joining us now is devlin barrett, national security and law enforcement reporter for the washington post, one of the violence on this piece. devlin, thank you for making the time. it's been exhausted reporting, and i kind of came away with it confused and enlightened. what is your take away from having investigated all of this, in terms of the relationship with the doj and the fbi on the topic of the trump mar-a-lago search? >> so, i think there are a couple of ways to think about. one is that it is very common for prosecutors and agents to argue during the course of investigation about what exactly to do, how aggressive to go after witnesses, how aggressive to go after evidence. that happens in a lot of cases. there are tension points, flare-ups, they get resolved, and they move forward. i think what is so different about the trump investigation is really two things. obviously, this is a very high profile case, you know that there will be a lot of attention paid to this. you know that there will be a lot of second-guessing, both inside the government and outside the government, and to,

>> with us now to talk more about all of this is "washington post" national security reporter devlin barrettf the former vp being ordered to testify here? >> well, there were basically two ways in which trump and pence separately tried to stop this grand jury testimony from happening. one is that trump tried to assert executive privilege. two is that pence asserted speech or debate clause against his testimony. what we're told is that the judge ruled against trump on the executive privilege question. but ruled partly for pence on the legislative question. so now what we're waiting to see is pence going to try to appeal that decision. >> and could this mean something for other people like former chief of staff mark meadows, who has been trying to get you of testifying before that grand jury? >> it's another way in which a lot of the people close to trump are failing to fight these subpoenas. because what you're seeing in the pence case and in many others is that when executive privilege has been asserted to try to stop these kind of grand jury questions for people close to trump, those effort

. >> devlin barrett, ryan nobles, thanks, guys, really appreciate it. >>> we are just now getting that video from the jury's visit to the crime scene. let's take a look. so there you see the scene of the crime back with me. legal analyst paul butler, paul, one of the arguments, the key argument that the defense made, the reason they wanted to get there is what they called spatial issues. they wanted, and we heard ellison talk about this, they wanted to drive home the point that they believe that alex murdaugh couldn't have killed his son the way the spatial situation is. how important might it be for jurors to actually go there, see the distances, see the size of the spaces for themselves in ways that, frankly, a videotape like what we're watching right now can't really tell you? >> that's right, chris. the prosecutors oppose this visit. they said that jurors could get the wrong impression because the crime scene looks different now than it did at the time of the killings. it's rare for judges to allow visits like this. remember, all of the evidence that's introduced in a criminal cour

joining us now to discuss is evelyn barrett security reporter for the national. coast and former federal prosecutor, devlinr being here. just from the prosecutors perspective i wonder how you interpret this string of victories for jack smith and what it means for future subpoenas like those of ivanka trump and jared kushner. >> alex, this goes to the heart of why the executive privilege defense or barriers won't work here because dating back to the united states versus nixon the supreme court made it clear that the executive privilege which doesn't exist won't shield the communications in the face of a criminal grand jury investigation which is what we have going on right here. these folks all indicate that smith zeroing in on people who are in a position to know about trump's state of mind the intent which is really gonna be the core of the controversy over whether he really believed that there was a problem with the election war what was he doing in terms of trying to overturn the election results these are the kind of people you need to have in there to make that case for or against my only frustration