i think there is frustration among the members about those existing like jeff clark. there is more happening. >> what happens? jeff clark did not do what steve bannon did and refuse to show up and pass participate. he showed up and did not say anything meaningful. >> chairman thompson said we are ready to take some strong action if he doesn't reconsider. what that means, i don't know. you can't do more than what they did with steve bannon than refer for criminal contempt. the justice department has not acted on steve bannon. they had the papers on the desk for two weeks. they want the justice department to move yesterday. whether they go to contempt for jeff clark or partly how they assess what the justice department is doing with steve bannon and whether that is worth doing again. >> these other subpoenas expected to come out. 20 subpoenas that apparently chairman thompson signed. does that influence that? if you get a subpoena for the committee, do you get to look at steve bannon and jeffrey clark and say that's my out? >> that is the fear. if there is no teeth, and

of course, one other key plot that we saw unfold last week was jeff clark, who you showed on screen, saying that he would refuse to cooperate. clark showed up for an interview. but according to thompson wouldn't answer any questions. in fact, i obtained a letter that clark and his lawyer have delivered to the committee trying to make a bit of a head scratcher of a legal argument as to why clark thinks he, for whatever reason, doesn't have to comply with this lawful subpoena. in fact, what's particularly weird about this letter is that clark cited a different letter that trump sent to him in august where trump actually said that he would not try to block clark from testifying. clark is in a really odd spot here. the committee expects they will have significant leverage in trying to push him to play ball. of course, the piece that makes this challenging is the committee went about as far as they can go in trying to force steve bannon to testify. the justice department has yet to send up any smoke signals as to whether or not they are going to prosecute steve bannon for defying that subp

well, tomorrow jeff clark will sit for a sworn deposition behind closed doors. the chairman of the investigation, congressman bennie thompson, just told reporters today he's freshly signed 20 new subpoenas he says are being sent out, quote, soon, possibly as soon as tomorrow. things are moving fast now and with quite a lot of volume in terms of the flow-through. watch this space. that's going to do it for us tonight. "way too early" is up next. >>> after months of negotiations, lawmakers are expected to hold a vote today on president biden's sweeping infrastructure plan and bipartisan bill. the question is are we finally going to see democrats get something done? >>> plus in georgia a murder trial gets under way for the three men who killed ahmaud arbery, but there's controversy. only one person on the jury deciding the case is blachlkt. >>> and lesson learned. i'll spe

>> well, i'm not really sure why they chose to hold jeff clark in contempt before mark meadows. at's going on in heads of members of the committee. i will say, though, the clark situation seems very discreet. there is already a lot in the public about what he did and how he tried to pressure his colleagues. what is not known is who in the white house was asking him to do it and what was going on in the larger scheme? you saw from different former officials that they don't think clark would have acted alone, they don't think he came up with this on his own, so they would be asking very pointed and specific things of clark, who at the white house told him to do what when. meadows is a much bigger set of questions, so maybe they're still trying to get their arms around those. >> katie, thank you sof. katie benner of the "new york times." >>> what did you do over the weekend? maybe a little pie, maybe a little football. here's a serious question. how many times did you think about the president? probably zero. hopefully zero. unless you're the president's family, in a normal world yo

it's a very different picture for jeff clark who was, at the time, the acting assistant attorney general so he's not a close advisor to the president. he's claimed that he also has attorney/client privilege, but that seems questionable because the president was not his client. so he's got some other problems that i think make any potential claim on his part less forceful. but john is right, this whole question of the president's former executive privilege claim is all to be worked out by the courts, and tomorrow the u.s. court of appeals here, a three-judge panel, will be delving into this when it hears the argument on whether these documents that the committee wants should be turned over that are now held by archives. >> any timeline of when we would get a decision after those arguments, pete? >> i think quickly, because you remember they moved very quickly on this. they did a hurry up and put it on a fast track, so i would think it would be a matter of weeks, not the normal months that it takes the court of appeals. >> john bresnahan and pete williams, thank you for that. >>> there is

>> i'm not really sure why they chose to hold jeff clark in contempt before mark meadows. the committee. i will say that the clark situation seems very discreet. there is already a lot in the public of what it is he did and how he tried to pressure his colleagues. which is not known, is who in the white house was asking him to do it. and what was going on in the larger scheme. we saw from different officials that they don't believe clark would act alone. they don't believe that he came up with this on his own. there would be asking him to point very specific things of clark, who at the white house told you to do what and when. meadows is a much bigger set of questions, they are still trying to get his arms around. >> good to see you, thank you so much for your excellent reporter. katie benner of the new york times. coming up, what did you do over the thanksgiving holiday? it some turkey, maybe some pie, probably more than you needed to. maybe watched a little football, maybe you snuck in a little velshi over the weekend? a guy can dream. but here is a serious question, how

jeff clark attorney general so they could carry out the scheme together. well, tomorrow jeff clark will sit for a sworn deposition behind closed doors. the chairman of the investigation, congressman benny thompson just told reporters today he's freshly signed 20 new subpoenas he says are being sent out, quote, soon, possibly as soon as tomorrow. things are moving fast now and with quite a lot of volume in terms of the flow through. watch this space. that's going to do it for us tonight. we'll see you again tomorrow. now it's time for the "last word" with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening, rachel. i've been sitting here trying to do the math, which you know is a big challenge for me, to figure have i interviewed 150 people since january 6th? and i think the answer is close to yes, somewhere in the neighborhood of yes. >> you're closer to it than i am. >> it's a lot. of course my interviews are five minutes, so, you know, it's a lot. that's -- they are really moving along. we're going to have adam schiff joining us. he's a member of

well tomorrow jeff clark will sit for a foreign deposition behind closed doors. told reporters today, that he is freshly signed 20 new subpoenas. he says are being sent out, quote, soon, possibly as soon as tomorrow. things are moving fast now and with quite a lot of volume in terms of the flow through. watch this space, that's going to do with us tonight, we will see you again tomorrow, now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. >> been sitting here trying to do the math, with you know is a big challenge for. me to figure out have i interviewed 150 people since january six? >> and i think that the answer is close to, yes or at least somewhere in the neighborhood yes, but you are closer to it than i am? >> of course my interviews are five minutes, so you know, it's a lot. that's they are really moving along, we're going to have adam schiff joyless, he's a member of that committee, and will get some insight into, that and rachel i was listening and taking notes on your reporting in that lawsuit against the nra. we are going to have tim mack join us t

well, tomorrow jeff clark will sit for a sworn deposition behind closed doors.ay he's freshly signed 20 new subpoenas he says are being sent out, quote, soon, possibly as soon as tomorrow. things are moving fast now and with quite a lot of volume in terms of the flow through. watch this space. that's going to do it for us tonight. we'll see you again tomorrow. now it's time for the "last word" with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening, rachel. i've been sitting here trying to do the math, which you know is a big challenge for me, to figure have i interviewed 150 people since january 6th? and i think the answer is close to yes, somewhere in the neighborhood of yes. >> you're closer to it than i am. >> it's a lot. of course my interviews are five minutes, so, you know, it's

the big thing is for the mark meadows, jeff clarks and the 150 other people behind the scenes already saying, you know what, we'll cooperate. including the mike pence team who is ready to cooperate and have a lot to say. >> bannon has been made an example of. used in a way to strike fear in the hearts of othe r witnesses. too late, he's been convicted of a crime. >>> the other major news out of washington this week, president biden pushing his infrastructure plan as a helpful measure. the cost of living has risen over 6%. the highest rate in 30 years. now republicans are blaming the president and his policies for the stricker shock many americans are feeling. cnn white house reporter with us. inflation has become a political liability. they initially said it i s transitory. at first, you heard that it was transitory. officials saying this is a big deal, a top priority trying to break up that log jam. saying this could through the middle of the year for americans as they start grocery shopping he really touted that infrastructure package saying it could help ease some of the inflation

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

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

your colleagues will decide on wednesday whether or not a similar referral will also be made about jeff clarknd his behavior towards the investigation and the other former trump officials or other people related to the investigation who have slow-walked you or not testified yet or not handed over the documents you've requested? sounds like there's been a lot of resistance encouraged by president trump. what puts jeffrey clark potentially in the statement boat at steve bannon as potentially this being criminal contempt? >> mr. clark is in a small group that have continued to stonewall us. he has not produced any documents. he came to the deposition but refused to answer questions and exerted both executive privilege and attorney-client privilege, which is a little confusing. and so we're going to proceed, and so that's what the business committee meeting on wednesday evening will be about is referral of the criminal contempt. we feel that he has shown just a willing -- unwillingness to come forward and to testify, and we feel that over 250 people have come before us and given -- submitted inte

the january six members who have been subpoenaed, who are trump loyalist, friends, advisers, like jeff clark from the department of justice. he was going to become the attorney general because he was willing to do what donald trump needed him to do. so that person, everything on all fronts from the trump side from trump world's stalled, slowed down, appealed, don't participate. and ultimately, brian, there is going to be an election, a midterm election where this committee may end up getting nowhere if the republicans take over the house this committee will be shelved. and those questions will not be answered. barb mcquade, let me bounce back to you before i bring in lisa for the last word. it's this question, i think about it a lot. federal judges appointed for life. they are usually masters of their own realm, they have a staff, many of them have been forced by the end of cases they handle, to have security with the. i'm driving them to work. they are king and queen of their courtroom domain. do they get frustrated, when a federal judge like the one in question today who made a very broad

. >> i obtained and politico just published a multipage letter that jeff clark's new lawyer wrote anded to the head of the committee. in this her, the lawyer lays out a real head scratcher for the legal theory as to why he doesn't have to answer the committee's question. it said that clark and other doj officials could actually testify, that letter from trump world august 7th specifically said trump would not take steps to block clark and other senior officials from playing ball. however, clark and his lawyers have taken a slightly tortured read of that letter and are trying to say because some circumstances are difference, because of steps the committee has taken, they're trying to say clark doesn't have to participate. my expectation is that letter would would be a key conversation topic in those 90 minutes. clark parted ways with his lawyers about two weeks ago, brought in a new lawyer, a guy named harry mcdougal who worked with sydney powell, the release the kraken infamy, so mcdougal is not just representing clark, but part of the mechanics to try to reverse the 2020 election res

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

your college will decide on wednesday, whether or not there is a scenario referral made around jeff clarkfrey clark and his behavior towards the investigation and the other former trump officials, other people related to the investigation, who have slow walk to you, or not testified yet? not handed over the documents that you have requested? it sounds like there's been a lot of resistance encouraged by former president trump. with puts jeffrey clark potentially in the same boat as steve bannon, as this being criminal contempt? >> mr. clark is in a small group that have continued to stonewall us. he has not produced any documents. he came to the deposition and refused to answer questions. exerted both executive privilege and attorney client privilege. which is a little confusing. so we are going to proceed. that is with the business committee meeting on wednesday will be about. the referral of the criminal content. we feel that he has shown unwillingness to come forward. and testify. we feel the oval on 250 people have come before us and submitted interviews. he should be no different. inc

the fact that jeff clark showed up in person and hung out for 90 minutes with committee members, he didn't he didn't give them what he want, he may face contempt, but the fact that he was there in person with his lawyer and dialogued a little bit, even distinguished him from bannon. that's the thing that doj prosecutors might consider. how much respect are these witnesses showing to the committee? are they having any pretense of taking it seriously? i think there's -- while it's likely there will be other folks who are subpoenaed who do the same thing that bannon does, i think there's going to be a significant number who follow more in the mark meadows route, in the route of other folks whose names aren't public who decide, the juice is not worth the squeeze when it comes to potentially tangling with doj or civil litigation as part of a potentially expensive legal effort to defy a lawful subpoena. >> betsy and barbara, thank you both. >>> coming up, the growing republican effort to take back the house by redistricting themselves into power. i will talk to the busiest elections lawyer in th

the fact that jeff clark showed up in person, and hung up for 90 minutes with committee members last week, he didn't answer the questions, he didn't give them what they want, he in self may still face come ten, but the fact that he was there in person, with his lawyers, and dialogue with him a little bit, even distinguishes him from bennett. at that is the kind of thing that doj prosecutors might consider. how much respect are these witnesses showing to the committee, are they having any pretense of taking it seriously. so, i think while it is likely that there will be other folks who are subpoenaed who do the same thing that bennett does. i think there is going to be a significant number who follow more in the mark meadows route, more on the road of other folks who names aren't yet public. and when they think that the juice is not worth the squeeze one tangling with the doj. in terms of that expensive legal effort. >> betsy woodruff swan and barb mcquade, thank you both. coming up, the growing effort to take back the house by redistricting themselves in the power. i'll talk to the b

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

you look at madison and the federalist paper, about how men aren't angels, there's a picture of jeff clarkly got to go and tell the truth about what happened because his role looks really, really serious and it's certainly not something protected by executive privilege. >> and then there's the structural questions. do you see anything coming out from all of this that suggests there should be some more concrete reform so that the doj is not as contactable, persuadable from a tyrant who wants to use it? >> there is a structural set of rules and one of my first jobs at the justice department was to draft those rules, and they require basically only the deputy attorney general or the attorney general to communicate with the white house on any serious matter, and obviously that was blown apart by the trump administration. but as i understand it, merrick garland has resumed that policy. so i think that's necessary. but more generally, ari, you look at investigation after investigation, they've taken so long. we're almost a year after january 6th. we've also got the new york investigations going

jeff clark's testimony is a key missing piece of that puzzle as far as what happened at doj in trump's's so frustrating that clark is trying to step on them. >> we're going to continue to follow this obviously as the investigation continues there. for now, sorry to cut it short, betsy, but i do have to wrap you. great to see you, my friend, and appreciate you joining us this hour. >>> that wraps it up for me this hour. i'm yasmin vossoughian. i'll be back here tomorrow at 3:00 a.m. eastern. reverend al sharpton and "politicsnation" begins right now. >>> good evening, and welcome to "politicsnation." tonight's lead, halfway there. right now i'm cautiously optimistic again. my hope is that it was all worth it, the months of negotiations, the other priorities diverted, and, of course, this unity among democrats. that continued nearly into last night's historic vote to pass the president's $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure

when you have people like mark meadows and steve bannon saying, okay, we're not cooperating, or jeff clark at the department of justice, the person who because he blindly agreed he would dispute the completely fair election in georgia, the president wanted to make him the new attorney general. these people are not cooperating. but guess who's been subpoenaed now. people who worked for all of those individuals, in administrative roles, in deputy roles, in taking notes roles. and that increases the odds of getting the words of those individuals if you can't get them directly from those people. >> joyce, looping back to bannon, if you were mark meadows' attorney, is bannon's indictment changing the advice you give to your client? >> it has to change the advice. if you read the language that the doj used to indict bannon, it is clear that they're contemplating that it's not just the fact that the bannon was out of the white house for three years that made him so susceptible to indictment, it's also the fact that he did absolutely nothing to comply with the subpoena. as long as meadows is in th

as whether or not they move to enforce the subpoena, but, look, bannon at this point, bannon and jeff clarktliers. even mark meadows, trump's former chief of staff. >> yeah. >> who would have arguably one of the stronger cases of make on privileged. he's engaged with the committee and so is kash patel, a senior dod official in the trump administration. the committee has said he's engaged with them, so just because bannon and jeffrey clark are using these real head-scratchers of legal theories to try not to cooperate doesn't mean that the folks in this batch are going to move in the direction of bannon and clark. it's just as likely that they will follow the lead that meadows and patel have laid out by engaging with the committee. we'll have to see. >> danny, your perspective from the legal front on this. i know you've talked about it as it relates to other, that the january 6th has subpoenaed. >> reporter: apair of cases dating back to the '80s nixon one and two teach us there's something as executive privilege and even possibly that a former president can assert that executive privilege bu

you know, a deputy and counsel to jeff clark, who refused to speak. an administrative assistant who was with meadows for part of those conversations. the effort to try to get to, forgive me, the deputy, principle deputy and secretary, meaning real secretary level, is interesting. it's like looking for the people who might have more to lose, less interest in staying loyal to donald trump when their whole career is in front of them. you know, this is interesting to me because of something we learned in our report being bill barr's reaction to president trump in those final months in the fall, in december, especially, of 2020. barr ultimately decided he was the person that was going to confront the president, that this big lie about alleged fraud that the president had to stop doing this and stop saying this, it was going hurt the party, it was going to hurt mitch mcconnell's chance to be senate majority leader, it was going to hurt the country. and he decided he needed to do that because so many other people in the white house didn't have his resources.

clark was, quote, accompanied by a lawyer who worked on a suit aimed at overturning the georgia election results. according to a letter from that loughery viewed by politico, former d.o.j. official jeff lee clark is refusing to cooperate with january 6th select committee. it comes as scores of documents related to january 6th are said to be handed over to the committee one week from today. the one judge who could stand in the way seems at this point unreadied to do that. appearing skeptical yesterday of donald trump's request to block the document release based on executive privilege stressing the significance it has already been denied by the current executive, president joe biden. desperate attempts to conceal the conspiracy behind what was all a big lie failing its leader today is where we start with some of our favorite reporters and friends. jackie alemany is here. also joining us, mike schmidt of the "new york times" and anz msnbc national security contributor. and robert costa is here, "washington post," national political reporter and coauthor of the best selling book, "peril". you are all reporters. this committee is investigating facts on the ground in arizona, michigan, an

officials most of whom with the very important exception of jeff clark lined up, got in, and testified as quick as they could before trump could take legal action the try to keep them from testifying. it's just a big, interesting, varied group of people the committee is going after that we know they are just getting information from all sorts of different sources and vantage point. >> harry litman, i want your thoughts on these two big developments today. we will start with luke's reporting. let me recite these three buckets again. the color coded teams are pursuing several avenues of inquiry, the money trail. this is something congressman eric swalwell has been talking about since that second impeachment of donald trump. planned meetings. this is what the trump folks called command center at the willard and other washington hotels. and this question we have been trying to drill down on, foreknowledge of violence during the insurrection. your thoughts? >> two points. first, on the opinion, it's really thorough and sure-footed. and if it holds up, nicole, basically, it blows out of the

criminal contempt charge to the justice department on behalf of mark meadows, and perhaps even jeff lee clarkion official who also has defied the january 6th select committee's subpoena. >> lee anne called well, joyce vance, pete williams reporting on this breaking news this hour. thanks to all of you. thank you for watching this hour of hallie jackson reports. you know nicole is going to have more on this. "deadline: white house" starts right now. >>> hi, there, everyone it's 4:00 in new york. we begin with that breaking news, the merrick garland justice department -- out of the merrick garland justice department that will have implications into the deadly capitol

have everybody from meadows to lindsey graham to the president himself basically asking -- >> jeff lee clark>> asking him to commit a crime and overturn an election. so all of those things are going on stultly. if i had to bet or die, i would bet that the new york investigation is most likely to bear something, because it's on paper and won't depend on human witnesses. >> wow. going out on a limb there with a prediction. i don't do that anymore. i admire your courage. mike, gleg, thank you so much for starting us off. betsy, thank you for sticking around and starting us off this hour. claire sticks around for the hour. >>> when we come back, the message sent to the white house on election day coming in loud and clear with the message of a big, huge infrastructure package late friday night. so what happens next? the republican party that has no interest in governing, clearly. >>> plus, one gop senator's call for a revival of manhood, strong manhood, in america. he says the left is assaulting manhood, manliness, masculine virtues, and he wants to make the return of man stuff his signature poli

asserted the privilege here and in fact he permitted the acting attorney general, jeff rosen, who would have been mr. clark'sly tough to maintain that there is any sort of a privilege. clark talked about attorney client privilege but he wasn't president trump's lawyer or alone in the room giving legal advice. so clark really gives every appearance of someone that just does not want to talk to the committee and forces us to contemplate the question what is it he is trying to hide. >> there is so much news it would have been easy to miss the steele dossier -- >> i would defer to joyce for that. one media pundit made a comment saying one person that was a contributor to the christopher steele dossier, may have misled the department of justice. you know, nothing actually comes out in the investigation that says that everything that we have discussed over multiple years of the president of the united states campaign, chairman giving election material to a known russian spy who passed it on to a russian oligarc, that has nothing to do with this. trump siding with the dictator of russian over u.s. intelligence. the

clarke: baseline, over 70,000. that number is still increasing every day. jeff is getting his physical exercise today. >> you need a vacation. >> thank you, general. patricia chi with military.com. there's been a lot of talk about oath keepers and extremist groups actively recruiting people from, you know, your organization on the military in general, but especially you all because you have the high training. and there was a guy who was a former green beret arrested on january 6. what are you doing to combat the internal threat, and do you have an active effort to either entertain these folks about recruitment, or are you seeking to see if any of your members are actually members of these groups? >> patricia, there's no place -- i've got to start there is no place for extremism in our groups. i'm aware of some of the folks you mentioned and others. i personally -- when i visit our forces around the globe, particularly within the united states, every single place i go, we have a conversation about extremism and what it can do to our force because i think you are

clark was advancing should scare every american. and but for the apparent real bravery of people like jeff rosen and pat rejected that, we may have gonery dark path. getting to the bottom of this and figuring out what kind of guardrails we can put in place prevent it in the future is vitally important. it is more about the institutions and less about clark. >> i want to get your take on what we're seeing in this fight, by former president trump to keep the documents away from the committee, not have the national archives release them. the judge ruled yesterday, interesting points. number one in noting that former president trump's attorneys basically wanted them to go through piece by piece document by document, the judge said that could take years. she also pushed back on some of the requests from the committee citing that some -- some of them were overly broad, and she said there has to be some limit. what is your take on that? >> well, i think it is sort of unfortunate that the judge would put herself in the position of second guessing the house committee. i tend to think that's a very difficult judgment for a judge to make. i do t

and while jeff bezos does have a logo connection, addiction on, on, on business practices with regards to the clark amendment. one thing that amazon amazon amazon is responsible for the war it is on board number on board or on board of corporate proportions and development of jumped up. the little jeep picked really large scale wind in up, up, up. so it's good to soci than sofi than so they can soaking some soaking some so so so so, so hm. so didn't so been so dismissed, so some, so in addition to so in addition to so in addition to so financial management's pioneer, pioneer, pioneer, pioneer, pioneer, pioneer to no financial devil financial can be if i needed to be a financial d financial d, financial tail finance, detail, financial bill, financial bill, financial bill finding a jacket bill financially, financially financial, lee finance, l. e. financially, financially finding what money going to be in the behavior and the behavior and being in a and i just wanna get some, a courtney sort of board of captains of industry ah, up or to participate in the discussion and on. and i kind of kind of kind