jeff clark's lawyer getting up today and telling the court, one, that jeff clark, yeah, he only wrote a memo or wrote a letter that he tried to get jeff rosen and richard donoghue who were the leadership at the doj at the time to sign, but that really at the end of the day, because the letter never made it out for public consumption, he was serving at the behest of donald trump. when asked pointedly by the federal judge in this case, what is your theory of the case, saying president trump told my client, jeff clark that he was allowed to do what he needed to do, and he had to do what he needed to do. with that information, the state of georgia got up and said, in the absence of evidence, judge, they haven't carried their burden and you should not allow removal to federal court. >> i have a whole host of questions from everything you told me, but let me start with this one, if jeffrey clark was there, what good would that have done? >> reporter: it's the burden on the defense. even though you you're not obligated to take the stand, especially as a criminal defendant, the law requires t

i don't think it helps jeff clark with his removal petition but it certainly suggests that jeff clarking at the direction of donald trump in drafting this fraudulent letter. >> yeah. if you don't mind i will answer that. it was clearly argument that was being made but in the absence of jeffrey clark the only thing you can rely upon is his lawyer, and he made it clear because jeffrey clark was acting pretty much outside of his lane of his ability to do stuff the fact that donald trump ratified his conduct and said it was okay it made it okay to do what they were doing. they acted in concert. there was no sunlight between the two of them and that was made clear today. it's notable the defense lawyer here in georgia steve sadow was sitting in the courtroom from the gallery the lawyer for donald trump listening to this unravel and we're watching it unravel in real time. >> it's interesting because i mean, he doesn't work for trump. he works for these two gentlemen who testified under oath they told him not to send the letter. let me show you rosen and donahue. do we have that, control roo

i hear jeff clark is great. ecause the president would have no reason to even know who jeffrey clark was. >> even within the department, very few people had really heard of jeffrey clark. >> but donald trump had. unbeknownst to rosen and donahue, pennsylvania republican republican scott perry had brought clark to the oval office to meet with donald trump on december 22nd, the day after perry had been amongst republican members of congress who had joined trump at the white house to discuss overturning the 2020 election. trump also mentioned jeff clark on a separate call with rosen. >> he made what i regarded as a peculiar reference. i don't remember the fact quote, but it was something about did i know jeff clark or did i know who he was or something like that. i was quizzical as to, how does the president even know mr. clark? >> rosen confronted clark who admitted he'd broken the longstanding policy governing communication between the justice department and the white house. white house lawyers pat cipollone and p

>> he seemed pretty skeptical of the arguments from jeff clark's team, he had to make the case it wass role. he challenged clark's attorney on why clark was circulating these claims of election fraud his bosses said were bogus in these draft memos to georgia officials, and it hurt clark that he didn't show up for person in this hearing. he submitted a sworn statement that the judge refused to accept into evidence because prosecutors can't cross-examination a sworn statement. that came up. this is interesting to see what happens for jeff clark, and also interesting because we want to know what's going to happen to donald trump in this case. trump's attorneys signal it's possible they will try to move his case to federal court as well. they haven't done that yet but we know they have been watching in closely. they were in the courtroom again today. at one point our team in the courtroom overheard trump's attorneys opining that things were not going well for jeffrey clark. they want to learn what they can from the codefendants before they make their own move to move to federal court if t

said, the real problem here is the lawless action on the january 6th committee, i'll grant you jeff clark knows lawless. he's probably an expert at it. but there's nothing improper about what the january 6th committee did. they investigated and found this guy way, way out of his lane, and that's why even trump appointees of the justice department like richard donohoe told the president, if you make this guy the acting attorney general of the united states, i'll resigning right away. >> so, on the doj portion, a place where, again, as i mentioned, you worked, does he have any better claim than meadows, and is there any downside or concern as, if he and his lawyer claim, that clark -- gosh, any doj writing something at the doj could get in trouble outside of the federal courts? >> if you're a justice department lawyer and you write a memo to launch a coup and justify it, yeah, you got something to worry about. i certainly don't think any of the 85,000 or whatever women and men at the justice department are doing those kinds of things, so i think they're absolutely fine. they have been fine

jeff clark did not appear, and that created a snafu at the beginning of the hearing. the judge asking whether or not clark waived his right to appear. his lawyer indicating he didn't realize he had to file the waiver. the defense got up and basically made argument, did not present evidence, and the reason that's critically important for our viewers to understand is because the burden is on the defense when they're attempting to review their case from state court to federal court. it was an evidentiary hearing that was supposed to take place today, and an argument by lawyers is not by definition evidence. the state of georgia getting up and basically presenting their case through the form of assistant attorney general, jodi hunt. you may recognize that name. he was the attorney representing cassidy hutchinson when she secured new counsel to testify before the january 6th committee. testifying that when he was the assistant attorney general in charge of the division, the same division that jeffrey clark worked in when he was at the doj, that election fraud or election i

i made the point jeff clark is not even competent to serve as the attorney general. had cipollone weighed in at one point, i remember saying that letter this guy wants to send, that letter is a murder/suicide pact. it's going to damage everyone who touches it, and we should have nothing to do with that letter. >> you're going to have hundreds of resignations in your entire justice department. jeff clark would be left leading a graveyard. >> how about you go back to your office and we'll call you when there's an oil spill? >> burn. the other attorney is trying to put clark back in his place conjuring the image of spilled oil. let's be clear, when you're telling a story, you have to understand what the people meant at the time in the story, not what the reader or the viewer might think. you might think it's important to deal with oil spills and the doj should have a role in that. let's be very clear about that dis. in the world of lawyers, it is huge shade to tell someone to get out of the real meeting room dealing with the real election stuff and go deal with the oil

also scott hall had contact with other people including jeff clark who had a 63 minute phone call on will also be of interest prosecutors, and as part of his plea, he has vowed that he will fully cooperate with prosecutors including testifying. it's bad news for sydney powell, it's bad news for jeff clark, ultimately, it could also be bad news for donald trump. >> lisa reuben, i want to talk about your life before you are an msnbc legal analyst, you served as a junior staffer, a late senator feinstein. you called her a, quote, study in contradictions. what do you see and what she -- >> i think diane for instance legacy is as a person who broke molds and who was perceived by the public particularly toward the end of her life as a moderate and as a centrist. that isn't necessarily the legacy that californians see. she was out in front on gay rights before it was nationally popular for democrats to favor things like gay marriage and advocacy for people with hiv and a.i.d.s.. she was persisted to the point of militancy about gun control and abortion rights. i think senator feinstein was

one of which is jeff clark, a former u.s. attorney, and attorney general.ning three are georgia fake electors. what are your, thoughts glenn, about how things will turn out for those defendants. >> the ruling in the meadows case is pretty ominous, katie, for everybody else who's trying to get their cases transferred from georgia state court to federal court. i think meadows had the best shot, even though he really had very little shot in getting they cased transferred. really, none of what he did was within the scope of his official duties as chief of staff, and judge jones pretty directly and definitively told meadows that in his ruling. let's start with the fake, electors they are not federal officials, no matter what they try to say to the contrary. really, their motions should be summarily denied. there is a hearing and judge jones will probably go through the motions. those will almost certainly be denied. jeff clark, i think he has less of a shot the meadows had, because what he dead, as they hide the oj official, was corrupt and weaponize the departm

jeff clark, for instance, who is over at the doj running the environment and national resources divisionany business whatsoever helping to develop a strategy for doj's to tell the states we are investigating serious fraud in this election. one wonders if there might be some reconsideration by these defendants now that they've seen what has happened in the meadows hearing. if they do take the stand, they will be exposed to the same risk that meadows has exposed himself to. >> joyce vance, thank you so much for getting into those weeds with me. i always appreciate spending time with you. thanks for your knowledge. >> thanks, katie. >> coming up, former top mike pence aid, olivia troye, on why her ex boss is struggling to gain traction in the polls with republican voters. we will take a look at how other former vice presidents have historically fared in their own run at the oval. let's just, say the odds don't look good for mike pence. that's next. pence that's next. that's next. smarter way to mop? introducing the new swiffer powermop. an all-in-one cleaning tool with a 360-degree swivel h

here with mark meadows, before the trial judge asking for that and not getting that relief, with jeff clark and there's fake elector this is made a bid that's a long shot, with all of these people, we're seeing the pieces of the trial in fulton county, georgia, come into place. there's going to be a trial set with jury selection to begin at the end of october. that's the chesebro and powell trial. there are other defendants that have to make decisions, just like scott hall did today, because the cases aren't getting split up in a lot of different ways. they are not getting moved into different court systems. so the reason that clark wasn't able to move his case today when the judge looked at it, it was that he didn't have any evidence to be able to make the claim that what he was doing was part of his job at the justice department to try to look into an election in georgia. he didn't present ims evidence to that. even when his attorney tried to argue it's plausible that donald trump told him to do these things as the president overseeing a man in the justice department in the administration

several people who had affiliations with the federal government in some way, the fake electors, jeff clarke justice department official, they tried to move their case to federal court and the trial judge said, no, that's not going to happen, it's all staying together in state court. we have two sets of people going to trial, first in october and then the rest later on and we're going to be watching for more possible guilty pleas in the near future. caitlin poe lantz, cnn, washington. >>> people in the northeastern u.s. will be trying to dry out and checking for possible damage after friday's record-setting rainstorms that overwhelmed the region. there's more rain in the forecast in the coming hours but nothing like the torrential downpours that brought life threatening flooding on friday, overwhelming homes, businesses, streets and subways across new york and surrounding areas. while more rain fell in one single day at new york's kennedy airport than any other day on record. according to flight aware.com 512 flights into or out of the city's three major airports were cancelled on friday. >

you've also got jeff clark.also got speedy trial requests from kenneth chesebro and from sydney powell. you've got any number of free trial fights that don't trump is going to bring. you've got rudy giuliani's likely challenges over information. this is going to be a logistical mess. and so, it will be interesting to see tomorrow is one of the things that judge asked fani willis to be prepared for is, if you were to do 19, how much time would you realistically need? it's not happening october for all 19. i'm sorry, there's just no way it's going to realistically. abbott >> -- wants it. to your point, about a speedy trial, it could work -- if the prosecutor said it was only up to her maybe it could, right? but it's not. it's also the defendants you can, say i want to go fast. and others are saying, i don't want to hear anything about october nothing about 2023. >> that's exactly right. the president has made clear that he does not want this trial to go forward anytime soon. and he is going to do everything he can

it won't be successful in allowing jeff clark to move to federal court because the burden is on him toy a federal official but he was acting in the scope of his federal duties. that is probably not a fight he's going to win. but in terms of him saying trump ratified my conduct, this is actually one of the first times we've seen somebody in one of the cases closest to trump say, no, no, no, it was his fault. we have the judge in fulton county dividing it into two buckets. all the rest he's left for a different date. then you have trump's then-lawyer or the justice department official saying he put me up to it, we know from trump's own lawyers he's likely to say no. >> we'll obviously keep an eye on that. let's switch to rudy giuliani. as we just detailed he's being sued by his lawyers. there's been plenty of media reports about giuliani's current financial struggles. if he's not able to pay the bill, giuliani is of course an attorney. it's been a long time he's been a u.s. attorney and deemed a successful one in new york. may we wend up in a scenario where he's going to be representing

. >> first of all, i think jeff clark was a key participant, lawrence, in one of the most neo-pagan ritualsd think that's a guy who simultaneously facing disbarment, state criminal charges, and the possibility of additional federal charges, might have something better to do than to troll people, frankly, to troll people poorly, online. i guess, you know, in a way, i feel for him. he's under an enormous strain of criminal indictment. and if i could advise him i'd say, look, you're in a hole. stop digging. but i realize it's kind of futile, that's the kind of behavior that landed him in jail in georgia in the first place. so, you know, part of ageist thinks jeffrey clark is upset that he couldn't attend burning man himself. because he's too busy turning himself into the fulton county jail. but on a more serious note, i've heard this garbage my whole life, lawrence. go home. go back to where you came from. pray to the one true god, lord, that kind of stuff. i've also seen the other side of that. i point i've been to a catholic school in chicago, we never heard that kind of garbage there. i'll

and i would say jeff clark as well.as a total lost gamble. i think that's it for removals. >> with one big caveat, which is automatic appeals. >> you can jump on that if you like. if meadows will try to appeal this, what happens at the court of appeals? it has been said not even by legal experts such as yourself. >> it is a pretty liberal test. it doesn't take much to get removal. with you the but the. the big point here, i don't think the court of appeals will reverse. the real issue is sort of a timing now. the judge in fulton county has suggested all six of them will need to go through that process because it would be too perilous to put them on trial and then potentially have a court of appeals reverse. so i think it has implications for the breakdown of groups and when trilals occur, especially for trump. >> and that's what you see with this many people and this many different kinds of motions. it is the small places where the timing begins to drag down. not for illegitimate reasons. there's substance going on. the

inter meddler, which is a job description in trump world in december of 2020 and also applies to jeff clark and chesebro. we know among other things that he has an hour plus phone call with clark in early january. so he is kibitzing generally. what he can provide in addition to the three coffee county defendants, who must be very seriously contemplating getting a plea deal today, remains to be seen. but it could be kind of rich and extend beyond coffee county. >> i want to talk about something you just said. someone else i saw, i online, i don't remember this from t indictment, but you just mentioned it, on or about the second day of january, 2021, before the break it in coffee county, scott graham hall, the y who just pled guilty today, placed a phone call to jeffrey bassler clark to discuss the november 3rd election in georgia. the phone call was 63 minutes and duration. he's got an hour-long phone call with another codefendant, jeffrey clark. we don't know if it relates to coffee county. we'd have no idea. but clark is named in the indictment. clark just had his motion to move to federal

jeff clark raised the process of a defense that is anti-cases of trump, saying, >> donald trump ratified my conduct. >> trump, we understand, have been weighing in advice account of the fence, who will point the finger at all his lawyer saying, these guys like me to do it. if everybody going like this >> tridents a. gather >> he can only see ratified conduct, he said press them into it. so, -- >> i think it's also accurate, facts, as far as we know. i think there was obviously, jeffrey clark was happy to help with this. i want to get one more little bit of news in today. i just love this detail, this is from the documents case were every bit of revelations, seems more and more incriminating as a general rule. this is an assistant emily michael. this is abc no saying as described, molly michael, told investigators, she was working for trump, that more than once she received requests or tasking from trump that were written on the back of note cards and later recognized those note cards are sensitive white house materials, with visible classification markings, used to brief trump while he w

it's mainly says to me is the other five people who are planning to do it, three georgia electors, jeff clarkand trump, almost certainly have very little chance of exceeding, because the reasoning that the judge used, if you apply it even superficially to the conduct charge against those other five in the indictment. they are, it really doesn't fly at all. it's an interesting situation, however, because back in fulton county, dodge mcafee said maybe he needs to let the whole removal process play out, including appeals. he has a right to an appeal. the other five will as well, to avoid the uncommonly situation if the 11th circuit i this, and they are now being tried. so, the second thing it's adjusts to me is we may now be having three groups. the first to, first speedy trial, everyone else, and the six people who have had been fighting, who will be fighting for removal. i think they won't make it. and when you talk about three, four, iterations of a four-month trial, it starts to get pretty head spinning. >> yeah. that is exactly what i was thinking, how much of a headache this is, really, to

you've also got jeff clark. you have speedy trial requests from ken chesebro and sidney powell.ber of fights that donald trump is going to bring. you've got rudy giuliani's likely challenges over information. this is going to be a logistical mess. will be interesting to see tomorrow is one of the things the judge asked fani willis to be prepared for, if you were to do all 19, how much time would you realistically need? it's not happening in october for all 19. there is no way this will be happening. >> everyone wants it. to your point about speedy trial, it can work. the prosecutor said if it was only up to her, maybe it could, right? but it's not. it's also the defendants who can say i want to go fast. and others are saying i don't want to hear anything about october and nothing about 2023. >> that's exactly right. the president made clear, he doesn't want the trial to go for it any time soon. he is going to do everything he can to throw sand in the gears of the former president, slow this thing down and make motions and try to get appeals rolling. he is going to have a very ha

. >> and jeff clark was a department of justice official, which is the argument that he is making. josh, the interesting thing about this is meadows presented his case forcefully and strongly. he's an affable guy. he was in there talking about all the things he allegedly did, but how it doesn't fit into this court. this was a case before the case. and he talked a lot. he gave a lot more testimony than a guy who might be actually be tried in this case. does not affect him? does that testimony carry over to the case? he did talk a lot about the things he did. >> yes, it's usually one of the last things a criminal defense attorney wants to have their client to. to go up on the witness stand a couple weeks into a case being filed, and lay out their version of the facts. and then be subject to cross-examination by the same prosecutors that are trying to put that defendant in jail. but that's exactly what mark meadows did. i think it means that his lawyers thought that this removal was the best possible vehicle for him to shut down or come that this prosecution. because we knew that if t

but he's scheduled hearings for jeff clark. >> thank you for saying jeff. >> and kathy lathem, they have hearings on september 18th or 20th. in all, there are five people who have asked for removal. mark meadows is only the first to have had his hearing. >> catherine, what do you expect for this 1:00 p.m. hearing tomorrow? >> well, it's interesting because mr. chesebro is doing i know her so why should i have to be tried with her. the reason they should be tried together is because they are charged with being with the same criminal enterprise. he's the fake elector scheme person who came up with that along with mr. eastman and miss powell is the voting machines tamperer. there are different prongs of the same criminal enterprise. so i can't foresee a judge saying everyone who asks for a speedy trial is going to get one. that would make no sense in terms of the court. the economy. so if you are, it's one thing if they weren't charged where the same rico. one was charged with something that wasn't, but they are all allegedly part of the same criminal enterprise so to say that i don't know

what are your, what's your prediction on whether or not any of these people, from jeff clark, to the three georgia fake electors, are going to be successful in their beds to reboot the course -- consider what happened mike meadows? >> i think every case is a little different, of course, you have to look not only at the, role but at their conduct to see if they're within the scope of their duties. i think that mark meadows was a very good bellwether. in fact, if anyone has a strong case for removal, it was probably him. even his case this week because as the judge said, the conduct was not about governing, and doing their jobs. they were acting on behalf of the campaign, and engage in political activity. i think for the same reason that they are also likely to fall short of the standard. we'll have to see, because as we said, every case will be different. >> barbara mcquade, these things are coming fast and furious. that's why we're grateful to happy with. us thanks for joining us today. >> thank, you katie. >> when we come back, imaginary impeachment. house speaker, kevin mccarthy's

what we know at this point is that jeff clark has submitted declarations. the justice department. that indicates to me that he's going to try to submit the declaration that he's acting within the scope of office instead of taking the stand as meadows did. that was a big move and gambit. we have seen through the decisions in which he denied the efforts to remove. we saw it with the fake electors, sean still has submitted a waiver of his appearance for the hearing on wednesday when kathy leave them and sean still are set to have their removal hearings. that means that he has also decided not to take the stand. and what's going on here is that these defendants have seen that mark meadows,, arguably had the strongest case on all of them, he got sent back to state court. they realize that the cost-benefit analysis, here it's not worth it for them to take the stand and really try to make a run for removal. they are airing on the side of caution here by not taking the stand on monday and wednesday. >> i am out of time. there is never enough time to get into everyt

there's still a pending hearing on monday for jeff clark, who was a federal official at the time, purportedlyelectors whose hearing is set for wednesday, september 20th. but the reason why i say there's more test balloons about to come up is this expedited speedy demand that was a calculated gamble made by kenneth chesebro and sidney powell who are currently bound together, even though powell has filed yesterday a motion to sever her case from chesebro. people are saying i do not want to be shoulder to shoulder with you in court, but that case is going to go to trial october 23rd. i want to emphasize something for all of your viewers. discovery cutoff is september 20th. what is today's date, september 12th? you're going to see discovery cut off by september 20th. they have to file motions by september 27th. they will be argued and the next jury is going to be starting to be picked on october 23rd. so in terms of division in a joint defense, you can bet your bottom dollar, and paul will agree with me, i'm sure, there are some very hard conversations that are being had right now between kenneth

but there is also jeff clark, most notably who had an hour-long conversation with him on january 2nd.g about that now. and prosecutors made clear, the earlier deals or paid ordeals. scott hall doesn't have to serve a day in jail. that's a pretty big advantage from what they all fear, and that's what everyone is now jockeying to think about. >> were you surprised to see trump saying he would ask to move the fulton county proceedings to federal court? >> yes i was. i predicted otherwise. but when i think about it, i don't buy the theory that it was going to be difficult. trump is fine with long shots. i actually think he prefers to be in state court. and the best, most likely recent mains he's got a republican federalist society appointee, who i want to say has been exemplary, but nevertheless that's -- trump's fantasy than the obama appointed federal judge who is going to be provided over the federal court. so if he's changed a strategy, it's purposeful. i don't think it was, it's too difficult so i'm not going to do it. >> i want to ask you about this. one of trump's more disturbing r

. >> i made the point that jeff clark is not even competent to serving as the attorney general. criminal attorney and never conducted a criminal investigation in his life. he's never been in front of a trial jury. he kind of retorted saying i've done a lot of complicated appeals and civil litigation and environmental litigation and things like that, and i said that's right, you're an environmental lawyer. how about you go back to your office and we'll call you when there's an oil spill. >> today in georgia former president trump is joined a motion from his former campaign lawyer sidney powell asking the court to dismiss the rico charge in the indictment. joining me, gary grumbach outside the courthouse in atlanta, university of georgia professor and former deputy district attorney melissa redman and former u.s. attorney harry lipman. gary, start with you, what's happening today including the argument that jeffrey clark's lawyers are prague to get this move approved? >> there's a couple interesting things happening. first, in this case, the defense's burden of prove to prove why

we think that he was a person who introduced jeff clark, who is now charged as a defendant in the georgia case. to president trump as a possible acting attorney general who is prepared to take the department of justice into territory of trying to interfere in, or suggesting special sessions with the state election processes. that did not work but perry was pushing, pushing meadows and probably pushing the president directly. it was also an object or with, and involved in with members of congress, who would or who would not reject the particular results on the floor. the judge is going to try to parse what is protected, what is legitimate, what might be privilege in some way. from what is potentially arguably criminal conduct. outside of the permissible scope of his roles in congress. this happens a lot, these are teams that do things for privilege and then pass what the team believes is not tainted on to prosecutors. it sounds like that's what's happening in this matter with perry texts's. >> you know one of the great ministries about mark meadows? what remains are his turning over of tho

rudy giuliani, john eastman, jeff clark. sydney powell. a bunch of others. about an ongoing investigation in two financial fraud. in other, words that a pack is raising money based on false pretenses. and i sort of really like that, one because i can really see that as a clean case. and it also can lead to pre-trial forfeiture. meaning that if that case is brought against the pack and members of the puck the government could seek to forfeit and essentially freeze money now that is being used for improper purposes. so there are at least two potential things that could be going on in the d.c. grand jury. >> before we let you go, do you think there are more indictments coming? >> i do. and part of the reason is that donald trump's m.o.'s obstruction of justice and it is interference it is using one lawyer for a bunch of codefendants to try and get them all on the same page but we've seen this already in the mar-a-lago stolen documents investigation of which the i.t. guy, basically has flipped his story and is now cooperating and there is a massive obstruction i

it includes jeff clark who was an assistant united states attorney at the time of this complete, youw, fraudulent scheme that they were pursuing. and so we're waiting to get the federal ruling and we expect it hopefully in the next few weeks. >> we just got our hands on this report. i have a copy here. i'm going to turn to lisa. i know you're just going through it. work with us, folks, and bear with us as we bring it to you as we are reading it ourselves for the first time. i'm seeing names here that weren't obviously part of the indictment. what stands out? >> i mean, two standout to me immediately on pages two and three of this special grand jury report. we see two names that are not in the indictment, one is cleta mitchell who was acting as an attorney to donald trump in connection with that january 2nd call to brad raffensperger. she was his attorney on the call. mark meadows and donald trump were indicted in connection with that call for soliciting brad raffensperger to violate his oath. cleta mitchell is not discussed in the indictment. and also david perdue who famously of los

stay until january 6th, so you've got donahue and rosen, right what's to stop trump from putting jeff clark there and i think the pentagon is even scarier, right at the pentagon you had milley -- i mean, mike flynn, pretty pardoned and waiting to be tapped i mean, what did you see that could make us feel that in the hands of people like this we'd be as safe as we were with the people there on january 6th, 2020 >> yeah. it's an excellent question, and it's the right question because you're 100% correct. these institutions come down to people, people with whom we trust these traditions, with whom we place the independence of the justice department, the independence of the military and thankfully, there were people that in a crisis moment protected those institutions what is to say now that in another trump term there would not be sort of a different standard that puts those people in those positions of defending democracy? people ask me all the time, what was the most surprising thing that you learned over the course of the january 6th investigation, my answer is always, you know, we came clo

jodi hunt appears to believe that jeff clark was off reservation when he was doing his election interferencenot within the scope of his official duties and, number two, even though jodi hunt believes that the former reagan attorney general edwin meese is a good guy and a personal friend, he thinks that the affidavit filed yesterday on the docket in this case was seriously lacking and it was an affidavit defending jeffrey clark saying he had all this privilege and the fact that he was working with the president and it was all deliberative but if jodi hunt as expected delivers damning testimony against both of those counts today, mika, i think clark will be in for a rough ride. >> hugo, last week we were talking to andrew weissmann and suggested the idea of moving cases to federal court in order to get a better jury pool or kind of, you know, more diverse jury pool may actually not make much difference, that actually the jury pool from fulton county and the state court would not actually be very different from a federal court. can you clarify that for us? would there be a big difference for th