the former presidents rights, are less significant because he's a former president. and where the current president has waived privilege, the court must necessarily consider that waiver. leading off our discussion tonight is adam shift of california, he's the chair of the house intelligence committee, and he's a member of the january 6th select committee, he was the lead impeachment manager in the first impeachment trial of donald trump, thank you very much for joining us tonight, as a former legal practitioner yourself, standing in those courtrooms, what did you make of this hearing today? >> the judge was clearly very skeptical of what the trump lawyers were arguing and for good reason.

official jeffrey clark.n to potentially face criminal charge force defying a congressional subpoena. committee members also say they expect to take up the same vote this week for former trump white house chief of staff mr. mark meadows. joining our conversation betsy woodruff swan, and miles and claire are still around. betsy, this would be to referrals for contempt of congress this week, jeffrey clark and mark meadows. >> we haven't heard confirmation from the official committee spokesperson about what the plans for the next couple days regarding meadows are. we know for sure clark is teed up to be referred over to the justice department for prosecution. i will believe the meadows referral will happen when it happens 678 sometimes different members have said things that the time line that the committee is operating under that haven't always proven to be totally accurate. of course it is possible we will get news about med knows the next day or so. again, i would believe in a when it cams. clark by himself,

clark's letter explains he wants to wait.alled clark's, quote, complete failure to cooperate unacceptable and in direct contrast with his supervisors at the doj. he concluded his statements saying this, i have concluded clark's claim of privilege and rejected it. he has a very short time to reconsider and cooperate fully. we need the information that he is withholding and we are willing to take a strong measure. a person with direct knowledge of the deliberations tells "the new york times." willis opened her inquiry in february and her office has been consulting with the house committee whose evidence could be of considerable value to her own probe, but her progress has been slowed in part by delays in the panel's fact-finding gather progress says, according to "the times." the paper goes on to say her inquiry is seen as parolless for the former president. joining us now, co-founder of punch bowl nurks anna palmer. she s i'm happy to say, an msnbc contributor. i hope you had a great weekend. thank you for starting your week w

. >> good morning, i'm jeff clark. >> reporter: clark is a trump loyalist who worked inside the d.o.jeddle lies about the 2020 election results and attempted to convince his superiors to use the power of the agency to investigate the false claims. clark will join steve bannon as the second trump ally referred to prosecutors to decide whether to pursue charges. unlike bannon who ignored the committee's request for an interview, clark showed up, but refused to answer questions, citing executive and attorney/client privilege. >> all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. >> reporter: the case against bannon is making its way through the courts. the podcast host has vowed not to stay quiet. >> we're going on the offense. we're tired of playing defense. >> reporter: prosecutors in the case asked the judge to limit what he can say. allowing the defendant to publicly disseminate will be witness tampering because it will expose commentary on their potential testimony before trial. meanwhile questions remain about former white house chief of staff mark meadows. the committee has threatened to

. >>> today the january 6th house committee is expected to interview jeffrey clark.r justice department official who is integral to helping then president trump in his efforts to try to overturn the 2020 presidential election. committee chair congressman bennie thompson said he's also signed about 20 new subpoenas, those could go out as soon as today. joining me now to discuss, paul rosensweg from the department of homeland security and former senior council for the whitewater investigation. good to have you with us this morning. if you were there and questioning jeffrey clark, what would you be asking him specifically? >> i think the most important questions to ask mr. clark would revolve around his specific interactions with others at the department of justice and at the white house. both the president, the vice president, the white house counsel, the acting attorney general jeff rosen. the details of what he tried to do are still obscure, certainly within the department of justice. we have a good paper record. but hearing his version of what he was attempting to a