harry litman, frank figliuzzi, thank you so much for starting us off.hen we come back, donald trump tried to spill secrets at the border too until he was stopped by an army general. that story next. through the at&t network, edge-to-edge intelligence gives you the power to see every corner of your growing business. from managing inventory... to detecting and preventing threats... to scaling up your production. giving you a nice big edge over your competition. that's the power of edge-to-edge intelligence. with time, comes change that's for sure... and when those changes might help more people, especially those in retirement, i think it's worth talking about! so, aag is introducing a new jumbo reverse mortgage loan so you can now access as much as $4 million dollars in cash, tax free, from your home's equity. aag's new jumbo reverse mortgage loan can give you more tax-free cash than ever before. if you've had your home for a while, it's probably worth a lot more today. so why not use that appreciation for anything you need maybe it's some home repairs, o

stoddard, and to harry litman. three of our returning veterans. appreciate it very much. >>> coming up for us, is the president really gunning for an attack on iran or just talking that way? >>> and can saudi arabia really ordered up an attack by u.s. forces on their behalf? even if they compensate us for our troubles? >>> and later, our interview today with edward snowden on how our phones never sleep. and the stories they can and do tell about all of us. that ought to keep you tuned in. it's a compelling segment. "the 11th hour" just getting started on this monday night of a new week. ♪ hey. you must be steven's phone. now you can know who's on your network and control who shouldn't be, only with xfinity xfi. simple. easy. awesome. >>> welcome back. there was a drone attack over the weekend on saudi oil facilities and our president is at least raising the question on social media, of course, that the u.s. would consider an attack on iran on behalf of the kingdom in saudi arabia. today he added they would reimburse us for the expense to our force

stoddard and harry litman, three returning veterans. thank you very much. >>> and coming up, is the president gunning for an attack on iran, or talking that way. and can saudi arabia have an attack by u.s. forces on their attack even if they compensate for our troubles. >> and later our interview today on edward snowden on how our phones never sleep and the stories they can and do tell about all of us. that ought to keep you tuned in. it's a compelling segment. "the 11th hour" just getting started on this monday nuight o a new week. time really is money. so, don't wait to get the internet your business really needs. switch to comcast business today for a special offer on the services you need to make your business boom. like speed to power all your devices, more complete internet reliability. and an advanced voice solution. it's time to make the switch to comcast business and take your business beyond fast. don't miss out on this limited time offer. call 1-800-501-6000 today. >>> welcome back, there was a drone attack over the weekend o

. >> harry litman and the table is back. harry, you write about this today.ake us inside what this could be about. >> well, it's a little opaque now, but we know it's part of a national intelligence operation. and they have as schiff says no basis, no legal basis for resisting. but the tissue thin excuse they've given is it involves somebody not in the intelligence community. that's a quite strange undertaking to figure that out because anybody who would be covered normally would be in the intelligence community. however, trump and the white house, technically they are the bosses of it, but they're not in the intelligence community. so that is the most likely supposition of what right now is sort of shielded from view. the number one point is here as in the tax case, there is zero, zero, zero legal justification for withholding. yet nevertheless they are doing it to force a court battle and buy time. >> is there something that congressman schiff said about the justice department being looped in? why would an inspector general for the intelligence for the dni

dana bash, kirsten powers, and harry litman, good evening. never a dull moment.s i said, everyone, what a momentous day. dana, i'm going to start with you. it's official. well, at least the inquiry looking into it, this impeachment. so tell our viewers what to look for. what do we know? >> well, the big news obviously is the announcement. what is still unclear -- and it's largely because this happened so fast, the 180 by the speaker led in large part by members of her caucus who are in trump districts, the so-called front liners, the majority makers, them changing their minds so quickly that it's not entirely clear how this is going to play out when it comes to the process. what we do know at least for now is that the speaker said there won't be a select committee. so there won't be one committee like there was during watergate. you mentioned nixon before the break. six committees have jurisdiction. they're going to continue to do that. but i can tell you in talking to some rank and file house democrats tonight, there is a lot of sort of consternation about that

elie honig, harry litman. good evening, gentlemen. good to see both you have. y, i'm going to start with you because i haven't seen you in a while. president trump's lawyers really all over the place on these reports that the whistle-blower complaint involves the ukraine. did he make the situation worse? what do you think? >> i'm sorry, me? >> yes. >> so, yes. look, there are these grand constitutional arguments that they're throwing around. we have a really simple statutory scheme that has never been violated. it says the inspector general determines if you have a complaint and if you do, you transfer it over to congress. to the intelligence committee. not to everybody in the country. to the intelligence community which always looks at sensitive information and that's the basic oversight we have. now, has the president's lawyers made it worse? i do think we're coming into some sort of rough focus of what's happened, and it may well be some kind -- what would be wrong with this ukraine deal? basically, it would be trump trading something that belongs to the unit

jillian: let's look at the author of power grab, jason chaffetz and attorney general harry litman.o you both. the statement from ken vogel who works at the new york times and has previously written about this topic for politico, the vice president saying it is not a big deal, it is going to go away, there is no credible objective media digging into this. >> reporter: >> mister vogel, the new york times and politico, look at the videotape. i want people to watch the videotape of joe biden talking about how he helped get this prosecutor dismissed, if you have any questions call barack obama. the fact about hunter biden, both in china but especially in ukraine, did he or did he not make $50,000 a month? was he involved in this company that got these contracts with a couple weeks after the vice president visited. shannon: not a lot of people have been ticking into the story and ken vogel has a theory on that. here are additional comments from him. >> if we were to perform a thought exercise it replaced joe biden with donald trump and hunter biden with donald trump junior we would proba

. >>> joining me right now is a former attorney harry litman. i got a lot of questions. i'd like your perspective on this. there is a whistleblower law. what does that mean for this situation? >> it means the administration position is bankrupt and directly contrary to the law. remember why we have whistleblowers in the first place? we seen them in doj and other places is you want to bypass the normal supervisory structure because they may be blowing the whistle on people in the supervisory structure. here it looks like they may be blowing the whistle on people in the white house. the law here is completely plain, kate. it says once the inspector general makes that determination, mcguire or the dni shall, no room, no wiggle room at all nor has there ever been wiggle room asserted transmitted to the director of the intelligence committee. it's plain as day and always been honored and the argument to the contrary in any event makes no sense. they've had nothing to do with whether it's a matter of urgent concern that it might involve also some people in the white house. >>

attorney harry litman, a frequent guest of ours, offers this context, quote, a grand jury's refusal toeturn an indictment is something that happens maybe once every five years in a given office. if it occurred here, given the magnitude, visibility of the mccabe case, it is a stunning and humiliating rebuke for overreaching and playing politics. well, joining us tonight, katie benner, justice department reporter for "the new york times," and cynthia oxney, a former federal prosecutor her self. cynthia, please start us off with the definition of "not a true bill." >> not a true bill would be if you went into the grand jury room and you asked the members of the grand jury for an indictment, and they said, no, we're not going to do it. i mean it just doesn't happen that you get a not a true bill. i probably have indicted 1,000 cases, maybe 2,000. i don't know. it's something you do so routinely, and i've never had that happen to me. and here's why. because the grand jury room -- let me just bring it to life for you for a minute. it's like a sixth grade classroom, and you have the members o

tonight, what the author of "power grab," jason chaffis and harry litman, welcome to you both. >> thank>> thank you. he's previously written about this topic for politico as well. but tonight, the vice president saying it's not a big deal. it's going to go away. he said no credible objective media source is digging in to this. >> well, mr. vogel, "the new york times" and politico, are incredible along the way. look at the video update. i just want to watch the videotape of joe biden talking about how he helped to get the prosecutor dismissed. he had six hours. if you have questions, call barack obama. the fact about hunter biden, both in china, but especially in the ukraine, did he or did he not make $50,000 a month. was he involved and engaged with this company that suddenly got these contracts that appear to be days or just a couple of weeks after the vice president visited? >> not a lot of people have been digging into this story. and ken vogel has a bit of a story on that as well. here are additional comments from him. >> a thought exercise and replace joe biden with donald trump an

. >> shannon: joining me now to discuss former deputy assistant attorney general, harry litman, and fromers association, harmeet dhillon. welcome to you both. >> thanks, shannon. >> shannon: the judge, a key player on fox news, says this in riding, is this just a lawyer saying, you know, we lost this. he's on the court, we don't like him. i meet? >> that's not what she's saying, she's making an admission on behalf of her client that there was a significant bias that motivated her outrageous allegations, couldn't find a shred of evidence or support for these accusations, so there was clearly a political bias, and contrary to the previous segment with neil gorsuch, you don't have five people change of the constitution -- that is exactly what liberals want, and that is exactly what they got in roe vs. wade. today, they will do anything and stop at nothing to prevent any such changes, and so despite the fact that this man's reputation was dragged through the mud, they don't care. i think it's very troubling. it suggest that maybe blasey ford's testimony was shaped by her lawyer or this motiv

to talk about this process democrats are embarking upon i'm joined by melissa murray and harry litmani recently read and reviewed a book on the first impeachment and one thing that struck me there and i think has been true with nixon and clinton as well is some parts are spelled out in the constitution but there's some latitude constitutionally in how this all goes, is that your understanding? >> the constitution is relatively fair about the impeachment process. and then if articles of impeachment are voted on successfully and then shifts to the senate which conducts the actual trial, but as to the rules for how the impeachment inquiry starts, where it starts and how the trial is conducted, the constitution is depletely silent and so we rely on those chambers to come up with their own rules. and as we saw ipthe clinton impeachment trial, sometimes they're making it up as they go along. >> in this case the somewhat innovative thing nancy pelosily has done is announce this inquiry, call it into being and task these committee chairs to go forward. i've seen republicans say there hasn't b

. >> harry litman, here is andy mccabe on his fateful decision to open a full investigation into donaldrump and the question of whether or not he was working for russia. >> our folks felt like we had an articulable basis to believe that the president might have engaged in obstruction of justice in the firing of jim comey and that, if so, there might be a natural security risk associated with that obstruction. that is of course the standard for opening an fbi full investigation. >> so it was a full investigation, not a preliminary? >> that's right, a full investigation. >> so, harry, you have the man who made the decision on the recommendation of his staff he went on to explain there to open a full investigation that the firing of comey wasn't just potential obstruction of justice trying to end ornvestigation in meddling but that it was in and of itself also potentially collusion. you also have attorney general barr who opinion appointed, the specific questioning from harris doesn't rule out that it's been suggested that as the new attorney general for donald trump, he prosecuted the pre

harry litman seeks the significance for what mcgabe's lawyers. jury's refusal to return an indictment is something that happens maybe once every five years in a given office. if it occurred here given the magnitude of visibility of the mccabe case it's a stunning rebuke for overreaching and playing politics. more on this, mike schmidt from the "new york times" is here and matt miller a former spokesman for the department of justice. mike, start by telling us where this story is 24 hours later. this letter that i read from was sent by mccabe's lawyer to the justice -- or to the u.s. attorney's office today trying to get clarity from what they describe as press rumors that a grand jury may have voted not to indict mccabe. >> yeah, and that's where it is. it it's in the same place it was. what we're seeing here is the problems with the politics that the president has created around the investigation. criminal investigations are very complicated. sometimes things get messed up at the end. that sort of -- that can happen. that's not unusual. but becau

. >> harry litman, matt miller, susan page, thanks to you as well. in terms of how congressional republicans appear to be prepared to push back on this impeachment inquiry, this is what house minority leader kevin mccarthy, this is what he said about that this morning. >> it was a dark day for the rule of law that the speaker of the house would claim a president violated the law without ever having any information to judge it on. >> we know that house democrats have been indulging their impeachment obsession for nearly three years now. a never-ending impeachment parade in search of a rationale. >> msnbc political analyst alleys jordan is with me, former aide to the jork w. bush white house. thank you for being here. it would seem as if the argument that the leadership is making so far is an argument about procedure. what can we glean, if anything, from that being the argument right out of the gate from republicans? >> it's going to be very hard to defend a president who is using his official position for personal gain. we're not discussing what was r

harry litman, joyce vance, and ben wittis. you really have never before in real life? u, nancy pelosi saying the attorney general has gone rogue. we haven't talk much about his role, talked about mike pompeo being subpoenaed. how much interest do you have? how much do you expect democrats will focus on that. >> i think they'll be focused a fair bit, but it's a bit murky. it appears if the complaint went over, it went to him that in fact the cia first forwarded it to him, so you can see he was there. that would have i think sounded alarm bells in most attorneys general to think -- he's a witness here unavoidably. he may not have taken action, but he's still involved. so i think the real question will be going forward, will he field emboldened to resist the calls to recuse, or will he say, here we've gone a different line here, i have to step back. >> i'll let you had pit another description, but he's not operating the way past attorneys general would. even as a witness to that, it's strange in different circumstances. >> he's not. it's important to remember this is an at

stoddard, and to harry litm litman. three of our returning veterans. appreciate it very much. >>> coming up for us, is the president really gunning for an attack on iran or just talking that way? >>> and can saudi arabia really ordered up an attack by u.s. forces on their behalf? even if they compensate us for our troubles? >>> and later, our interview today with edward snowden on how our phones never sleep. and the stories they can and do tell about all of us. that ought to keep you tuned in. it's a compelling segment. "the 11th hour" just getting started on this monday night of a new week. a new week his luxurious fur calms my nerves when i'm worried about moving into our new apartment. why don't we just ask geico for help with renters insurance? i didn't know geico helps with renters insurance. yeah, and we could save a bunch too. antonio! fetch computer! antonio? i'll get it. get to know geico and see how much you could save on renters insurance. "have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national