in the end, merrick garland has the final say on what happened . it seems like a defense of -- my politics are not interfering because somebody else's politics are interfering with it and it seems like he is trying to say it will not be run by a biden official because a trump official is running it and i know how that's takes the politics off of that and that's with the american people want to see. the american people are frustrated that they are seeing people of either party get away with certain crimes who are connected and they want to make sure these investigations whether they result in charges are above board. it's problematic to point to his politics. host: there were calls for a special counsel. guest: republicans have been calling for a special prosecutor into hunter biden. obviously, what the republicans want is hopefully that will touch on something embarrassing they can use against president biden especially if he runs for reelection. i don't know where that gets the republican party. the special counsel still has to report to the attor

so garland sent that signal to lester holt. that is, i believe, a specific reference, as specific as we have seen to donald trump. >> you think the peaceful, to interfere with the lawful transfer of power, you think that is, again, why does that stand out to you? do you think that's the strongest language he's used? >> is the most specific language he has used. and it's the most pointed at trump, because trump was above all, at the top of that pyramid of folks who we now know from the january 6th committee were attempting to interfere with a peaceful transfer of power trump was at the top i think those remarks were a signal and. it was followed by the post reporting. >> ali, merrick garland says a house criminal referral would necessarily affect the doj's january six probe. committee member jamie raskin found that encouraging what do you think that means? >> i agree with both of them, don. i think merrick garland is absolutely right that a criminal referral from the committee is pure politics, as zero impact on doj or any prose

garland is one of the most respectable -- respected people in this town. he was chief judge of our nation's second highest course for 20 years. never overruled once by the supreme court. and in a town where people talk trash about everyone, nobody, even republicans couldn't find trash on him when he was nominated to be in the supreme court. that kind of steadiness and a political nunes did really help him. what this to me says that doj investigative strategy is for bearing fruit. you talked about flipping in the past, prosecutors build a criminal case by getting others to turn on others. we've seen that with the insurrectionists, then moving up to hires to extractions like stewart rhodes. we know that from last week that the white house top aides from pence marc short and mr. jacobs were both interviewed as well. that is all bearing fruit. now the question is, does the department have the goods right now? do they need more? do they try to flip a chinese man or dreadfully clark or mark meadows? none of these are guys who are particularly known for being par

go ahead. garland. well, i would agree with you and your, your implication in that zalinski will be very fortunate if he walks out of this one, you know, unscathed, shall we say, i'll just leave it at that. because i think what ultimately happens. and this is the problem that the neocons are going to have the need at least a semblance of a governing body. um for ukraine in order to argue that there's some legitimacy, the way things are going, i would predict a sudden collapse of some type, either a sudden collapse of the military of political collapse, some type of a qu, etc, is going to happen maybe after the don boss, ah, you know, the eastern ukrainian military part of the, of this particular conflict is over, but at some point there's going to be some kind of collapse and it's going to be very difficult for the west to a, you know, depending on who wins in the far right wins. well you certainly can work with them or bargain with them and they will and barrow i think they've been working with them si

go ahead. garland. well, i would agree with you and your, your implication in that zalinski will be very fortunate if he walks out of this one, you know, unscathed, shall we say, i'll just leave it at that. because i think what ultimately happens. and this is the problem that the neocons are going to have the need at least a semblance of a governing body. um for ukraine in order to argue that there's some legitimacy, the way things are going, i would predict a sudden collapse of some type, either a collapse of the military of political collapse, some type of a qu, etc, is going to happen maybe after the don boss, ah, you know, the eastern ukrainian or military part of the, of this particular conflict is over, but at some point there's going to be some kind of collapse and it's going to be very difficult for the west to a, you know, depending on who wins. if the far right wins, well you certainly can't work with them or bargain with them and they will embarrass. i think they've been working with them sin

and garland is no different. you know how pathetic this entire investigation is when you realize that the same party that's okay with letting thugs who assault police officers go free, they think trump should be charged for violence committed on january 6th. >> my grand jury is actively investigating trump's criminal conduct. the justice department is interested in two different kinds of crime. one is the violence and blood that we associate with insurrection day. crimes like conspiracy to defraud the united states, conspiracy to impede progression and russian investigation's. >> laura: if not even worth responding to. it's a name. so why don't these nincompoops pundits just come out and say the truth? it would be liberating for them. trump should be indicted because we can't beat him otherwise. and that's "the angle." joining me now, delighted he's with us, matt whitaker, former acting attorney general under president trump. according to cbs, there are two parts of this investigation. one part concerns the effor

i always think this is important when we talk about merrick garland.doesn't give a lot of interviews. as a member of congress, as someone who is involved and concerned it was sort of a direct target of the insurrection. how comforted were you by merrick dawar lapd's interview? did he say things that bolster your confidence in the doj? do you now feel safer? what was your general response to his interview today? >> very comforted. good to see you in the chair, jason >> thank you >> and hello, paul, but, first, let me just say that the concern has been, and perhaps this is why he did the interview, is that because donald trump was a former president that he may be afforded, you know, privileges that no other everyday suspect would receive, and what we want is for him to not be treated any better than any ordinary citizen and to not be treated, of course, any worse, but evidence is so overwhelming. it's a mountain of evidence now that the committee has put forward. all of the arrows point to donald trump inflaming, incopyright and then aiming that mob rig

go ahead. garland of a couple of things. i think number one, based on the history of the neocons and how many lives the needlessly wasted. i don't think they're concerned with unintended consequences of starvation or things like that around the world. that's not a concern of theirs. they could care less, they just see all of those lives as collateral. damage to ultimately achieve their, you know, hedge a monic goals as far as europe. i would disagree with you that that's an unintended consequence on john bolton said or year to go in his book that the, the neocons in washington, particularly in the trump administration, viewed the e u as a, a tremendous economic threat. second only to china. sure. so i think the plan was to take out rushes economy and take out the used car economy and they're not taking out rushes economy, but i think they'll be happy to at least get what they won't. they won't be happy that they didn't get russia, but they will be happy that they subjugated the you and put them in their place and eliminated

where is merrick garland?r fellow committee member adam schiff has repeatedly gone on camera to say, we've given enough in material. there is more than enough there to start a case, to start a criminal investigation of the president himself. the new york times reported earlier this week that doj's been playing catch-up. they were shocked by the cassidy hutchinson testimony. they don't really talk about donald trump in their internal readings. what do you make of the doj's performance so far, if i can put it that way there? the slowness that a lot of people in your party's team upset with? >> but i would say is that we don't, as a committee, have a lot of insight into where the department of justice is in their card investigations. i will tell, you it's ratcheting up in the sense of going after these domestic violent extremists who are charged now, with seditious conspiracy. and we know that they are listening. we know that they are watching. and as america, and have faith in the fact they're gonna take it for

garland has always said that nobody is above the law and to be patient. this is now the time where we see him actually taking steps that a lot of people have been asking him to do for sometime. including, i should say, members of the january 6th select committee. >> ryan, another question for you. what more are we learning, if anything, about who has spoken to the investigators about what is happening at the doj? >> so, what we know is when you have somebody like marc short and you have somebody like greg jacob, these are inside players inside the white house and in the west wing in the days leading up to january 6th. and they are the ones who can talk specifically about the pressure campaign that was put on mike pence. and that pressure came directly from donald trump. and i can just tell you from my experience covering the january 6th committee, when short and jacob broke through, and when the committee was able to subpoena them and get that in front of them, that is when you really saw the floodgates begin to open in terms of the direction of this inve

he wrote a piece saying garland memo does not rule out prosecuting trump.that out for us for those who are anxious. >> sure, first of all the reality was the headline was that mayor garland extends bill barr's rule on prosecuting presidential candidates and anything bill barr is saying that anything mayor garland is expanding that bill barr did, i am sure i get why would freak about, it freaks me out if mayor garland was going to follow bill barr's rule on changing the hours and the doj commissaries like how will that help republicans and donald trump? that is what we have been through and i think was the fact that he literally was mayor garland, extending the bill barr rule. and all the rule says is that russia so you cannot investigate in the presidential candidate. simply says, you need the approval of the attorney general in writing before you do it. as a practical matter, you think the doj was going to allow investigations into ex president, the first one ever without having mayor garland revolve than it? of course we are going to. everybody calm down,

what merrick garland says there is absolutely true. federal prosecutors do not conduct their investigations in public, nor should they. but the inevitable part of those investigations do become public. and subpoenas are issued. witnesses are called to testify. reporters get scoops about where investigations stand. and where they are head. what leads they are following. what we don't know for sure what is happening inside the justice department we do have enough fragments to try to piece together a picture and right now that picture is starting to look like one of a justice department that meticulously tried to avoid politics and as a result of that, it appears to be frantically playing catch-up on mao what merrick garland today himself described as the most important investigation of our time. joining us now are a reporter forin "the wall street journal" covering the justice department, and david road, executive director for the news for the new ecyorker.com. thanks for joining us. sadie, i want to start with you. you cover the justice

and merrick garland's next steps after this. revelation and merrick garland's next steps after this i wish that shaq was my real life big brother. what's up, little bro? turns out, some wishes do come true. and it turns out the general is a quality insurance company that's been saving people money for nearly 60 years. for a great low rate, and nearly 60 years of quality coverage- go with the general. let's start off and talk about january six, we just wash weeks of some pretty horrific testimony that led up to january six and what happened that day. just, as an american, can you tell me what your impression was of what we heard? >> are you talking about the hearings? >> the hearings. >> i think it is a very important, it's important part of democracy. every american recognizes the truth of what happened on january 6th and in the times surrounding it. i think that this is an important part that we have not downgrade or suppress how important that day was. and i think that the hearings did an extremely good job of reminding us, fo

first what merrick garland told lester holt when asked when indicting a former president and possible presidential candidate again might tear the country apart. >> we pursue justice without fear or favor. we intend to hold everyone, anyone who is criminally responsible for the events surrounding january 6th or any attempt to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another accountable. that's what we do. we don't pay any attention to other issues with respect to that. >> reporter: so if donald trump were to become a candidate for president again, that would not change your schedule or how you move forward or don't move forward? >> i'll say again that we will hold accountable anyone who is criminally responsible for attempting with the legitimate transfer of power from one administration to the next. >> the attorney general vowed twice to hold responsible anyone trying to interfere with the transfer of power. cnn had similar roaring earlier today, josh. your article goes a little deeper with details about specific questions being asked by grand jury invest

i was h shocked by what merrick garland said. d are given toaks "the washington post" the day before his interview. and instead of sayingernd i cant confirm or deny the existence of an investigation or i can'tsc talk t about ongoing investigations, he gave the left exactly what they are demanding from him, which is essentially he pretty much confirmed donald trump is under investigation and we should rejoiced . these people are sick and it's just really sad to see the department of justice be taken to thiss level of political persecution. you know, they did it in t sixteen with the russian collusion hoax. you c then congress took over with the two impeachment and now they're working together and colluding with congress and the department of justice to try to finally come up with some way so that they don't havey to24 oppose him in twenty four if he decides to run. now, obama's former solicitorl, general matt neal katyal, hadin an interesting read on garland watch. d >> o this is the kind of guy you want running that prosecution,

i hope that merrick garland realizes that time is not on his side.finitely will not be a good idea when the country is on a course that puts it in collision with the survival of democracy. and i think he is going to do with any good attorney general would do. he's a particularly powerful and brilliant one. and that is to organize an indictment that is airtight. he could either go with a rather simple course that barry berke suggested. charge the easier but quite serious crimes of trying to obstruct a congressional inquiry. or he could go a more dramatic course that neal katyal suggests. and that is, [inaudible] seditious conspiracy and inciting an attempt to foment and aid and abet a violent insurrection. he could do all of the above. it seems to me that there is no reason to leave anything on the field. >> i think the way we have all been talking about it publicly separates january 6th and the attack on the capitol from the phone call to georgia around january 1st, which is the subject of a criminal january investigation right now -- donald trump is

that is what merrick garland is sort of all about. about following the protocols, the doj, stephanie. >> but ryan, it is a big deal. i get that there is snow on the ground, and they reported that it is snowing. guess what, former president trump has been lying or pushing the big lie for months and months, and months with no consequences. so when there is definitive reporting around it, that is a big deal. >> oh yes, it's huge. again, all kudos to them. they nailed it. i think the hints were there, and they were the ones who were able to actually nail this down. so all credit goes to them for nailing this down. but there has been a lot of hints about this in the months leading up to it for sure. >> joyce, we do know that these two top aides of mike pence spoke to the grand jury, i'm not saying that's not a big deal. but we cannot assume that just because they testified, they are incriminating trump in any way? >> so i think that's right that we don't. no -- we don't know >> joyce. >> i think that is correct. we don't know what takes pl

. >> is merrick garland zeroing in on the former president? tuesday's big primaries are a test of the influence over the gop. will they fight off maga challengers? >> if the i don't know in office is to stay in office you should find another job. >> "inside politics," the biggest stories sourced by the best reporters now. >> welcome "inside politics supd." i i'm manu raju in for abby phillips. joe manchin is supporting the plan to fight the climate crisis and fight prescription drug costs. it was a deal 18 months in the working. >> the work of the government can be slow and sometimes infuriating. then the hard work of hours and days and months from people who refused to give up pays off. history is made. lives are changed. with this legislation, we are facing up to some of the biggest problems and we are taking a giant step forward as a nation. >> but as democrats were celebrating new data shows the american economy shrank for a second straight quarter. >> two negative quarters of gdp growth is not the technical definition of a recession. >> y

then it would be for merrick garland. is that what you are saying?at's exactly what i'm saying, chris. the president is a singularly unique defendant. merrick garland, the reality is, he has to take into account, especially as you just mentioned, the institutional considerations in terms of the public space in the justice departments impartiality. it has to be reinforced, not weekend by any persecution. i think that in this regard, i've been thinking about this a lot, there is a crime, usc 28 83, incitement for insurrection. that would be the charge that merrick garland would be right in bringing. for three reasons, first, it creates a bright line. if you send an armed lunatic mob to attack a equal branch of government, that is wrong. everybody knows, that merrick garland, shot kennedy, they all texan and that that day. second, the public can get their minds around, it that's what they saw unfolding on television. not something the science behind the scenes, and crazy legal theories. third, and this is really important, incitement to insurrection car

. a pretty bad one. -- merrick garland-— a pretty bad one. -- merrick garland. ~ . ., ., garland.ple over the _ garland. we have heard from so many people over the last - many people over the last hearing spot sarah matthews, a young deputy press secretary, we have heard from other young people there at the start of their careers, feeding this sense of imperative to do something in terms of ethically, morally, to stop what was going on, is that something that struck you as well from junior staffers in the white house feeling that something had to be done? absolutely struck me as remarkable. this was not a bunch of bernie sanders democrats testifying, these were loyal, lifetime republicans who were simply appalled by donald trump's actions in inciting the mob and encouraging the mob and felt they had to get out and tell they had to get out and tell the truth and it wasn'tjust the truth and it wasn'tjust the staffers, it was donald trumpjunior, it was a bunker trump, it was jared kushner, his allies in the media including sean hannity, republican members of congress. everybody saw t

and today, attorney general merrick garland took questions from reporters. it was asked directly about what the justice department is doing to investigate trump's efforts to overturn the election. listen. >> there is a lot of special speculation around with the justice department is doing, what it is not, doing whatever feelings are, what our feelings aren't, and it will continue to be that speculation. that is because a central tenant of the way in which the justice department investigates, a central tenet to the rule of law, is that we do not do our investigations in public. this is the most wide ranging investigation, and the most important investigation, that the justice department has ever entered. we have done so because this effort to up and a legitimate election, transferring power from one place to another, cuts of the fundamental of american democracy. we have to get this right. >> we have to get this right! but merrick garland says there is absolutely true, federal prosecutors do not conduct their investigations in public, nor should they. the ine

so it doesn't actually stop merrick garland for pursuing an investigation. i think in his case, as a good faith after, it would unnecessarily politicize a step depending on when he takes it. and i think that's my concern. >> okay. two things. i find this fascinating. i think it strikes the heart of an existential question about what the department of justice is. and how the law and executive function. but to your first point, the counterfactual, or future possibility of sydney powell as a jew, you would not want that to be the case. my feeling about that is, if sydney powell is the ag, no memorandum's going to save us. at some level, which is adjacent to the deeper point here. which is about whether the people at the department of justice are acting in good faith or not, whatever memos are being probably gated, that is the fundamental question. and the worry is that in creating this extra step, garland is saying it's on me, when he is the political appointee. >> right. i think that, ideally, in a case involving either, the sitting president, a former preside

i take merrick garland at his word, there is no reason not to. since the speech he gave on he's repeatedly emphasize that he will follow the facts wherever they take him. that is a really heartening return to doj's principles. frustrating for those of us in the public who have to wait and see, but we don't want to become a country that routinely goes after its former leaders. although donald trump is richly deserving of the scrutiny that he's getting, we need to make sure we adhere to the principles of the rule of law, it's a good sign that merrick garland is doing just by. >> all right, we're gonna keep this particular part of the conversation going when we come back after a quick break. coming up later on the sunday show, she is back, sunday show favorites, and gloria comes by to show us how she sees a. don't go anywhere. show us how she just $30? (mom) it's their best unlimited price ever. (cool guy) $30...that's awesome. (dad) yeah, and it's from the most reliable 5g network in america. (geek) wow... i've got to let my buddies know. (geek fri

and merrick garland next epps after this. and merrick garlan nice try. really? this leon's paying for his paint job on the spot... and this leon, as a chase private client, he's in the south of france, taking out cash with no atm fees. that's because this family of leons has chase. actually, it's león. ooh la la! one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours. after this my active psoriatic arthritis can slow me down. now, skyrizi helps me get going by treating my skin and joints. along with significantly clearer skin, skyrizi helps me move with less joint pain, stiffness, swelling, and fatigue. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year after two starter doses. skyrizi attaches to and reduces a source of excess inflammation that can lead to skin and joint symptoms. with skyrizi, 90% clearer skin and less joint pain is possible. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. with skyrizi, there's nothing l

i think that's because of merrick garland's background. this is an individual who is not this partisan hack. he's been in the court system a very long time, has a stellar reputation, had a bipartisan vote which is rare these days for his confirmation. he's not a partisan warrior. he's a kind of middle of the road guy. obviously that enrages a lot of people about the way he's handled this investigation because he isn't coming out and sort of just condemning donald trump. he's trying to stay within the bounds of doj. he cares very much about the justice department as an institution. he cares about the court system as an institution. i think that's he has his eyes on that sort of long-term reputation of doj and the federal court system. >> ryan, you mentioned all the cases out there against the people who attacked the capitol. there was a conviction yesterday of a washington, d.c. man who violently assaulted police officers at the capitol on january 6th. he was sentenced to more than five years in prison. five years to mark ponder, who pleade

garland essentially telling lester, don't worry, america.tle about the justice field and that's appropriate. i'm a member of the judiciary committee of the senate and a close friend and supporter of the president's. i will say about the january 6th committee and their eight hearings that when i first tuned in to the first hearing, i honestly did not expect to hear that much new. i sat through the entire second impeachment trial of former president trump. i was in the building for january 6th, and i did not expect to hear a lot of new information, but hearing after hearing i was struck at how much detail they had uncovered and how many former inner circle trump administration and trump campaign members came forward and testified and how clearly, in particular, the former attorney general bill barr said that he knew the election was won by our president joe biden and conveyed that he thought it was all bs, the attempts at trying to invalidate the election so i do think the reporting that carol from "the washington post" was detailing breaks ne

what else does garland say? >> reporter: kate, in this interview with nbc news, garland gave revealing statements. he told lester holt that this is one of the most important investigations that the department of justice has ever entered into and one of the most wide ranging. he also made clear when questioned numerous times that no one in this investigation is off limits. take a listen. >> we pursue justice without fear or favor. we intend to hold everyone, anyone who was criminally responsible for the events surrounding january 6th for any attempt to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one stradministration to anothe accountable. that's what we do. we don't pay attention to other issues with respect to that. >> reporter: and you heard him there talking about just how wide ranging this investigation is. anyone who was involved in interrupting or attempting to interrupt the lawful transfer of power. as evan noted, these former pence aides were brought before the grand jury. that's very significant. t

garland made a nod to that as well? >> yeah, it seems to me, anderson, that one, and most importantly, the justice department seems to be on the case, but secondly that they want to be seen, as being on the case because there has been a lot of pressure on garland, and justice that they seem to be lacking behind the january six committee. they seem to be lagging behind that da in atlanta, who's pursuing her own case about georgia. and interference with the election there. so you have a couple of things, on monday we found out that they had a grand jury. that hat they had heard testimony from two top aides to mike pence, mark showed, his chief of staff. and his counsel. and the attorney general agreeing to do the interview today. and twice in the interview, he said we are moving urgently. and one other thing i noted in josh towards the story in the washington post, in the breaking tonight, that it specifically says that they seized the records of mark meadows phone records, of him and other people, and specifically said t

how merrick garland is feeling the pressure, and how the republican party i

i believe merrick garland is not of that flavor of public official. i am quite comfortable waiting to see what he does. host: palm beach florida, democratic color. good morning to you. caller: good morning, greta. how are you? host: doing well. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: good morning. my question is just basically, i did like merrick garland said we need to do it honestly and ethically. i agree with that. my question is, how can we still get the answers on how trump incited the riot, how should set i say the people storming the capital how can we still get former president trump on him being responsible? and him people protecting him? what can we do to still get answers? guest: we will see a report from the january 6 committee. i assume it will be ready massive. there will be a lot of coverage of that. they had over 1000 witnesses, tens of thousands of documents. we are only seeing a tiny piece of it. if the justice department takes steps, the grand jury is secret. we will not see any information unless there are actually trials a

attorney general merrick garland satp down for an exclusive interview with nbc's lester holt. >> you said in no uncertain terms the other dayin that no o is above the law. >> atyeah. >> that said, the indictment of a former president or perhaps candidate for president would arguably tear the country apart. is that your concern as you make your decision down the road here, do you have to think about things like that? >> look, we pursue justice without fear or favor. we intend to hold everyone, anyone, who is criminally responsiblene for the then surrounding january 6th for any attemptrr to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another accountable. that's what wera do. we don't pay any attention to other issues with respect to that. >> well, on the t heels of thos comments from the attorney general, we have brand new reporting tonight that suggests the justice department investigation may indeed be heating s up.ve this is just out tonight "the washington post," quote, justice department investigating trump's actions in january 6th criminal probe. quote,

you know, merrick garland is a constituent of mine. i was never into the idea of people brow beating him and pressuring him. he's perfectly capable of doing his job. we need to restore the tradition of respect for the independence of law enforcement. i've got confidence that they're going to find their way to render justice for the american people. they've got very specific guidelines at the doj about when to bring a case. it depends on if they've got probable cause. they know how to do it. >> what we understand is that the doj was focussed on the fact elector scheme. there were developments on that front today. that scheme we're learning more and more how broad it was, as, of course, you have revealed as part of your committee. has the focus of the doj, such that you understand it, gone beyond the fact elector scheme criminally or not? >> i don't know anything more than you do, but, of course, it has. they charged people with lots of offenses in terms of the insurrection, interference with a federal proceeding and a -- >> as far as th

merrick garland saying it is just about the pursuit of justice. justice department reporter for "the new york times," katie benner, thank you for being here this morning. ari melber, thank you. we'll be watching your special report inside trump's election plot tonight at 6:00 and 9:00 p.m. eastern. right here on msnbc. >>> coming up, former president trump hosts the controversial liv golf tour in bedminster, new jersey, today. we'll have a live report from there. plus with ten days to go before the august recess, chuck schumer is urging democrats to stick together to pass that spending bill. we'll go live to capitol hill when "morning joe" comes right back. for too long, big pharma has been squeezing americans for every penny, and inflation has only added to the pain. but congress has a historic opportunity to deliver relief, by passing a bill to let medicare negotiate lower drug prices and put money back in the pockets of seniors. 87% of americans support the plan, and applaud the senators who are standing up to big pharma. let's make history. vo

that is how trump thinks of garland. >> i want to play you some quick sound. we have a candidate running for attorney general in georgia. a quick soundbite. i want your thoughts on the other side. >> it is surreal. i walked in and there is rudy giuliani. i think it was really about providing what they believe to be some kind of legitimate basis for the legislature to go into special session and basically throw out , you know, the slate of electors chosen by the voters of georgia. im legally googling who is john eastman. he reported giving expert testimony on georgia law and the man isn't even a georgia lawyer. >> we have a local prosecutor. do you think georgia might be the best place right now to see justice brought against this previous administration for attempting to overturn the election? >> look, i am a new yorker. i will ride and i my state. both are the best chances. both of these states have jurisdiction over various aspects of trump's criminal empire. georgia has the easiest case to make because again, trump is already on tape committing election fra

attorney general merrick garland, actually said on wednesday.son is above the law in this country. i can't say it any more clearly than that. there is nothing in the principles of prosecution in any other factors which prevent us from investigating anyone, anyone who is criminally responsible for -- for an attempt to undo a democratic election. >> i am joined now by the harvard law professor lawrence tribe who taught merrick garland as a law student at harvard. professor tribe, thank you very much for joining us. i know you are the co-author of the important book "to end the presidency. the power of impeachment" there's the cover right there. the last time we spoke you told me you do expect the attorney general merrick garland will eventually indict former president trump. do these latest comments from the attorney general merrick garland bolster that belief? >> they certainly do, wolf. thank you for having me. the attorney general made very clear yesterday that all of the speculation that if trump announces for the presidency, the fear of makin

garland was actually a student of yours at harvard law school.it dangerous in your view for him not to indict the former president trump? >> i think there is no excuse at this point for not going ahead with a criminal prosecution of donald trump. as i said in that tweet, not prosecuting him based on everything we know about the pressure campaign aimed at his vice president and everything we know about his attempts to abinst obstruct the investigation not prosecuting him would be giving him an unearned pardon. if it was earned, if trump and this is unthinkable were to be contripe and to admit his guilt, the pardon power doesn't belong to the attorney general. it's not part of his job description. so all of this talk about he has to, you know, he has to worry about the harm to the country of indicting a former president is beside the point. those issues, the issues of whether it would bring harmony or division, those are above his pay grade, honestly and those are questions for the pardon power. just like, you know, when gerald ford decided to pard