nonetheless, the committee's still moving forward with reporting out this criminal contempt referral of jeffrey clark. >> i don't know if you know the answer but obviously what we saw november 5th was question after question after question. they asked every question and he or his lawyer -- mr. clark or his lawyer, mr. mcdougal, would say i exert executive privilege, right? and then, he got up and walked out. like, did donald trump say x? i plead the fifth. like, is he going to have to plead the fifth 50 times? >> so, that's a great question and i was there that day. you know, i saw clark walk into the room. we saw him walk in and out of the room multiple times and having hushed conversations with attorney -- his attorney on that day. it didn't take very long for the committee and clark and his attorney to realize that they weren't making any progress before he left. think he was only in the room for about an hour, and it wasn't just executive privilege. he also claimed that there was some attorney-client privilege that prevented him from answering these questions. but if you read the tea leaves in be

capitol attack voted unanimously to recommend criminal contempt charges against jeffrey clark. members moved forward with the referral despite indications from mr. clark us attorneys that he is now going to meet with the committee to assert his fifth amendment right. if the full house were to take up the resolution, mr. clark would become the second person to face potential prosecution in relation to the january 6 investigation. the select committee is meeting to consider a report on the resolution recommended that the house of representatives find jeffrey clark in contempt of congress for refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by a select committee to investigate january 6 attack on the united states capital. without objection, the chair is authorized to declare the committee in recess at any time. i will now recognize myself for an opening statement. i will support and defend the constitution of the united states. that is a part of the oath that i took. when we were sworn in as a present lives in part, all of our staff members serve this country in uniform civil services and

jeffrey clark was an assistant attorney general. a trump appointee of the department of justice. according to multiple sources, mr. clark was asked by president trump to overtake the role of attorney general. in parts that he could issue a series of letters falsely suggesting that the deriving of justice believed that the presidential election may have been stolen. of course, this happened after the department had repeatedly informed president trump that his allegations of a stolen election were not true. and they were not supported by the evidence. this happened after dozens of courts ruled against president trump and his election fraud names. this happened after the electoral college certify the results of the election as our constitution requires we are a nation of laws. imagine what would have happened if all the trump appointed leaders at the justice department had supported clark and correctly issued to those false letters. imagine what january 6 would have been then. and even more profound constitutional crisis. mr. clark was not appointed and his letter was not issued beca

behind inapplicable claims of executive privilege. >> the committee then voted unanimously to refer jeffrey clark for prosecution of criminal content of congress. congressman adam schiff, added -- that the 11th hour, miss clark has agreed to appear before committee once again. this time to assert a fifth amendment privilege against self incrimination. mr. clark makes the assertion that answering particular questions about the scheme to overturn the election would tend to incriminate him, that is a weighty matter, and the committee will soberly assess whether that privilege has been properly invoked. >> joining us now is democratic congressman adam schiff of california. he's a chairman of the house intelligence committee and he's a member of the january 6th select committee. congresswoman schiff, the fifth amendment -- invoking the fifth amendment means that you personally believe, as you invoke it, that you did commit or may have committed the crime. and answering this question might bring you closer to prosecution and conviction for committing that crime. but people sometimes hide behind the fif

we meant to roll video of jeffrey clark. we apologize for the error. >>> still ahead, would you pay a hundred bucks for magic dirt? it may sound like a modern-day jack and the bean stalk but it's a real product, sold as a covid cure. inside the rise and fall of online pandemic pyramid schemes. >>> plus, if these walls could talk, the money mystery found inside joel olsteen's mega church in texas. details of the bizarre discovery. >> it was just like unbelievable, the things he was telling us they found in the wall. hey found in the wall abdominal discomfort, gas, and bloating and it works fast. in as little as 7 days try fast acting biotic gummies from align. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand. ♪♪ what the- henry? thanks! if it's “out decorating the neighbors” season, it's walgreens season. ♪♪ what a pain in the- alice? if it's “let's wrap this up” season, it's walgreens season. [music: "i swear"] jaycee tried gain flings for the first time the other day... and forgot where she was. you can always spot a first time ga

let's put on the record all the things i would have asked jeffrey clark about. had the dude not just up and stormed out. and for the purpose of getting it on the record he gives this whole long list of things that they wanted to ask jeff clark about. and it's a big whole gamut, runs for three or four pages in the transcript they want to ask him about him potentially using personal email and personal devices to do his government work. they want to ask him about his communications with president trump after the election about the election, they say they believe that jeff clark this had in never met president trump until after the election. and they want to know why it is they met then and what they talked about after the election. and they want to ask about communications with trump campaign people ask him about communications with steve bannon and rudy giuliani and the other people who had set up the january 6th war room at the washington, d.c. hotel. this whole long list of things they wanted to ask him about. but then right in the middle of it there is this. we

which is jeffrey clark. the guy we are looking at in the senate judiciary committee, who was in the u.s. department of justice. nominally in charge of the environment division, which under trump you know when supposed to do anything in. and he got himself all cooked up with esteemed unduly the election. where? in georgia. he has not played the fifth. he's not exactly a principle figure. he's kind of do we be so the likelihood that there are people behind him, steering that letter at georgia as part of that scheme, operating within the department of justice and through the department of justice, is a pretty, strong probability. georgia could be the place trump goes for redemption, georgia can also be the place where justice comes for trump. >> you mentioned jeffrey clark

and then you got a third thread, which i'll bring in, if you don't mind, which is jeffrey clark, the guy we're looking at in the senate judiciary committee who was in the u.s. department of justice, nominally in charge of the environment division, which under trump you know he wasn't supposed to do anything in. and he got himself all cooked up with a scheme to undo the election where? in georgia. >> yeah. >> he has now plead the fifth. he is not exactly a principle figure. he is kind of dweebie. so the likelihood that there were people behind him steering that letter at georgia as part of that scheme operating within the department of justice and through the department of justice is a pretty strong probability right now. so, you know, georgia could be the place trump goes for redemption, but georgia could also be the place where justice comes for trump. >> you mentioned jeffrey clark

moments ago they voted unanimous lesion 9-0, to refer jeffrey clark for criminal charges. e department official who reportedly plotted with trump in a scheme to invalidate electoral votes of georgia and other states. in other words, an extremely valuable witness who could face criminal liability hmsz. he not only refused to answer questions, he abruptly walked out of his deposition last mont. his lawyer told the committee today the client might invoke his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination, that's according to bennie thompson who said clark has agreed to be deposed again on saturday. if he does not pass on saturday, the measure will have to pass the full house of representatives before it is passed onto the justice department who will decide whether to prosecute and charge clark. let me read from the contempt report on clark. it says clark met with white house officials including then president trump to discuss efforts to delegitimize disrupt or overturn election results. they also say they have reason to believe that mr. clark had conversations with others in

katie, your reporting for me brought jeffrey clark to light and life. intersection of a 1/6 committee perfectly willing to refer him to the justice department. >> sure, so i think there's a lot of significance in this contempt vote. jeffrey clark, he was an official during this time after the election when it seemed trump was trying to overturn the results. if he has held in contempt, it will send a really strong message to this very long list of people that the committee has already said, has already requested come in. another way as well. he was a former justice department official. so this would be the department saying one of our own has really done something wrong and i think that that is a line that congress has asked the justice department to lay down again and again and now we're just starting to see that happen. >> neil, talk about jeffrey clark. it's not hyperbole anymore to describe him as sort of the coup plotter at doj. >> i think you're right to say he's the legal architect of this. at least according to the draft letter. this guy wrote a

jeffrey clark. you may remember he served as the acting head of the civil division of the doj under trump, a position he kind ever fell backwards into as people left. and it was in that position that he hatched a plot to oust then acting attorney general jeffrey rosen, become a.g. himself with trump's support, and then use the full power of the department of justice to question the legitimacy of the 2020 election. had he succeeded, if it had gone off, it almost certainly would have thrown the country into a full-blown constitutional crisis as the committee puts it in that new report. "according to documents and testimony gathered by the select committee in the weeks leading up to the january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol jeffrey bosert clark participated in efforts to delegitimize results of the 2020 presidential election and delay or interrupt the peaceful transfer of power. after numerous courts from the united states have resoundingly rejected alleged voter fraud challenges to election results b

who is jeffrey clark?y a name we heard often or really ever for most of trump's administration. we've learned he was very active in efforts to overturn the 2020 election. so here he is. at the end of the trump presidency, clark was the acting head of the civil cases at the department of justice. in the weeks after the election, he pushed unfounded claims about voter fraud. he's also accused of helping donald trump create a plan to oust then acting attorney jeffrey rosen and take the job himself and attorney general. it's thought that clark would have probably helped lawmakers in georgia and other states potentially undermine the results of the popular vote. so leaders in the department of justice say they told trump if he made clark attorney general to overturn biden's lelections, many if not all of the senior officials would resign. a report by the judicial committee slammed clark and asked for a view of his professionalism as a lawyer. as to the possibility that clark would refuse to testify, democrats s

jeffrey clark did show up. this is clarifying what the committee considers cooperating. g to a 90-minute deposition in which clark revealed next to nothing other than his own stamina to say, i'm not saying any more. state lawmakers and senior members of the white house, which brings us to the other big news that cnn broke this week, the mark meadows story. the chief of staff for then president trump is cooperating with the committee. the source tells us he has handed over thousands of emails, but what he eventually tells the committee is still unclear. however, kate, it's very obvious there's a new willingness coming out of mark meadows to work with the committee, a source telling cnn, frankly meadows does not want a criminal charge, kate. >> great to see you, whitney. thank you. joining us is cnn senior legal analyst elie honig. the committee says clark did show up and his attorney handed over a letter objecting to almost all the questions that they presented -- that they wanted to ask on the grounds that then president trump is entitled to confidential legal advice, a s

jeffrey clark.rved as the acting head of the civil division of donald trump, of positioning fell backwards into a people left. it was in that position that he hatched a plot to oust then acting attorney general rosen. but coming at him himself with trump support, but then with the full using the full power of justice to question the legitimacy of 2020 election. had he succeeded if he had gone off, it almost certainly would've thrown the country into a full blown constitutional crisis! and the committee puts it in that report, quote, according to the documents and testimony gathered by the select committee, in the weeks leading up to the january attacks jeffrey bowser clark participated in efforts to delegitimized the results of the 2020 presidential election and delay or interrupt the peaceful transfer of power. after numerous court throughout the united states had resoundingly rejected alleged voter fraud challenges to the election results by the trump campaign and after all states certified in the

it seems like they need information from jeffrey clark and john eastman. in your experience, what options are available to the committee with these two? >> i think the individuals at this point have a choice to made, which is, do they want to invite a contempt of congress viation, just like steve bannon did, or do they want to cooperate to the best extent possible? and i think that my hope is that through the cooperation of mark meadows, they will feel that they have no choice but to cooperate, baa but we will see very much if that ends to be the case. >> congressman, politico is reporting that, quote, an unpublished investigative compilation, sometimes referred to as the alternative mueller report has been located in the justice department files and could be released soon. to do you know anything about this. >> mr. weismann, part of the mueller team revealed in his book that they could come up with this alternative, "the new york times" sued to get access to it. and the justice department is now apparently in the process of producing it. my hope is that i

during our hearing on the jeffrey clark contempt resolution, you and your colleagues repeatedly said clark could not raise executive privilege pursuant to trump versus thompson because clark was not the one in court. mr. meadows is in court, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> okay. during the same hearing you and your colleagues referred to the need for document production in order to continue your investigation. if that's -- i'm sure that is the case, but then why are we advancing a measure here that is purely punitive? that is the committee's not pursuing civil enforcement of the subpoena. why not the civil course, why the criminal source? >> well, clearly the criminal choice is what the committee made. we see the lawsuit as merely a delaying tactic on the part of mr. meadows. we have given him as i said earlier every opportunity to come to the committee. we negotiated with him. and at the last moment, he said he's not coming and then he filed suit, which is his choice. we don't have to, as a committee -- >> again, i'm just trying to be clear on this. you clearly had a choice to

jeffrey clark originally was invited to appear voluntarily.n issued him a subpoena when he made it clear he would not cooperate on a voluntary basis. now on wednesday, this past wednesday just a couple of days ago, the committee met to vote on a report issuing contempt of congress for jeffrey clark. that report was committed -- excuse me, that report was reported out of the committee on a unanimous basis, but look, now the full house vote is on a pause while they wait for jeffrey clark to appear. let's take a listen to adam schiff. he's a member of the select committee, what he had to say when he found out late last night that jeffrey clark wouldn't be appearing this morning. watch. >> the committee is satisfied that it is genuine, that is the sample documentation. this is not yet another ruse, and frankly, given his pattern of, you know, spending weeks when we were trying to get his voluntary cooperation stringing us along, then being subpoenaed, then coming in and refusing to testify, and then on the eve of holding him in contempt, a new cla

installed as the acting attorney general of the united states so that jeffrey clark could use that position to corruptly attempt to overturn election results in some states including georgia. jeffrey clark has not yet testified to the committee because of reported illness but he's indicated he believes his criminal culpability is such he'll invoke the fifth amendment so he does not implicate himself in crimes in his testimony. while people like jeffrey clark and donald trump who held positions at the very top of the conspiracy to over throw the election have not yet been charged with any crimes, today, 81-year-old gary was sentenced to 90 days of home detention and 36 months probation and a $2,000 fine for the 22 minutes he spent in the capitol on january 6th. he did not engage in violence. he never needed a lawyer in his life until he followed what he thought was donald trump's order to go down to the capitol and fight like hell. president ronald reagan appointed the judge who sentenced gary wickersham today. he's 78 years old. he said quote, it's the first defendant i've had

let's remember what jeffrey clark did. he wrote a memo when he was one of the highest ranking members of doj saying we have detected significant potential election fraud in georgia. you ought to call a special election and appoint a different slate of elect tors. that's fraud . it's a crime to conspire to defraud the united states of a free and fair election. so jeffrey clark does havepotential concerns. >> how is pleading the fifth not a copout for anyone who doesn't want to talk to the committee? >> it is a copout, ana. it's a constitutionally sanctioned copout, but that's what the fifth amendment does. it would be interesting to see if someone like roger stone f they, too, take the fifth. if steve bannon had taken the fifth on day one, he absolutely would not be charged with criminal contempt of congress today. there's a stigma attached and rightfully so. what a disgrace it is that jeffrey clark, a high-ranking doj former official may have to hide behind the fifth because he may have -- and he's acknowledging -- potenti

installed, as the acting attorney general of the united states, so that jeffrey clark could use that position to corruptly attempt to overturn election results, in some states, including georgia. jeffrey clark has not yet testified to the committee, because of reported on, this but he has indicated that he believes, his criminal culpability, is such, that he will invoke the fifth amendment, so that he does not implicate himself, in crimes. in his testimony. will people like jeffrey clark and donald trump, who held positions at the very top of the conspiracy to overthrow the election. have not yet been charged with any crimes, today, 81 year old gary wicker shaq. was sentenced to 90 days of home detention, and 36 months probation, along with a fine of $2,000. for the 22 minutes that he's spent inside the capitol, on january six. where he did not engage in violence. he never needed a lawyer, in his, life until he followed what he thought was donald trump's order, to go down to the capitol. and fight like hell. president ronald reagan appointed judge race lamberth, a sentence carri

he's in contempt not talking and the other hand, doj and jeffrey clark is taking the fifth. clark -- so excuse me, perry is the obvious person for the committee to look at. he can send a thank you note to mark meadows and jeffrey clark for his what may soon become a subpoena. >> he unlike mark meadows won't have the most direct climb, not a valid one but privilege. he has a different scenario at hand. they sent a letter to perry saying they are aware of multiple texts and other communications, multiple texts and other communications with mark meadows as you point out about jeffrey clark. they're making it really clear they have the receipts so what happens if, say, perry follows the lead of a mark meadows or a steve bannon and stone walls them? >> interesting question. so it depends how he does it. he could take the fifth representative perry. he has the right to do that if he thinks his answers may incriminate him granted he's a sitting member of congress, that would be fraught to do that. if he defies the committee and says no, i'm not cooperating, the committee has to dec

jeffrey clark did not assert the fifth amendment right back when he testified before the committee. he at least appeared for this deposition on november 5th. so, if this isn't said simply as a stall tactic, i think this will keep the heat on him and forces him totally show up and go through question by question that issues on which he's going to plead the fifth amendment. >> peter, back over to your the. hard as it is to believe, life in this white house and for this administration has changed once again in the past 24 to 40 hours, with the arrival of this variant forcing the administration to scramble. it through certainly, a wrench in the national works when this nation has zero appetite for new restrictions. >> i think that's exactly right. obviously, president biden came to office on the promise of getting hold of this pandemic and getting us passed it. whether this omicron variant is going to be as serious as some people fear, we don't know yet. obviously, still a little early. there's not enough data yet to tell us well as whether the current vaccines will manage to handle it.

committee chairman bennie thompson took the step of offering former department justice official jeffrey clarkto sit for a deposition. he has been in for one. at his last appearance, clark's attorney told the committee he would not answer questions, would not produce any documents. the committee still voted to hold clark in contempt. that passing unanimously. a vote by the full house could come within days if clark spurns the committee again. stephanie murphy is a member of the select committee investigating the attack who voted for the contempt referral. she joins me now. maybe you can explain the scenario. what happened when he came the first time, the decision to vote for contempt and what the latest developments are now. >> sure. thanks for having me, chris. the first time that mr. clark appeared before the committee, he basically didn't answer any questions, continued to try to use the executive privilege to not answer any questions. then he ended the meeting and left. what he has done is try to tell us that now he is ready to come before the committee again. but he is going to plead the

letter sent a lawyer -- jeffrey clark's lawyer sent a letter. he's likely to plead the fifth but will appear and go through that process. so that deposition is scheduled for saturday. the house is going to hold off on a full vote to see how saturday goes. we're a little bit of a waiting game right now as is the house to see how things play out and what bay jeffrey clark cooperates. jose? >> thank you so much. has a head we'll talk with congresswoman pramila jayapal. >>> a majority of the justices on abortion to peer to be willing to uphold the mississippi law that bans almost all abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy but it's not clear if they would take the ultimate step of overturning two previous decisions affirming a woman's right to an abortion. with me is barbara mcquaid, former u.s. attorney, now professor at the university of michigan law school, also co-host of the "sister-in-law product cast" and former msnbc analyst. justice sonia sotomayor made the point during yesterday's arguments you heard on msnbc, it was fascinating that tossing

>> what's going to happen is that this vote for referring jeffrey clark, a top department official, atuary 6th riot. this is a man that the house select committee thinks played a key role in attempting to use the doj authorities to overturn the results of the 2020 election. they are now trying to refer him for criminal contempt. that's going through the committee tonight. it will probably hit the house floor tomorrow and then go on to the department of justice. his old agency. and now in light of all of this, we have learned that jeffrey clark's lawyer sent a letter to the committee saying, in effect, he wants a do-over. that he wants to now plead the fifth, something he could have done when he went in for his initial interview and basically refused to answer any questions which is why they're trying to move forward with this criminal contempt charge. this action is sending a ripple through the community of people of witnesses that the committee wants to talk to, wolf, because they want to show people that they really do have the authority to hold people in criminal contempt. certainly

received, we have good faith reason to believe that, yes, he was involved in efforts to install jeffrey clarkhe justice department. why were they trying to effectively decapitate the leadership of that department and install clark and, you know, i think there's good reason to believe it is because clark was willing to try to get georgia to withhold its electors or send an alternate slate and was developing plans to do that with other states. so, look, he has a lot that he could share with the congress and the country and legally he's at this point, you know, been asked to volunteer, but if he refuses we'll have to consider what comes next. >> we should note in that letter that chair thompson sent, he said when mr. clark decided to invoke his fifth amendment rights he understood we planned to pose questions addressing his interactions with you, among a host of other topics. he has not declined a subpoena at this point. this was simply an invitation to cooperate, given he's a member of congress there would be an expectation that, of course, a member of congress would. what happens next? >> we w

the january 6th select committee voted 9 -0 unanimously to approve a contempt report referring jeffrey clarkstice department for criminal prosecution for defiance of a subpoena. just before that happened, just before that meeting was scheduled to take place, the chairman said he had heard from clark's lawyer that clark is willing to appear again for a deposition. that is expected to happen this saturday. it's unclear whether he wants to cooperate or whether he wants to find a new legal path to try to stone wall his previous claims of executive privilege alerted by the former president were rejected by the committee. nevertheless, the committee is willing to give jeffrey clark one more chance to appear on saturday and to see if he can resolve this subpoena. if he can ultimately comply with this subpoena and they're holding off on moving that contempt report through the whole house of representatives. if they do that, it could happen next week. the last time this happened was with steve bannon. it took from the time of the committee vote to hold him in contempt, 24 days between then and the in

from this jeffrey clark unless he changes his mind, he has telegraphed that he will take the fifth. how is that likely to go? did he really want criminal contempt as the top line in his resume and remind us his degree of exposure here? >> well, look, i think it's very important to remember the context here. this is jeffrey clark who is one of the senior officials at the justice department, and environmental law. the environmental division. and trump moved to make him the acting attorney general in early january. the acting attorney general because he promised to use the power of the justice department to force these states to effectively overturn the election. he was only stopped, trump was only stopped from placing him as the acting attorney general when he faced the reality of it the entire senior staff of the justice department. basically every other senior official besides mr. clark were going to resign en masse if he was made the acting attorney general and donald trump back then. that was on january 2nd. now you have him coming before this committee, and signaling that he is g

but jeffrey clark is without equivocation a pivotal figure, an active u.s. department official, a high ranking one on that day, on january 6th. in the hours that led up to it he's right in the wheel house of what the january 6th committee was created for and looking at. >> scott, i know you've also been reporting that dozens of january 6th rioters are being held in d.c. jail as they await sentencing and that there's actually interestingly enough here radicalization that's going on in that wing. i'm really fascinated by this. tell me more about that reporting and how it might be a problem going forward. >> this is our exclusive reporting for you tonight, ayman. as of tonight 40 of the 675 u.s. capitol rioters in pretrial detention in the washington, d.c. jail, the complex just down the road from the u.s. capitol. 40 of them in the same wing. they've segregated them from the general population. the inmates call it the patriot wing. it's known by the staff and by d.c. officials as the january 6th wing. we've had a number of defendants former defense lawyers arg

i think a very big moment -- they may not get i anything of substance out of jeffrey clark.ut if he goes through with this, if he actually invokes the fifth amendment to refuse to answer questions about what he was doing and what he was promising donald trump on the basis that it could be implicating him in a criminal allegation, i think it's an important moment, an important moment to be marked. >> an important moment indeed. and frank figliuzzi, what, if anything, should we read into this further committee statement to expect weeks of public hearings? and i'm curious, as a veteran investigator, how do you think this investigation is going based on the distance we all must watch from? >> i think we can glean quite a bit from the mere statement that public hearings are coming soon. and in my opinion, this is prime time viewing. and here's why. for those who have been saying all along they're taking too long, i don't understand the silence from the select committee, there's not enough hearings, what's been going on behind the scenes is hundreds of interviews and depositions,

but it is perry who put forward jeffrey clark saying that this is someone who is on our side and who we could have take over the justice department. the committee is very interested in getting the details. and it signals to me that they are not talking to principles like jeffrey clark and congressman perry. that they have said enough of the groundwork talking to other witnesses who were around those conversations. who would've been able to provide them with some of the details that the committee is far enough and willing to question the principles. they would not simply take a run at them if they didn't know much about what they expected to have listed in that testimony. >> you often make that point the prosecutors and the committee think about these things well in advance. it is not a fishing expedition to by the fact that people think it. is courtney, we'll talk about president biden. he's going to be speaking to the country tomorrow. one of these very successful ways of getting people vaccinated in this country have been the rules that the administration has put up for companies u

members to participate remotely as well but it will be in person. >> you've already met with clark's former boss jeffrey. they didn't take the fifth. do you have information you believe implicates clark in things like election interference or fraud possibly? >> well, i don't want to comment on that, don, for the reason i don't want to give mr. clark any false reason on his part to claim the fifth. so i don't want to speculate about that. i will say the witnesses you mentioned who were his seniors at the justice department have testified openly before the senate. we are not confirming witnesses before our committee but neither claimed any executive privilege so the idea a more junior person at the justice department would have an executive privilege claim when the seniors did not is i think pretty ludicrous. we will have to see what assertions he makes with respect to what questions. one thing i can tell you is that the fifth amendment does not permit him to refuse to answer questions merely because he wants to cover up for donald trump. he has to feel that his own activities and answering questions abou

about jeffrey clark. has now voted for this criminal referral but it's not gone to the full house yet. they decided to give him one more shot. he sent a letter saying he's intending to invoke his fifth amendment protections. if they do that, they'll set aside the criminal process, but if he decides to delegitimize this, they'll move to a floor vote. what is the use of that protection? >> it must be question by question invocation. remember, schiff is the next federal prosecutor. they'll sit him down and say, did you have this job? he'll say, on advice of counsel, i decline to answer. they'll go to the next question and next question and probably he'll keep asserting the fifth. he's the one who asked for this extra interview because you can't get someone on contempt if they take the fifth. if he talskes it in a blanket w and they serve it up to the department of justice and they see this guy pled the fifth, would that be enough for contempt? i don't think so. i think his game would probably be to go up and

jeffrey clark played a key role in the effort to overturn the election.ll plead the 5th after another scheduled deposition this weekend. >> this is, in my view, a last ditch attempt to delay the select committee. we will not allow anyone to run out the clark and we will insist that he must appear on this sad. >> leanne caldwell joins me now from the hill. we pressed the pause button, but tell me about jeffrey clark. >> he is not a household name, but he is the former president's biggest advocate and ally inside of the justice department to try to get them to investigate what they say, what he says was a stolen election or to publicly say that the election was stolen. she eluded to what the committee and she was asked by then to take over the role of attorney general so they could issue a series of letters. so because they think that clark was instrumental in the pressure campaign in the department of justice which we know that ag resigned over, we know that clark is a big target for the select committee and they said they're going to give him saturday to

the committee is set to vote to advance a contempt of congress charge against jeffrey clark who has refused to cooperate. clark worked with mr. trump to overturn the election by spreading baseless claims of voter fraud. this comes after steve bannon was indicted last month on contempt charges. >> you don't blow off a congressional subpoena. executive privilege is just a distraction and side show. >> reporter: a new look at one of those charged for storming the capitol. >> i thought i was helping to save the country. >> reporter: this is danny rodriguez, accused of multiple violent crimes, speaking to the fbi. here you can see it appears the california man is tasing a d.c. police officer. >> why did youyou tase him? >> i don't know. >> reporter: this one sent to minnesota democrat omar. she is as she received the racist profanity-laced voicemail after being likened to a suicide bomber. >> there are active discussions underway to make sure that lauren bobert is held accountable. >> reporter: she apologized on twitter but after a contentious call with omar has gone back on the offensive. now i

but in the absence of anyone else willing to go along with a lie, he gets jeffrey clark at doj. and clark wanted to use the legitimacy of the department of justice to disseminate the lie, to stamp it with doj letterhead, to give it it to georgia's top lawmakers and say maybe you should call a special session to send in your electors. to pressure them to throw out the results of a democratic election and install the loser over the winner. it's the same scheme trump would mention in that phone call to brian kemp. now, of course none of this works. he tries every link in the chain. and with the clock ticking down to the final 48 hours before the electoral votes will be counted on january 6th, with every court in the land having dismissed the allegations of voter fraud as completely baseless, with every single audit that has been undertaken showing the election was free and fair, with literally nothing to sustain this coup plot, we come to a woman named ruby freeman. she is a georgia election worker who was smeared with false conspiracies and viral videos that she and her daughter he

>> yeah, look, jeffrey clark should be referred for contempt and contempt should be the least of jeffrey clark's worries. let's remember who he is. he's a high ranking official and committed a fraud inside the justice department. he wrote a letter say to the state of georgia saying we the doj have identified potential wide spread election fraud and you state of georgia, you need to call a special session and appoint new electors. that's outrageous and false and a fraud. so he should be held in contempt if he continues to defy the committee and he may have bigger problems, as well. >> thank you so much, sirme. appreciate it. >> thanks, don. >>> with all of this going on, the gop is having an absolute meltdown. the qanon congresswoman publicly and repeatedly slamming a colleague in her own party for opposing hate and bigotry and from the leaders of the gop, crickets. nyquil severe gives you powerful relief for your worst cold and flu symptoms, on sunday night and every night. nyquil severe. the nighttime, sniffling, sneezing, coughing, aching, stuffy head, best sleep with a cold, medicine.

if, in fact, jeffrey clark was referred for criminal contempt, do you think the justice department wouldo them. they have to go through the facts and the law. >> but do you feel based on what you've seen that they would? >> well, they did bring an action against mr. bannon, and i think this -- that shows that they are taking this seriously. we're not a prosecuting body. we're a legislative body, so we're going to make our best determination and do a referral. we wouldn't do a referral if we didn't think it was valid. >> congresswoman sew lofgren, appreciate your time. >> you bet. >>> right now oral arguments continue inside the nation's highest court in a case that could change the future of abortion access across this country. we're going to bring you the latest coming up. what's strong with me? i know when i'm ready for a rest day. ...so i can be ready for anything... tomorrow. find out what's strong with you with fitbit sense and daily readiness. firefighter maggie gronewald knows how to handle dry weather... ...and dry, cracked skin. new gold bond advanced healing ointment. restore h

why did they want to make jeffrey clark attorney general, what did he think about the letter that jeffrey clark cwas proposing to send to state legislators in georgia. why were fox news hosts texting him telling him that they needed to get the president out to stop this. why did they think the president was those who could stop this. many of those people are saying, gosh, this was just tourists. or this was a false flag operation, another person on fox news has claimed. >> clearly they have a lot of questions for the former chief of staff, and if he was to cooperate or continue to engage, he would be such a critical witness for their investigation. but they continue to proceed with this criminal contempt. it's unlikely that they will hear from mark meadows. the other outstanding question is whether this goes to the justice department, if attorney general merrick garland will proceed with the prosecution against meadows. they have of course been prosecuting another trump ally, steve bannon. this case is different for several reasons. meadows was a top official at the white house on january

jeffrey clark may not want to go the way of steve bannon, because steve bannon is facing two counts of criminal contempt and they each carry a mandatory minimum prison sentence. clark may not want to go that way and he has sort of flinched by saying my bad, i know i played the fool two weeks ago when i appeared before the house select committee but i'm prepared to come in and invoke my fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. once he does that, there will be a series of consequences. >> what took so long, glen? leann mentioned it, invoking the fifth this late in the game, why wouldn't he have done it weeks ago? >> he should have. i think he was gambling on being able to go in with a lot of bluff and bluster and invoke play privileges and walk out unscathed. but he's a lawyer, he should have known better. this is his last play. it's his only legal play to go in and say i invoke the fifth. nobody wants to do that, it's a bad look. >> but to that point, glen, clark is a former department of justice employee. there's no question he didn't know how the rules work. what do you think

look, jeffrey clark should be referred for contempt, and contempt should be actually the least of jeffrey clark's worries. let's remember who this guy is. he was a high-ranking official at doj. he committed a fraud inside the justice department. he wrote a letter to the state of georgia saying, we, the doj, have identified potential widespread election fraud and you, state of georgia, you need to call a special session and apoint new electors. he should be held in contempt if he continues to defy the committee, and he may have bigger problems as well. >> elie, thank you so much, sir. appreciate it. >>> with all of this going on, the gop is having an absolute meltdown. the qanon congresswoman publicly and repeatedly slamming a colleague in her own party for opposing hate and bigotry, and from the leaders of the gop, crickets. really make my dry skin healthier in one day? it's true jen. really?! this nourishing prebiotic oat formula moisturizes to help prevent dry skin. one day? for real! wow! aveeno® healthy. it's our nature.™ i gotta say i'm still impressed. very impressed. new daily mois

covered this investigation from the very start is seeing the committee circle around meadows and jeffrey clarktwo of the key people who were assisting president trump. clark has not been held in contempt. they were giving him one more opportunity to appear before the committee to plead the fifth, so i am waiting eagerly to see if clark ultimately does that. and if he does, what questions he decides to plead the fifth on. >> yeah, and david, that was also an interesting moment for me where she outlined, congressman cheney outlined that she believed clark saying to the committee he expects criminal charges as a result of those proceedings or what was happening behind the scenes there with the department of justice and the white house, that he is deciding to plead and exercise his fifth amendment privilege not to incriminate itself. also a telling moment was to undercut the central argument that mark meadows provided this information. provided text messages and documents to the committee and he is no longer either part of the legislative or executive branch and therefore does not have a leg to st

to overturn the january 6th results, the committee voting to recommend contempt charges again jeffrey clarkolved in a pressure campaign to oust his boss jeffrey rosen that was part of a bid to overturn georgia's election results. as questions were circulating when a contempt vote might be put before the house a last-minute offer from clark came to the committee. it is an offer members of the committee are approaching with a degree of skepticism, adam schiff said last night this move could merely amount to more obstruction. he said this, quote, at the 1th hour, clark has agreed to appear before our committee once again, this time to assert a fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. if clark makes the assertion that answering particular questions about the scheme to overturn the election would tend to incriminate him that is a weighty matter and the committee will soberly assess whether that privilege has been properly invoked. but clark may not make that assertion as a generic matter committee vice chair liz cheney added this on the committee's commitment to pierce the obstructi