clark attorney told us mr. clark would be willing to appear at another deposition and that he plans to assert his fifth amendment rights. if mr. clark believes answering questions about his discussions with president trump and others in november and december of 2020 and january of 2021 could incriminate him and therefore wishes to invoke privilege on that basis, the committee would consider that. we will not finalize this contempt process if mr. clark genuinely cures -- it is important to note that mr. clark is not excused from testifying simply because president trump is trying to hide behind inapplicable claims of executive privilege. mr. clark is refusing to answer austin's that are not conceivably subject to any executive or any other privilege. let me make a larger point. president trump continues to make the same claims about a stolen election with which he has misled millions of americans. these are the same claims he knows provoked violence in the past. he recently suggested he wants to debate embers of

clark on our witness list. as someone who was in direct contact with the former president in the days leading up to january 6, he has information we believe is relevant to our investigation. when he, unlike hundreds of others refused to cooperate with our investigation voluntarily, we subpoenaed him on october 13 and when he appeared for a position on november 5, instead of answering her questions, his lawyer presented the committee with a dozen pages of excuses for defying the law and refusing to comply with our subpoena. we heard the term contempt of congress a lot in the last few weeks. we know it is serious business that can land a person in serious trouble. it can sound a little abstract. so if you want to know what contempt of congress really looks like, read the transcript of mr. clark's deposition and his attorneys correspondence with the select committee. what you find there is contempt for congress and the american people. contempt for the rule of law, contempt for the constitution. faced with specifi

clark. jeff clark is the person with whom president trump apparently cooked up a scheme by which the justice department would try to induce georgia and reportedly several other states to flip the results of the election. mr. clark reportedly drew up documents falsely claiming that the justice department was investigating serious fraud in the presidential election, and therefore advising georgia and other state legislatures and states won by jody joe biden that in light that serious supposed fraud in the election that the justice department was supposedly investigating those states should reconsider sending biden electors to the electoral college. in other words, they should think about sending trump electors to the electoral college, effectively calling their states for trump, even though biden had won. now, the -- the broader picture here of course is that the u.s. justice department has brought criminal prosecutions against more than 600 americans who took part in the physical attack on th

clark and mr.ring enough for their own -- fearful enough that they're invoking their fifth amendment rights? >> well, it could well be. it's worth reading what the fifth amendment actually says. no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. well, it looks like mr. clark and now mr. eastman think that there's going to be or could well be a criminal prosecution based on their actions, so they're in a position to know more than i am what they did, and i think it's a very troubling and quite possibly criminal. >> if there were -- was evidence either of state crimes, obviously interfering with or intimidating election officials is i believe a crime in every state. certainly it's a federal crime as well when it comes to federal elections. if your committee turns up sound voluminous uncontested evidence that such crimes were committed, what would the process be? obviously you guys can't bring it yourself. >> it's speculation to some extent. we're a legislative body. we

clark on our witness list. as someone who was in direct contact with the former president in days leading up to the january 6th. he was -- he has information we believe is relevant to our investigation. when he, like -- unlike hundreds of others -- refused to cooperate with our investigation voluntarily, we subpoenaed him on october 13th. and when he appeared for a deposition on november 5th, instead of answering our questions, his lawyer presented the committee with a dozen pages of excuses for defying the law and refusing to comply with our subpoena. we heard the term contempt of congress a lot in the last few weeks. we know it's serious business that can land a person in serious trouble. but it can sound a little abstract. so, if you want to know what contempt of congress really looks like, read the transcript of mr. clark's deposition and his attorney's correspondence with the select committee because what you find there is contempt for congress and for the american people. contempt for the rule of law. con

jeffrey clark. you may remember he served as the acting head of the civil division of the doj under trump, a position he kind ever fell backwards into as people left. and it was in that position that he hatched a plot to oust then acting attorney general jeffrey rosen, become a.g. himself with trump's support, and then use the full power of the department of justice to question the legitimacy of the 2020 election. had he succeeded, if it had gone off, it almost certainly would have thrown the country into a full-blown constitutional crisis as the committee puts it in that new report. "according to documents and testimony gathered by the select committee in the weeks leading up to the january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol jeffrey bosert clark participated in efforts to delegitimize results of the 2020 presidential election and delay or interrupt the peaceful transfer of power. after numerous courts from the united states have resoundingly rejected alleged voter fraud challenges to election results b

clark has agreed to appear again to continue his deposition.ever, we will proceed tonight with considering the contempt request as this is just the first step of the contempt process. >> the republican vice chair of the committee liz cheney said this. >> if mr. clark believes that answering questions about his discussions with president trump and others in november and december of 2020 and january of 2021 could inkrem nate him, and he therefore wishes to invoke privilege on that basis the committee would certainly consider that. we will not finalize this contempt process if mr. clark genuinely cures his failure to comply with the subpoena this saturday. it is important to note, however, that mr. clark is not excused from testifying simply because president trump is trying to hide behind inapplicable claims of executive privilege. >> the committee then vote unanimously to refer jeffrey clark to the justice department for prosecution of criminal contempt of congress. congressman adam schiff a member of the committee issued this statement. at the

jeffrey clark.rved as the acting head of the civil division of donald trump, of positioning fell backwards into a people left. it was in that position that he hatched a plot to oust then acting attorney general rosen. but coming at him himself with trump support, but then with the full using the full power of justice to question the legitimacy of 2020 election. had he succeeded if he had gone off, it almost certainly would've thrown the country into a full blown constitutional crisis! and the committee puts it in that report, quote, according to the documents and testimony gathered by the select committee, in the weeks leading up to the january attacks jeffrey bowser clark participated in efforts to delegitimized the results of the 2020 presidential election and delay or interrupt the peaceful transfer of power. after numerous court throughout the united states had resoundingly rejected alleged voter fraud challenges to the election results by the trump campaign and after all states certified in the

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

clark acting attorney general.e might be persuaded to turn down the president's offer to have him replace rosen if rosen sent out the proposed letters. after he refused to send the letters, clark informed rosen on january 3rd that clark intended to accept the president's offer to replace rosen. doj leadership threatened to resign if the president appointed clark as acting ag and the plan to replace rosen and proceed with clark's efforts did not advance. so it was this threat of a mass resignation in this period these days before the insurrection. that stopped this from happening and it's another sort of sliding doors moment for me of how close we came. we came really close to a guy named jeffrey clark to being the acting ag. he wrote a letter on doj letterhead telling georgia to do what donald trump told ralphensburger to do, find the votes for him. at what point do we stop saying ah, coup plot, barely, it didn't happen. it almost happened. here's another place where donald trump's totety was almost in charge of th

let me read from the contempt report on clark.white house officials including then president trump to discuss efforts to delegitimize disrupt or overturn election results. they also say they have reason to believe that mr. clark had conversations with others in the federal government including members of congress. that to me is intriguing. your thoughts on his potential to wind up actually incarcerated. what do you think happens now? >> yeah, he clearly has important information, but, frankly, even more importantly, he has a fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. there was reporting that donald trump was ep listing the department of justice officials to do his nefarious bidding in trying to corruptly overturn the election's results. remember, there was that famous meeting where it was reported that president trump said, look, i know there was no fraud, just say there was and leave the rest to me and my allies in congress. what did jeffrey clark do? then a d.o.j. official he went back to the department of justice. he dra

he had a list in his mind, and in fact when tom clark came to him, when tom clark came to the oval officewith a list, you had a list of nominees, catholic nominees because we are going to have a catholic nominee to replace the justice. he said he didn't even look at, it. he had a list in his own mind of who was going to be the nominee's to the court. and, they were going to be men, they were all men at this time. and whom he knew and trusted. >> -- his supporters pointed out that his wife and kids [inaudible]. >> his wife is catholic, come on, that has got to count! now most of the court's catholic, it is incredible. >> throughout the book, you weave two great narratives about how truman used the court. a couple of the cases relate to unions, and a couple relate to civil rights. we don't really have time to get too much into those, i would encourage people, please buy the book or get it from the library, whatever, it is a fantastic read and you will learn so much. but, i wonder if you could just in closing summarize how truman used the supreme court to advance his civil rights agenda. >>

clark still has that opportunity.akes advantage of it. >> surprising development tonight as the committee investigating january 6 met to dole out its second contempt of congress citation. committee chairman bennie thompson took the step of offering former department justice official jeffrey clark another chance to sit for a deposition. he has been in for one. at his last appearance, clark's attorney told the committee he would not answer questions, would not produce any documents. the committee still voted to hold clark in contempt. that passing unanimously. a vote by the full house could come within days if clark spurns the committee again. stephanie murphy is a member of the select committee investigating the attack who voted for the contempt referral. she joins me now. maybe you can explain the scenario. what happened when he came the first time, the decision to vote for contempt and what the latest developments are now. >> sure. thanks for having me, chris. the first time that mr. clark appeared before the committ

we meant to roll video of jeffrey clark. we apologize for the error. >>> still ahead, would you pay a hundred bucks for magic dirt? it may sound like a modern-day jack and the bean stalk but it's a real product, sold as a covid cure. inside the rise and fall of online pandemic pyramid schemes. >>> plus, if these walls could talk, the money mystery found inside joel olsteen's mega church in texas. details of the bizarre discovery. >> it was just like unbelievable, the things he was telling us they found in the wall. hey found in the wall abdominal discomfort, gas, and bloating and it works fast. in as little as 7 days try fast acting biotic gummies from align. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand. ♪♪ what the- henry? thanks! if it's “out decorating the neighbors” season, it's walgreens season. ♪♪ what a pain in the- alice? if it's “let's wrap this up” season, it's walgreens season. [music: "i swear"] jaycee tried gain flings for the first time the other day... and forgot where she was. you can always spot a first time ga

not only did president trump not say anything about clark, but clark's superiors at the department of justice have appeared before our committee and have provided testimony. it is a real shame that somebody who has taken an oath of office when he went to work for the department of justice to uphold the constitution is behaving in the way that he is today. >> i should say that the committee's report on clark says the committee believes that clark had conversations with others in the federal government, including members of congress, regarding efforts to delegitimized the results of the election in the weeks leading up to january 6th. you mentioned something i saw before, which i don't know if you have stated or indicated this through lawyers, his intend to invoke the fifth amendment. of course, it is their constitutional protection against self incrimination. you don't have to answer questions from a police officer or on the stand. it is an american right. when i hear from you is your committee's position that that fifth amendment does not apply in this case, because it is not a crimin

clark. we are doing everything we can to show that we are not partisan, that this committee is just trying to get to the facts. as you said, we voted unanimously tonight to hold him in contempt. i will go before the rules committee in the morning to proffer a rule to go to the floor. we'll hold that in abeyance until saturday. so this will be mr. clark's last chance to come. he can come and assert himself. but, you know, if you say you haven't done anything wrong but on the other hand you want to assert the fifth amendment in terms of self-prosecution, it's saying that you have something to hide. so we're going to give him an opportunity to do it. a lot of other people have come before the committee, they have done what's right, they have talked to us, and we thank them for it. our charge is to get to the facts. mr. clark, through his attorney, has been deliberately avoiding us. this is his last chance to come. if he wants to assert it, rachel, he can do it. but it will be under oath. he is

who is jeffrey clark?y a name we heard often or really ever for most of trump's administration. we've learned he was very active in efforts to overturn the 2020 election. so here he is. at the end of the trump presidency, clark was the acting head of the civil cases at the department of justice. in the weeks after the election, he pushed unfounded claims about voter fraud. he's also accused of helping donald trump create a plan to oust then acting attorney jeffrey rosen and take the job himself and attorney general. it's thought that clark would have probably helped lawmakers in georgia and other states potentially undermine the results of the popular vote. so leaders in the department of justice say they told trump if he made clark attorney general to overturn biden's lelections, many if not all of the senior officials would resign. a report by the judicial committee slammed clark and asked for a view of his professionalism as a lawyer. as to the possibility that clark would refuse to testify, democrats s

clark's attorney sent a letter to the committee.letters stating that mr. clark now intends to assert his fifth amendment privilege. this is, in my view, a last ditch attempt to delay the select committee's proceedings. however, a fifth amendment privilege assertion is e waiting one. i am informed mr. clark's of turning that i am willing to convene another deposition, of which mr. clark can assert that privilege, but we will not allow any one to run out the clock. and we will insist that he must appear on this saturday. >> he must appear this saturday, where we are advised he will plead the fifth. that was mississippi congressman benny thompson tonight, on a surprising new development in the january six investigation that congressman thompson share. 's investigation, members of that committee, did vote tonight unanimously former trump justice department official just jeff clark, for prosecution over his refusal to comply with subpoenas from the committee. that mr. clark's are also, apparently, going to be pleading the fifth, invoking

clark's case to the justice department for criminal prosecution. that will put the justice department in the position of having to decide whether or not they're going to bring formal criminal proceedings against somebody who very recently was a senior official at that same department. that meeting tomorrow where the january 6th investigation is going to take the vote as to whether or not they're going to refer clark for prosecution, that meeting is going to be open to the public so we'll see what we can glean from that. we'll be watching closely. >> cnn was first to report today as well that trump white house chief of staff mark meadows appears to have diverted from what was otherwise looking like his own path to a criminal indictment. he has started to cooperate with the january 6th investigation. now, per a statement from the committee's chairman, a statement from bennie thompson, the congressman who is the chair of the investigation, we don't know how cooperative mark meadows is being. we don't know exactly what he has handed over to the investi

clark could not raise executive privilege pursuant to trump versus thompson because clark was not the one in court. mr. meadows is in court, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> okay. during the same hearing you and your colleagues referred to the need for document production in order to continue your investigation. if that's -- i'm sure that is the case, but then why are we advancing a measure here that is purely punitive? that is the committee's not pursuing civil enforcement of the subpoena. why not the civil course, why the criminal source? >> well, clearly the criminal choice is what the committee made. we see the lawsuit as merely a delaying tactic on the part of mr. meadows. we have given him as i said earlier every opportunity to come to the committee. we negotiated with him. and at the last moment, he said he's not coming and then he filed suit, which is his choice. we don't have to, as a committee -- >> again, i'm just trying to be clear on this. you clearly had a choice to make. i think when you choose the criminal course, you assure you're not going to get corporation. w

clark could alter the department of justice's conclusions regarding the election. mr. clark has informed this committee that he anticipates potential criminal prosecution related to these matters. and intends in upcoming testimony to invoke his fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. as mr. meadows' nonprivileged texts reveal, meadows communicated multiple times with a member of congress who was working with mr. clark.f mr. meadows has no basis to refuse to testify regarding those communications. >> clark has informed the committee he anticipates potential criminal prosecution related to these matters, and meadows' texts reveal he communicated multiple times with a member of congress who was t working with jeff clark. so we learn through meadows' production to the committee that he was -- that jeff clark was working with a sitting member of congress on that at the time. mark meadows' documents apparently show which member of congress that is who was workint with jeff clark on this scheme for which mr. clark is now anticipating potential criminal prosecuti

clark. mr. meadows has no basis to refuse to testify regarding those communications. >> clark has informed the committee he anticipates potential criminal prosecution related to these matters and meadows' texts reveal he communicated multiple times with a member of congress who was working with jeff clark. so we learn through meadows' production to the committee that he was, jeff clark was working with a sitting member of congress on that at the time. mark meadows' documents apparently show which member of congress that is who was working with jeff clark on this scheme for which mr. clark is now anticipating potential criminal prosecution. so now we're getting down to brass tacks here. this is news tonight from the january 6th investigation. news not just that they are referring meadows for contempt but what his production has revealed to them thus far. members of the committee did vote to unanimously hold him in contempt. the full house is expected to vote tomorrow on whether to hold meadows in

it's not just clarke. was also postponed, so what's going on here? is postponing the goal? >> so, i think that all of these trump advisors are trying to figure out how far they can push the select committee before they get held in contempt. clarke already voted to recommend his criminal prosecution if he doesn't cooperate and testify before the committee. of course, he delayed it, as you said, his deposition this morning, but he does have the deposition rescheduled so let's see if he cooperates then. but i think it's a case of them trying to find out what is the breaking point. >> now, i know you're also reporting on what questions the committee wants to ask clarke, so what do you have on that? >> yeah, so, the committee revealed in its contempt report or the transcripts backing up the contempt of court the kind of things they wanted to seek from mr. clarke, and involve communications that he had with the former president as well as individuals not connected to the executive branch and that involves people

clark's attorney sent a letter to the committee. another in a long series of long letters stating that mr. clark now intends to assert his fifth amendment privilege, even though mr. clark previously had the opportunity to make these claims on the record, the select committee will provide him another chance to do so. >> we will not finalize this contempt process, if mr. clark genuinely -- failure to comply with their subpoena the saturday. >> meanwhile, former trump chief of staff mark meadows today revealed how he plans to handle his upcoming appearance before that same committee. meadows has been resisting, asserting that he was following trump's claim of executive privilege, while yesterday the panel said he started complying with a subpoena for records and plan to testify, but comments are meadows today raised questions about just how much cooperating he plans to do. >> the president has made a very clear that he is claiming executive privilege, not because he has anything to hide. i'm going to be honoring his executive privilege

doctor simon clark, aood to at a cost to us. doctor simon clark, good to talk — at a cost to us.t to us. doctor simon clark, good to talk to you. _ at a cost to us. doctor simon clark, good to talk to you. thank - at a cost to us. doctor simon clark, good to talk to you. thank you. - the latest headlines on bbc news.... in the uk the prime minister's scientific advisers will brief him today on the spread of coronavirus over christmas, as he decides whether to impose more restrictions in england before the new year. in scotland and northern ireland, further measures come into force today for pubs, bars and cafes. health advisers in israel have recommended a fourth covid jab for all people aged over 60 and healthcare workers. a week of events are starting in south africa to commemorate the life of the anti—apartheid leader archbishop desmond tutu. he died on sunday, aged 90. the bells of cape town's st george's cathedral will toll for ten minutes a day every day at noon until friday. buildings have been lit up in the city as people gathered outside the city's st george's cathedral

which is jeffrey clark. the guy we are looking at in the senate judiciary committee, who was in the u.s. department of justice. nominally in charge of the environment division, which under trump you know when supposed to do anything in. and he got himself all cooked up with esteemed unduly the election. where? in georgia. he has not played the fifth. he's not exactly a principle figure. he's kind of do we be so the likelihood that there are people behind him, steering that letter at georgia as part of that scheme, operating within the department of justice and through the department of justice, is a pretty, strong probability. georgia could be the place trump goes for redemption, georgia can also be the place where justice comes for trump. >> you mentioned jeffrey clark

and then you got a third thread, which i'll bring in, if you don't mind, which is jeffrey clark, the guy we're looking at in the senate judiciary committee who was in the u.s. department of justice, nominally in charge of the environment division, which under trump you know he wasn't supposed to do anything in. and he got himself all cooked up with a scheme to undo the election where? in georgia. >> yeah. >> he has now plead the fifth. he is not exactly a principle figure. he is kind of dweebie. so the likelihood that there were people behind him steering that letter at georgia as part of that scheme operating within the department of justice and through the department of justice is a pretty strong probability right now. so, you know, georgia could be the place trump goes for redemption, but georgia could also be the place where justice comes for trump. >> you mentioned jeffrey clark

it seems like they need information from jeffrey clark and john eastman. in your experience, what options are available to the committee with these two? >> i think the individuals at this point have a choice to made, which is, do they want to invite a contempt of congress viation, just like steve bannon did, or do they want to cooperate to the best extent possible? and i think that my hope is that through the cooperation of mark meadows, they will feel that they have no choice but to cooperate, baa but we will see very much if that ends to be the case. >> congressman, politico is reporting that, quote, an unpublished investigative compilation, sometimes referred to as the alternative mueller report has been located in the justice department files and could be released soon. to do you know anything about this. >> mr. weismann, part of the mueller team revealed in his book that they could come up with this alternative, "the new york times" sued to get access to it. and the justice department is now apparently in the process of producing it. my hope is that i

clark as acting attorney general. this morning saying, quote, i decline this entity's request and will continue to fight the failures of the radical left." tonight the committee is indicating a firm response to perry's resistance. we will talk about it in a moment with adam schiff. it is a sign of how serious it is getting. as "the new york times" reported last night the committee is considering recommending that donald trump himself face criminal charges. adam schiff of california is a member of the house select committee. he also is the lead impeachment manager in donald trump's first impeachment and he joins me now. congressman, first let's talk about congressman scott perry. obviously this is interesting, and i feel like almost uncharted waters. i'm trying to wrack my brain for a similar situation in which you had to sort of special impanelled committee who have witnesses who are themselves a member of congress and how to treat that. what is your response to him saying he simply won't cooperate? >> well, there's,

clark disappeared and mr.in the area when clark disappeared. >> sarah, meanwhile, her marriage falling apart, had suspicions about james and not just his cheating ways. it went back to the day james told her about doug carlile's death. >> he just walked into the room and was like, doug's dead, straight-faced, nothing. of course, i immediately got upset. we need to call his wife, business partners, how did this happen? he just walked back into the kitchen and started talking about it with everyone like it was no big deal. it was the strangest thing ever. >> did he say what happened? >> he said he got shot in his home. he said someone must have been really mad at him? how did you figure you 24is out? an old friend of doug's called james and let him know. >> did you think at the time, i wonder if james had something to do with this? >> it seemed fishy, it did. but again, your life's already crumbling. you don't want to think that your husband could be doing anything like that. >> why didn't you get out of that ma

clark. they voted to hold him in contempt tonight while also agreeing to bring him back and hear him out, i believe on saturday, at a session where he may take the fifth. opinions seem split on whether this shows weakness or wisdom. where do you come down? >> i think it's wisdom, brian. but i think they have to proceed cautiously. a fifth amendment privilege is different than the executive privilege that we saw with steve bannon. but there are certainly indications that jeffery clark is kind of playing games here. as the chairman pointed out, jeffery clark did not assert the fifth amendment right when he testified before the committee at least appeared for a deposition on november 5th. and so if this isn't a stall tactic, i think this vote keeps the heat on him, forces him to show up and go through question by question the issues on what he going to plead the fifth amendment. >> and, peter, back to your beat. hard as it is to believe, life in this white house and for this administration has

jeffrey clark played a key role in the effort to overturn the election.ll plead the 5th after another scheduled deposition this weekend. >> this is, in my view, a last ditch attempt to delay the select committee. we will not allow anyone to run out the clark and we will insist that he must appear on this sad. >> leanne caldwell joins me now from the hill. we pressed the pause button, but tell me about jeffrey clark. >> he is not a household name, but he is the former president's biggest advocate and ally inside of the justice department to try to get them to investigate what they say, what he says was a stolen election or to publicly say that the election was stolen. she eluded to what the committee and she was asked by then to take over the role of attorney general so they could issue a series of letters. so because they think that clark was instrumental in the pressure campaign in the department of justice which we know that ag resigned over, we know that clark is a big target for the select committee and they said they're going to give him saturday to

he's also, jeffrey clark, raising an executive privilege type argument with that.e on record -- back in august he wrote a letter -- his lawyers wrote a letter to jeffrey rosen saying i'm not going to invoke executive privilege as to you or certain other doj officials including jeffrey clark. he doesn't have an executive privilege claim here. >> the other thing whitney was reporting on, mark meadows now cooperating with the panel. lawmakers say, as whitney was reporting, it's thousands of emails and will sit for a deposition soon. we see so often, elie, people in trump's orbit defying courts and defying congress if only to slow things down. why do you think meadows could be the exception here? >> kate, on the surface, this is a smart and reasonable deal for both parties. i think it is significant. we're talking about somebody very close to donald trump who has stepped away from steve bannon, stepped away from jeffrey clark and done what usually happens in this scenario and say, let's negotiate, i'm willing to give you this and not that. that's a return to some degre

clark worked his way up. what he might have lacked in perhaps academic ability, he certainly made up for it in work ethic, and he became truman's attorney general and became very successful in being an aggressive attorney general in part because he recognized that he was not the best lawyer in the building, and so what he did was managed the department of justice and said what can we do to advance the administration's agenda? now we expect that of our attorneys general. prior to that the attorney general had generally been kind of like we think of now -- at least lawyers think of now as the solicitor-general as an exceptional lawyer with these impeccable credentials. now you can get someone in there like president trump had senator jeff sessions in there in carrying out his agenda. and president george w. bush had alberto gonzalez. neither of those are these great incredible legal minds. they were effective, though, for the time in which they were there in carrying out the president's agenda. and i would cont

clark's lawyer has been a confusing hodgepodge of legal theories.ore our committee and refused to answer questions he didn't do so on the basis of any fifth amendment concern about self-incrimination. he had a whole range of theories and then in more recent correspondence he added to those and complained about the composition of our committee and now most recently he said that he has a fifth amendment concern. we'll ask him the range of questions pertinent to our investigation. with some he may take the fifth. with others he may use the other, you know, assertions of privilege, which we think have no merit. and on the basis of what does happen we'll make a decision about next steps. >> so this deposition in person, remote? >> it's in person. i mean, there will be an opportunity for members to participate remotely as well but it will be in person. >> you've already met with clark's former boss jeffrey rosen and richard donahue. they didn't take the fifth. do you have information you believe implicates clark in things like election interference or fra

after a ruling clarks will appear this saturday for another.t >> i want to note that around 8:00 last evening, mr. clark's attorney sent a letter to the committee, another in a long series of long letters, stating that mr. clark now intends to assert his fifth amendment privilege against incriminating himself in this process. this is, in my view, a last-ditch attempt to delay the select committee's proceedings, however, a fifth amendment privilege assertion is a weighty one. we have just learned that mr. clark has agreed to appear again to continue his deposition. however, we will proceed tonight with considering the contempt request as this is just the first step of the contempt process. >> he has recently suggested that he wants to debate members of this committee. this committee's investigation into the violent assault on our capitol on january 6th is not a game. any communication mrs. trump has with this committee will be under oath. and if he persists lying then, he'll be under the laws of this great nation and subject to penalties for eve

clark was supposed to be deposed today bd postponed. clark is indicating he will do the same. they have the right to do that, of course. but i want to know how you see this as a former prosecutor. >> well, they do have the right to plead the fifth. as a former prosecutor, of course i recognize that constitutional right, and i also know that a jury would be instructed not to take into account and make any conclusions from that. but i also know, as a human being, as a u.s. citizen, that people do reach a conclusion. and the conclusion is that they know they're guilty of a crime, that they could say something that could be used as evidence against them. and if they didn't have something to say that would be used against them, they wouldn't need to take the fifth. so it is a pretty dramatic thing. and clark, of course, as we know started out with -- and eastman, too, started with attorney-client privilege. then they moved to executive privilege which was equally without any substance. and now we're going to, okay, if i can't get away with not testifying for those reasons, i'm goin

clark's acting attorney general. perry responded this morning saying quote, i declined this entities request, and will continue to fight the failures, of the radical capitol left. tonight the committee is indicating a firm response to perry's resistant, to talk about that in one moment with a committee member adam schiff. it's just another sign of how serious this investigation is getting. remember, as the new york times reported last, night the committee is recommending, donald trump himself face federal criminal charges. adam schiff of california, is a member of the house select committee, he's also the lead impeachment manager donald trump's first impeachment. he joins me now. congressman, let's talk about congressman scott perry. obviously this is interesting. and i feel like almost uncharted waters. i'm trying to rack my brain, for a similar situation, in which you had a specially impounded committee, you have witnesses who are themselves member of congress, and how to treat that. what is your response to him sa

said that clark could not raise executive privilege pursuant to clark versus thompson, because clark was not the one in court. but mr. meadows is in court, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> and during the same hearing, you and your colleagues repeatedly referred to the need for document production in order to continue your investigation. and i'm sure that is the case, but why are we advancing a measure here that's purely punitive, that is the committee's not pursuing civil enforcement of the subpoena. why not the civil course? why the criminal course? >> well, clearly, the criminal course is what the committee made. we see the lawsuit merely as a delaying tactic on the part of mr. meadows and we have given him, as i've said earlier, every opportunity, we negotiated with him, and at the last moment, he said he's not coming and he filed suit, which is his choice. we done have to as a committee -- >> i'm just trying to be clear on this, because you had a choice to make, and when you sure the criminal course, you sure you're not going to get cooperation, when you choose the civil co

clark's attorneys that he is now willing to meet with the committee to reassert his fifth amendment right. if the house were to take up the resolution, mr. clark would become the second person to face potential prosecution in relation to the january 6 investigation.

clark and that mark meadows was closely aligned with clark as well, which we did know. who those lawmakers are that were part of this legal conspiracy or the effort to use the force of the information to overturn the results of the election is become a important pressure point for the committee and the reason why they want meadows to sit down for a deposition as was requested in the initial subpoena, it is not accurate for congressman jim banks to say that he is not, that he is actually trying to comply because part of the deal that was negotiated was that meadows would provide certain records then he would also sit down for an actual interview, but there are a lot of follow up questions to these documents that were handed over. and i think what's most fascinating to me having covered this investigation from the very start is seeing the committee circle around meadows and jeffrey clark as two of the key people who were assisting president trump. clark has not been held in contempt. they were giving him one more opportunity to appear before the committee to plead the fif

harry, let me start with you on what jeffrey clark is doing.the precipice of being referred for criminal referral he says i will come but i am going to take the fifth. >> give me another chance to make a record so i don't get indicted for criminal contempt. instead of all the half baked privilege claims i am going to take the fifth amendment. adam schiff says, he's a former prosecutor, well and good, but you have to do it question by question. they will sit him down, he will raise his hand, were you working a the department of justice in december of 2020. on advice of counsel, i respectfully decline to answer that question. >> schiff will then try to probe other questions say to him you can't do it in a wholesale way. but the ultimate audience here, nicolle s merrick garland. if he continues to do it generically, schiff and the committee will be apoplectic, but will that make it harder to have a referral and make it look like he acted with criminal intent? i think it will. i think this is kind of a game, unpleasant for both, but especially for