we also have msnbc analyst lisa rubin. i'm bringing you in to the conversation for the first time. what are your thoughts? >> i totally agree with andrew that what happened this morning is probably what put merrick garland over the edge. the justice manual says that in an ongoing criminal investigation that hasn't matured to an indictment, it's not appropriate for the department of justice to comment on that investigation except in one or two circumstances and one is where necessary to protect the public safety. i would note that what happened this morning at the fbi's office in cincinnati resulted in a threat to and ohio state troopers that engaged in a car chase to the public at large. they shut down highways and right now the suspect is surrounded in a corn field in clint, ohio. there are a whole bunch of people that could be affected. in order to preserve and protect the public safety, merrick garland may find it necessary to give the public some modicum of detail about the status of the investigation and how we go to that investigation, that the former president and his staff

let's bring in legal analyst lisa rubin and paul butler to hash this how the further. t the judge go back and redact the document and maybe that's what he will release. i know you don't want to put any witness at risk here, i know you don't want to, if you're the government or the judge, to harm the investigation, but is there a way of saying witness a or subject a said x, y, z, so we get a little more information about why the government felt it was so urgent and necessary to go in there and why they couldn't just get a subpoena? >> well, look, i think that andrew's point that they don't want to compromise witness safety or integrity is absolutely paramount for the department. to the extent that they can give details about the number of witnesses in court today j. bratt of the department of justice cited several witnesses were involved here. to the extent they can tell us the number of witnesses, the dates on which they talked to witnesses and maybe some of the content of what those witnesses told them, they might do that so long as they can do so without revealing the

. >> okay lisa rubin, married and -- meredith mcgraw, such a good conversation. thank you ladies, both of you. >> now to nbc's gary graham back, gary welcome. what are we hearing on both sides of the aisle relative to all of this? >> attorney general merrick garland made it clear with an interview with lester holt, in an address yesterday, that he's going to investigate without fear, without favor, and will go wherever the investigation may lead. there's so many things that we don't know right now about the fbi search at mar-a-lago. you're just talking about that with lisa and meredith. it's not stopping folks on both sides of the aisle from making predictions and giving their opinions. among republicans, a lot of what they have to say is predictable. they're preparing a lot of this to hillary clinton's classified emails server, back in 2016. but of course, the fact check there, she wasn't the president. there was no boxes and boxes full of classified information found in a private resort of her residence. here's what some republicans had to say over the past 24

nbc news digital reporter, glenn kirschner, former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst and lisa rubin, also a legal analyst and former litigator. welcome an. ken, we'll start with you relative to the latest in this mar-a-lago search. the doj wants to keep the search warrant affidavit sealed, citing a need to protect witnesses, also an ongoing investigation. a hearing is set for thursday at 1:00 p.m. what happens then? >> the judge will decide whether to unseal that affidavit and the justice department, if he does grant that request by news organizations, the justice department would ask for redactions of sensitive information, and they say there will be a lot. we actually learned a good deal from this justice department filing yesterday, alex, about the scope of this investigation, the fact that there is an ongoing grand jury investigation involving multiple witnesses and sensitive information they still want to protect. the idea that this is just the action to recover classified documents seems dispelled by this affidavit. we're turning to reporting on how these top secret sci docume

joining me now is justice reporter ryan reilly and lisa rubin, msnbc legal analyst.sterday. we also got the application for the warrant unsealed. ryan, when the justice department says evidence might be destroyed in this motion to seal, what do you take from that? >> i think there could be additional evidence that could be destroyed. sort of what it seems. i do think we are in sort of a unique situation and that normally this information wouldn't be coming out. this is obviously some unprecedented territory that we're in and that's why you sort of saw this press conference that merrick garland had to begin with donald trump made the decision to make the search warrant execution on his home public. it's an interesting position of merrick garland. the central motivation has here to be about enforcing the law and deter people who might be inclined to do something like this in the future but it's also dealing with a former president. you know, there's a lot of complications that comes when you're dealing with an investigation of a form are former president. the attorney

don't go too far because we're in to bring in right now lisa rubin, legal analyst for the rachel maddoww. and hayes run as well, msnbc daily columnist and editor. lisa, i want to begin with the breaking news that just went down shortly before the show started here. that a judge has temporarily blocked senator lindsey graham from having to testify in the georgia election fraud probe. ram argues he should have protections as a federal lawmaker. but will this argument stand up long term? it might delay from tuesday. but long term is the question. will the grand jury ever hear from the senator? >> i think the grand jury should hear from the senator. alex, the immunity that senator graham has been talking about in his briefs, both the district court under the 11th circuit, stems from the constitution in the speech and debate clause. which essentially holds the members of congress can be immune for their actions taken in their capacity as a lawmaker. but do you and i both know that the thing that bonnie willis is most interested in exploring with lindsey graham is a myth of a rough phone call

. >> harry litman, lisa rubin, ken dilanian, thank you for starting us off. we are also keeping an eye on a courthouse in fulton, georgia. right now, a judge is hearing arguments about whether the state's governor, brian kemp, will have to testify before a special grand jury. that panel is looking into allegations of voter fraud by former president trump and his allies in the 2020 election in georgia. earlier today, donald trump's attorney, jenna ellis, was scheduled to testify before that same special grand jury. nbc's blayne alexander is in atlanta with the latest. so, blayne, what can you tell us? >> reporter: well, katy, good morning to you. there are certainly a lot of moving pieces. let's start with jenna ellis. of course, she was a former advisor to the trump campaign but for the purposes of this investigation and 2020, really what prosecutors are looking at is the role that she played in setting up several legislative hearings in which rudy giuliani came forward and made really a number of false claims, conspiracy theories, about the election here in

ryan riley on that letter from the national archives and what it tells us, msnbc legal analyst lisa rubin on donald trump's motion for a special master. and political investigative reporter for "the washington post" who has broken more stories on donald trump and his orbit than i can count. okay. ryan, this letter from the national archives, which they decided to post themselves, actually told us quite a bit of information. >> it really did and it is remarkable that the trump team was trying to get this out in some sort of fashion because it was exculpatory in some way. it is not exculpatory in any way and shows us several steps that the national archives, the fbi went through to try to head off what ultimately we went to now all the way in august. i mean, the back story on this, which "the washington post" has been reporting about for a long time as well i note is that they were trying to get a lot of these records for a year plus. this was all the way back in 2021 and then finally these documents in january that were returned to the national archives that included a bunch of top-secret