in — think they are looking to put mark meadows injail, _ think they are looking to put mark meadowsoss injail- meadows injail, i think they're| looking to put his boss injail or -et looking to put his boss injail or get a _ looking to put his boss injail or get a conviction. _ looking to put his boss injail or get a conviction. with - looking to put his boss injail or get a conviction. with17 - get a conviction. with17 codefendants— get a conviction. with17 codefendants and - get a conviction. with17 codefendants and the i get a conviction. with17 - codefendants and the president is not paying — codefendants and the president is not paying anyone's _ codefendants and the president is not paying anyone's legal - codefendants and the president is not paying anyone's legal bills, i not paying anyone's legal bills, depending _ not paying anyone's legal bills, depending on— not paying anyone's legal bills, depending on the _ not paying anyone's legal bills, depending on the jurisdiction, i not paying anyone's legal bills,| depending on the jurisdiction, a conviction— depending on the jur

that the court finds that the color of the office of white house chief of staff, which is what mark meadowseeded to prove, that he was acting under the color of the office, did not include working with or working for the trump campaign. so, essentially, these activities that meadows engaged in after the 2020 election allegedly related to trying to overturn georgia's election results had more to do with campaign work than had to do with his white house work. so, they don't meet the threshold. the other thing that i think is important to note is the judge goes on to say, even though he is making this decision about the meadows case, it's not going to have any effect about the outcome of other defendants. he's essentially going to let them go forward, put their arguments forward. we know jeffrey clark has a hearing scheduled to do this. we know a couple of people who served as fake electors for donald trump in georgia also have a special hearing. the judge is saying, i will hear all your arguments separately, and i will decide them. but it doesn't portend well for them that mark meadows did no

that would become an official duty of mark meadows to respond to that. it was a broad lay down from meadows inside. you're right in pointing to the crucial question here. in the ruling, the judge said he thought the charges did not involve what was at the heart of meadows's official duties. i think as this goes up on appeal, that will be the key question. was there any part of the indictment that was part of meadows is arguable official duties. i bet you will see appeals court judges, and perhaps even supreme court justices have to weigh in on that subject. >> fred, there are four other codefendants already making the same motion to have their case removed. donald trump may also do so himself. he suggested he might. putting aside donald trump, for the four other defendants, the argument i heard from legal experts is meadows's case was probably the best one. in other words, if someone was gonna get removed, it would be meadows. there are four other codefendants here, a harder case to make. some were claiming that they were federal officials because they we

on friday, steve jones issue -- mark meadows would have to face trial in fulton county state court afterts to remove the charges to federal court. the judge saying, quote, meadows cannot have acted in his role is a federal officer with respect to any efforts to influence, interfere with, disrupt, oversee, or change state elections. those activities are expressly delegated to the states. meadows has since filed a peel, but the really just bad news for any codefendant federal official who is hoping to avoid d.a., fani willis. including former president donald trump. speaking of avoiding d.a. fani willis's prosecution, a grand jury report was unveiled. it reveals a wide array of trump allies who were not indicted despite recommendations from the special grand jurors. the sprawling list included top republican names like senator lindsey graham, former senator david perdue and kelly loeffler, trump's former national security adviser, michael flynn, interim quarterback lawyer, for us epstein. joining me now, legal analyst for the host of the justice meadows podcast, glenn, let's start with tha

provided a road map for what prosecutors may use to shape their case against donald trump and mark meadowst trial. in her brief district attorney willis writes as a threshold matter under questioning meadows admitted that then-president trump had a personal interest in being re-elected and a personal interest in seeing the adverse election results in georgia, michigan, and other states overturned. in her book cassidy hutchinson recalls this moment with mark meadows. will you take a bullet for him, mark asked. undersnapped towards him in surprise, but his eyes were fixed on the stage. i tried to make a joke. it was the only thing i can think of on the spot. yeah, sure, but could it be to delay. we laughed. would you, i asked him. i would do anything, mark answered, looking over his shoulder at me to get him re-elected. cassidy hutchinson also reports in her bookmark meadows had a, quote, personal interest in getting donald trump re-elected saying i'll be the best chief of staff if i can keep him in office. the district attorney's brief tells the appeals court meadows also undertook actions

to formal government official. 5:30 pm, mark meadows lawyer renews the request for an emergency stay. 5:40 pm, the 11th circuit schedules oral arguments on the meadows motion for an emergency stay for friday. at 10:15 a.m., district attorney willis agreed with mark meadows request for an expedited appeal, since district attorney willis also wants the case to move as quickly as possible. the 11th circuit schedule issue today for the expedited appeal is even faster than what district attorney willis specifically requested. the appeals court said that mark meadows appeals brief is due monday, next monday, so terry 18th, with district attorney willis's response brief do exactly one week after that, with mark meadows now getting three more days to reply to the district attorney's brief. and with that schedule, the mark meadows appeal will surely be decided in the month of october, possibly early october. the question posed by the 11th circuit court of appeals surprised everyone yesterday when they asked the lip against to address the question does the statute permit former federal officer

willis. >> and we could talk for an hour about the mark meadows stuff but really the question is if mark meadows succeeds in getting his case removed to federal court, there are others who also want to do that using perhaps not the same argument but similar arguments that they had some sort of responsibility under federal law, dubious as paul says, that those claims might be. maybe jeffrey clark can say that he was going to be the attorney general of america and he has a reason to be doing what he was doing. but what is the consequence, if any of these people succeed in getting out from under fani willis's jurisdiction and tried in federal court. do they get tried? is it automatic if they remove their case they are still actually a federal trial? >> yes. the case would proceed in federal court as if it were in state court. if you remember, donald trump actually tried to do this in new york with the dea in new york's case. that motion was denied. obviously if meadows does successfully get his case removed, that would be a precedent for others to try although i think that it is very indivi

first of all, mark meadows says i was just helping donald trump. well, the president under the constitution has no specific responsibility, really no responsibility with regard to the administration of federal election. so, again, those are mainly legal decisions for the judge. this, i think, today is more just to make meadows think a little bit about either pleading and/or cooperating with d.a. willis. >> and mimi, we can talk for an hour about the mark meadows stuff, but really the question here is if mark meadows succeeds to getting his case removed to federal court, there are others who will want to do this using perhaps not the same argument but some arguments that they had responsibility under federal law, dubious as paul says though those claims might be -- maybe jeffrey clark can say he was going to be attorney general of america and he had a reason to be doing what he was doing. but what's the consequence if any of these people succeed get tried in federal court? by the way, do they get tried? is it automatic if they remove their case ther

which ruled obviously that mark meadows could not have his case removed to federal court but that it should go back down to state court. meadows is saying he could be irreparably harmed by this decision. he wants to appeal and have the judge put a pause on things while he appeals. if this judge doesn't do that, he's going to ask the appeals court to do that. generally you get a stay if you have a chance of winning on appeal, and this judge's opinion was pretty resounding that mark meadows didn't meet any of the tests to remove his case to federal court, and what the judge said is it was clear that mark meadows, when lobbying georgia state officials on behalf of donald trump, asking them to investigate bogus allegations of fraud and the election that he was doing that on behalf of the trump campaign, not as part of his role as the chief of staff to the president and the judge went through point by point all of his actions in a detailed ruling. hard for me to imagine that he would get this stay. anything is possible. the judge may decide out of a matter of fairness he would give it to m

because that's donald trump saying it to mark meadows. >> absolutely.hink, in addition to the substance of what she has to say, and obviously she has a lot a very direct evidence that was said to mark meadows, who is currently charged in georgia, and we will wait to see whether he is charged anywhere else -- but with respect to mark meadows, he so clearly a central witness. but there's a little bit more than that, and this is something that joyce and i know, as people who have done trial work. which is, if you think about her demeanor on your show, lawrence, last night, and her demeanor in the congressional hearings, the phrase wise beyond her years comes to mind and in some ways, when you think about her background and what she had to overcome in terms of her upbringing and also what she has been through in sort of transitioning from a loyal trump soldier to really shedding that, -- since somebody who is just a phenomenal witness. because she is so grounded and so centered as the water values are. so, when you are sizing up not just the substance of wh

mark meadows is a public officer, that means he qualifies to ask for removal, but the judge evaluates the conduct that he is charged with. and concludes that it was not part of meadows' official duties. in other words, not a real shocker here, right? trying to help your boss steal an election is not part of the chief of staff's official duties in serving the presidency. sounds like the work of the campaign at best, a criminal conspiracy at worst. and the judge says it will stay with the courts in georgia for a decision. >> charles, so i'm reading through this. this is what fascinated me because the argument that trying to overturn an election is part of your job would sort of be like the manchurian candidate is on trial and says, hey, look, i was trying to overthrow the government for a foreign government, but i was technically president or candidate at the time. here the thing about that. why does this end up being significant for trump? trump might say, hey, i have a stronger argument because i was actually president. i was simply investigating what i thought was fraud. why does thi

and in pat cipollone's case -- the president and mark meadows, that no, you can't do that? that's something you are doing a lot? >> it is. and i took the job with mark with the understanding that we -- , mark and i had an effective working relationship. mark but a lot of trust in me. mark, and i, ideologically, aren't very similar and -- i am more moderate republican and mark's. >> new jersey -- >> thank you. but somebody has to be able to say that -- somebody has to be the person to rein somebody in or just give advice you might not want to hear. and it might not be received well. but it was important that i always provide that to mark. i felt i was there to advise him and guide him in that job. was i a fish out of water at points? absolutely. but i think that is how a lot of the trump administration played out, and i think what sometimes i think is lost is that there were a lot of hair on fire. moments we were swimming to stay afloat. a lot of times we were drawn drowning. and whether it was pat saponi pat cipollone for myself -- our job to make sure he had the best advic

of course, we're waiting on mark meadows.emember, he testified and pushed in a separate hearing to have his case moved to federal court, arguing his role in all of this as the white house chief of staff meant that it should be a federal judge and federal judges that over see the case, and we have not seen a decision in that point of order in this case, and we may not by tomorrow so it's possible we could see mark meadows filing his not guilty plea, via a waiver. there's a lot of paperwork in that courtroom tomorrow. >> what is the strategy for those that decided not to waive their arraignment? >> well, one of the major issues here is how you want to be depicted in the public. how you want to show up. part of this will be theater, theater in what i mean is not the arraignment itself, necessarily, but what will follow in terms of public statements and public appearances, and it's shocking to some degree, because if you are a criminal defense attorney this is not what you want to see. we know with mark meadows and misty hampton,

, outer limits of mark meadows federal job as white house chief of staff. the judge wrote, meadows failed to provide sufficient evidence that these actions related to any legitimate purpose of the executive branch. mark meadows is now desperately afraid that the federal court ruling could mean that mark meadows could be spending the christmas season in prison. tonight, mark meadows filed emergency motion, asking the 11th circuit court of appeals to state judge jones's ruling to, quote, prevent irreparable loss to meadows writes. this follows an earlier attempt by mark meadows today to stay the case through a motion filed in federal district court to pause the judge's order banning the appeals process and that motion. mike meadows lawyers argue that georgia state judge, scott mcafee, has not ruled yet on the issue of severing the other defendants from the two who requested a speedy trial. they wrote, at a minimum, the court should stay the remand order to protect meadows from a conviction pending appeal. absent a stay, the state will continue seeking to try m

saying >> up to that day, mark meadows and i were tied as never having been drunk in our lives. i still have not gotten accidentally drunk. you're going to have to pull it off somehow sneaky one of those counts around my office. >> i've been switching labels and you can figure it out. >> not a true next door, i am afraid of that. i am very careful about every single beverage i pick up there. >> see now, i seem like the creep in the bar. >> rachel, great interview, thank you for doing it, we're going to get jen psaki reaction to it, because she lives the life we just talk about in a same white house. >> excellent, thank you lawrence. >> thank you,, rachel. >> joining us now is, jen this network and has experience working into administrations in the white house. jen, such an extraordinary interview with someone peter welch who, like me, as i've read the book, i know those rooms, i know the white house chief of staff, i know the fireplace, i know where her desk would be, you know it better than i do. these people are very vivid to you. what did you get from rachel interview tonight

mark meadows made an appeal. appeal to what we call the 11th circuit court of appeals. now there are 13 federal circuit. the 11th circuit is traditionally known as the second or third most conservative circuit. generally speaking, if you're mark meadows you probably want a more conservative circuit. whoever loses in the 11th circuit can try to get the u.s. supreme court to take this case but you can never force the u.s. supreme court to take a case. always up to them whether they want it or not. this has important implications for separation of powers, federal versus state authority. so we could be in for two more levels of appeal. >> one of the things everybody was watching this meadows-specific issue was looking at it from a broader perspective, too. what does this mean for the other 18 people involved in this case. what's your sense? >> yeah. there's a couple other people who we know have sought or may seek to move their case to federal court. jeffrey clark wants to get the federal court. trump's team said lat

here we finally get our hands on the transcript from mark meadows hearing on monday. what's your biggest take away? >> hey, jonathan. i read it, and when you read it and when the viewers read it, the wheels start falling off and about page 100. he holds it together fairly well, gives a fairly engaging account of what he does is chief of staff. he just does everything, he works all the time. and then we you spoke to, him some of the things that he has said earlier, he just can't hold together. he really has no idea what the presidential duties are in elections under article two. he kind of takes a pass on it. and as it goes, he's trying to dig himself out of a hole with a shovel is how this reads. he just continues to make it worse until, again, his attorney tries to save him and page 148, which is what y'all were looking at. he manages to volunteer like, oh no, i was just trying to help the president, trying to help the campaign. i forget his exact words. but it's just not good. >> it also makes me think, isn't it a hatch act violation? but that's a whole other conver

he has seen mark meadows take the stand, and he has seen a written detailed ruling rejecting mark meadowspoint by point, and say, where did mark meadows fall short, and where can we address this. he is going to make the motion, because there is too much to be gained going to federal court, but he is going to try to gain as much information. >> is it possible that one of the attorneys is in the hearing? >> no, any time you have a multi defendant case, and in this case, 19 defendants, i expect all of the lawyers to be in the case, and if not making a motion, they are sitting in the back to learn about the judge, the prosecution's tactics and what is working and doesn't work, and it is one of the advantages of being one of many defendants in the case. >> one of the few. thank you, elie. sara? >>> breaking news for you at this hour, the five americans that were detained in iran for more than five years are finally out of iranian air space. we watched them get on a plane, and we now know that seven total people have made their way out of iranian air space. we are expecting to see them arrive i

fani willis is expected to reply to an appeal to former chief of staff mark meadows. meadows is trying to get his case moved to federal court. meadows made the unusual claim that stealing an election was part of his job description as chief of staff. he argued that it is, quote, impossible to draw a bright line distinction between a chief of staff engaging in official and political activity. meadows lost that argument, but he's now appealing that decision. the second deadline is in the special counsel's election interfere. trump is expected to respond in court to the doj's gag order request. the special counsel had asked for a quote narrow gag order, citing trump's, ot established practice of issuing inflammatory public statements targeted at individuals or institutions that present an obstacle or challenge to him. joining me now to break it all down is former watergate prosecutor nick ackerman. so, nick. >> yes. >> let's talk about mark meadows. >> absolutely. >> what do you think of this argument that it's within the job description of chief of staff to basically try

the judge in fulton county rejecting mark meadows' bid to move his case to federal court. adows' actions to help trump overturn the election were not connected to his official duties as white house chief of staff. many say that if meadows failed to move his case out of fulton county, bad news for the other 18 co-defendants, including donald trump. now the fulton county sheriff, this is his first interview since former president trump was arrested and processed at the fulton county jail, which, you run. thank you so much for being with me tonight. so you have got this breaking news. the judge saying the trial for mark meadows is going to stay in your county, which could be a sign that a lot of other cases are going to stay in your county, including that for the former president himself. fani willis, the d.a., says she wants to hold a joint trial for all of them starting next month. she says it would be four months. the judge said it could be eight. we saw your security preparations, how tight, how involved, how intensive and exhausting for the one day trump surrendered. how

mark meadows was on that call. we also know that he made another of calls to reach out other georgia state officials and so his involvement in that pressure campaign has always been a part of this narrative. as charles was mentioning, though, the key question before the judge here was who was he acting in his federal capacity as the chief of staff to the president or was he acting as a part of the political campaign citing that these were political actions, and that the case can't be moved or shouldn't be moved to a federal court. one of things to keep in mind here is how each of these decisions that we are seeing and the many motions that we expected to have already come and will come in the weeks ahead, related to the georgia election subversion case, is that they're giving us a little insight into how some of these were going to unfold. let's not forget that we already saw the motion from ken chesbrough's attorneys to try to sever his case, from us in the polls, and also from the other 18 defendants. it doesn't

your reaction to mark meadows' decision to appeal this ruling?> i'm glad he appealed quickly because it will make it easier for the 11th circuit to rule against him quickly. there is no serious basis for the appeal. the judge's 49-page opinion, judge johnson, very carefully reasoned. but the basis of it is essentially that it is not part of the executive function of the president or his chief of staff to try to meddle in a state election, especially to overturn it and deprive the citizens of the state of their representation. so, i don't think the appeal will succeed. it'll get a little bit of delay, but i think the appeal will fail. the u.s. supreme court will probably deny review. and then what started in georgia will stay in georgia. >> do you think that the ruling has any ramifications for whether or not the former president might be successful in moving his case to federal court? obviously the issues involved for him are different for meadows. >> they're different but if anything, they're worse. meadows could at least say, look, i was doing

barbara, good morning, we'll start with this new order from mark meadows federal judge who said, that's not gonna work, or not taking your case in federal court. putting aside that meadows has already filed his notice of appeal. i want to get your top line fall thoughts barb on whether not you think this new ruling, from judge jones will act as a deterrent for other codefendants in fulton county from trying to remove their cases. >> yes, katie, i do not see anybody else succeeding. mark went first, and really, it is not a surprise to me that the judge ruled the way he did. the real question is, when these individuals were acting in the kind described in the indictment, were they acting within the scope of their federal employment. the reason they get paid by the taxpayers. or were they instead acting in a political capacity. on behalf of the trump campaign. what the judge found here is that the bulk of the conduct by mark meadows was political, and not governmental execution of the law. so for that reason, it belongs in state court. i don't think any of the other defendants who are fede

quote, one morning last month in an atlanta federal courtroom mark meadows, former president trump's chief of staff was in the hot seat, and he put himself there. meadows lawyer made the surprise move of asking his client to testify in an effort to have the georgia election interference case against him moved to a federal court. a venue where his chances of acquittal or having the case thrown out may be better than in the state court where he's been charged. "the new york times" goes on to report how meadows did himself grave legal harm in an exchange in which meadows appears to lie about his own role in the fake lectors plot. meadows hit a snag, a prosecutor asked whether he had, quote, any role in coordinating the bogus electors used in a last-ditch effort to keep trump in power after he lost the 2020 election. i did not, he replied. prosecutor then introduced into the record a december 2020 e-mail mr. meadows wrote to a trump campaign staff member. in it, mr. med to wrote this, quote, we just need to have someone coordinating the lectors for the states end quote. the exchange, whic

in a filing with federal district court judge jones, who denied mark meadows motion to move his case to federal court, district attorney willis said that mike meadows was very unlucky to succeed in his appeal of judge jones ruling, and that the claim that mark meadows could be unfairly harmed by the case going to trial in state court before the federal appeals court rules, was extremely unrealistic. district attorney willis said the defendant is already seeking expedited procedures on penal and even the most optimistic timeline for this case would not see a verdict reached for months. donald trump's criminal defense lawyers have filed a series of motions based on the work of other lawyers in the case, representing codefendants. the trump lawyers filed a motion to adopt co-defended giuliani's preliminary motion to quash and motion to adopt chesbrough's gym or to count one along with a motion to adopt codefendant chesbrough's motion to dismiss the indictment, and a motion to adopt codefendant ray smith's motion to quash the indictment. donald trump's lawyers have indicated they might ev

by the way, not just for mark meadows. but also for donald trump, should he file one. the reasoning here applies just as much to donald trump, judge jones has explained why this case is going ahead in the state court. so, meadows has already filed an appeal. jonathan, as we noted. i suspect the reason for that is not because meadows or trump thinks they are going to win this thing. they are just trying to hope to delay this. they are so afraid of going to trial. that is why i think fani willis, the prosecutor's next move in georgia, she's going to ask that federal court of appeals and say, look, we can expedite this massively. let's have meadows file his brief on tuesday, we will respond on friday. we will quarrel argument the next monday, september 18th. you decide this by the end of the week. that is what should happen here. >> so, neal, donald trump's lawyers said yesterday, trump, quote, may decide to move his case from fulton county to federal court. how does the decision today effect that decision? or does it not matter since the whole goal is to delay to begin wi

as the chief of staff, not mark meadows as mark meadows. e of the chief of staff meaning that i worked for the institution and the executive branch. mark and i had a great working relationship most of the time. you know, he trusted me, he empowered me, he turned to me for a lot of things. and i was young in that role, but i think mark was also able to see that in certain circumstances especially in washington when some people would allow somebody young and female to not be in positions like that, mark was able to look past that and see that what matters is the confidence that somebody has and the ability to be confident and effective operator. so mark and i had a great working relationship at the white house. i didn't really ever expect us to have a non -- i never expected us to have a working relationship outside of the white house just because ideologically as republicans we fell into different camps. i consider myself a more moderate republican, and he has a reputation of being far more conservative as the former chairman of the freedom c

for example, what was mark meadows burning in the white house office fireplace. at was her reply when meadows asked her whether she would take a bullet for donald trump? hutchinson, as you might recall, was thrust into the national spotlight with her bombshell televised testimony from the january 6 committee. but that moment, that moment, her testimony, that almost never happened. she had already spoken to the comm committee twice behind closed doors and it was her third closed-door deposition when she chose to come forward and testify fully and honestly and openly about what she really saw and heard in the west wing. >> cassidy hutchinson was a top aide to mark meadows. working a few steps abay from the oval office and watching as her boss's reel from the 2020 election loss and fought it with lies and wild schemes. >> i remember feeling scared an nervous for what could happen on january 6. >> at just 26 years old, hutchibson was a star witness in the january 6 special committee hearings in june 2022. >> miss hutchinson was in a gs po to know a great deal about th

meadows' attorneys are intervening asking that judge to put his decision on hooltd essentially while mark meadows can appeal it to the 11th circuit court of appeals. meadows' attorneys are arguing that if it proceeds in state court and meadows is convicted, that this would be offensive to his rights and they should let the full appeal play out. they are especially arguing this because the fulton county district attorney's office has said that she wants to see all 19 defendants in this case including donald trump, including mark meadow, go to trial in october 2023. the state court judge has been pretty skeptical of that time line. he is expected to make some decisions this week about when all of these defendants, including potentially mark meadows, could go to trial in state court. in the meantime though, mark meadows again waiting on a federal judge to intervene and potentially decide his fate. sara murray, cnn, washington. >>> meantime donald trump is asking a court to dismiss most of the charges against him in the georgia case. his filings on monday suggest that he wants to use the same legal a

the ruling goes on like this with judge jones not buying what mark meadows was selling. that his involvement in the phone call between donald trump and georgia secretary of state, brad raffensperger, was somehow federal work, that his arrangement of a call between trump and other georgia elections official was, again, somehow federal work. that a meeting with a michigan state official was, again, federal work. judge jones was not agreeing with any of that. in fact, the only thing mr. meadows is accused of doing that judge jones finds was within his duties as chief of staff, was the fact that mr. meadows sent a text message to republican congressman, scott perry. as judge jones writes, near the end of this ruling, meadows was required to come forward with competent proof of his factual contention that his allegations, his actions, involving challenges to the outcome of the georgia election results were within his role of chief of staff. his efforts fall short. tonight, just before we got on the air, lawyers for mr. meadows told the court that they plan to appeal this ruli

mark meadows is in the process of trying to move all of the proceedings against him from state court to federal court. a judge has heard hours of arguments on, that and he got additional briefings on that, and we are waiting essentially at any moment for him to make the decision of whether meadows met the threshold that everything that he did related to the 2020 election or his activities were all stemmed from his role as white house chief of staff. if the judge decides that he has met that bar, he can move his case to federal court, and a number of the other defendants are going to be watching to see if meadows is successful, including former president donald trump's team who is looking at the possibility of trying to move trump's case to federal court as well. >> absolutely. great to see you, sara. thank you for jumping on to bring us this. >> and also, new cnn exclusive reporting of where and whom and what special counsel jack smith is focused on right now in the federal election subversion case. look, this is the situation. donald trump's trial date is set for march, but what we

when mark meadows took the stand, he admitted to other crimes. him saying i want to be removed, saying i was just doing my job, i think inadvertently admitted to other crimes. crimes known as the hatch act. kids are not allowed to mix your day job with politics and political activity. so it was a big risk, but he's hoping to get immunity. >> there's a lot of that mixing in the administration. a lot of gray area. >> appreciate it, elie honing. next, new cnn polling on republicans willingness to accept a trump presidency, even if charges against him are true. we'll get chris christie's take on that -- later, new video of an escaped killer on the run as the search for him, the man hunt, continues and intensifies. is strong enamel- nothing beats it. new pronamel active shield actively shields the enamel to defend against erosion and cavities. i think that this product is a gamechanger for my patients- it really works. here's how tommy lost 30 lbs on noom weight. i'm tom. noom helped him use psychology to lose weight. the mindful aspect made me feel m

you enjoined mark meadows t fortin -- team when he became chief of staff. fair to say you are in the inner circle and i wonder how that kind of she routed to your sense of this idea of loyalty we hear again and again. cassidy: i took a job in legislative affairs knowing that i wanted to pursue a career in public service and that my loyalty was to my country. when i took the job with mark meadows, i still have that mindset, that conversation with him that my loyalty and my duty and obligations were to the office of the chief of staff, not mark meadows as an individual, and i still felt that loyalty but i also felt it towards the principles that i served. and that is a notion that is expected in trump world and when you full to from that, you were seen as somebody that you have a target on your back. you become subjected to either donald trump attacking you or you get exiled from that world. amna: it sounds like a really oppressive environment. is that the right word? cassidy: in hindsight, looking back now with the perspective that i have, i would say suffoc

we saw how poorly that worked out for mark meadows. on monday for jeff clark, who was a federal official at the time, purportedly, as well as three fake georgia electors 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 wil

>> mark meadows and the clark case are still on the ropes. they still have a chance. ose call. yes, clark and meadows have the burden here. but that burden is a pretty light burden in the world of burdens. it's not beyond a reasonable doubt. and all they have to show is that they have a colorable defense. it may be a suing defense, it may ultimately be an unsuccessful defense that their federal officership allows them, or permanen permanen permits thl court. it just needs to be plausible. and the northern district of georgia and the supreme court had even observed that the federal officer authority, yes, ewe right, is someone in that division acts outside of their authority getting involved in elections? absolutely. but courts have said that the federal officer removal statute applies even where that officer acts outside of his or her authority. soer it's a thorny question that has yet to be resolved. yes, is meadows if you're laying odds, would you say that meadows will stay in state court? yes, probably. but it's on appeal. clark today will probably ultimately meet t

>> i think it's very bad for mark meadows' case.le the judge was very express in saying he wasn't really trying to influence his thinking on the other cases, it's clear he did and he does, because of the very clear and and a very careful 49-page opinion he wrote that is not likely to be overturned on appeal. >> now donald trump's lawyers say they are considering asking to move his case to federal court as well. doesn't that ruling for mark meadows kind of obviate any kind of move like that? >> they're different situations. one of the points the judge made about mark meadows is that he, like all federal employees, is under the so-called hatch act, which prohibits campaign activity by federal employees focusing on the executive branch in particular. the president, though, is exempted from the hatch act. so he's outside that. but yet the president still has to show he was acting under color of his office. disrupting a state constitutional process that's delegated by the constitution to the state of georgia is not an easy hurdle to over

at any moment a federal district judge could rule on mark meadows request to move out of fulton countyked for last week. now we're waiting to see how the judge ruled. before now, meadows is set to be arraigned in court tomorrow along with any of the other defendants who haven't waived their right to an arraignment. donald trump waived his and submitted a not guilty plea in writing. let's bring in former senior investigative counsel for the january 6th committee, deputy chief of staff adam kinzinger and former director of the new york democratic state party. remind people what's at stake here in this meadows of the georgia case specifically. why we're waiting for what will happen next. >> so there's the criminal statute that allows individual charge with state crimes if that person is a federal officer and charged for a crime that was conducted under color of law, they did the thing they're charged with because they were a federal employee, they can go to court and say i want to remove that case to federal court for basically a neutral jury, a neutral forum. you can think way back when

mark meadows fits that bill in spades. he was not in the public spotlight by any stretch before going to congress. he had played out his time in the congress before he went to the white house. and then once in the white house, he was one of the biggest trump sycophants in the white house. i think it runs much deeper than being yelled at. he was part of a coordinated effort to do a lot of anticonstitutional things that did not respect the rule of law but furthered donald trump's needs. and you can see this across the board with most of his advisers. >> tim, i agree with you. let me say to widen this conversation out to what jack smith may be interested in learning from mark meadows. here's cassidy hutchinson on just that. >> after mr. giuliani had left the campus that evening, i went back up to our office and i found mr. meadows in his office on the couch. he was scrolling through his phone. i remember leaning against the doorway saying, is that an interesting conversation with rudy? it sounds like we're going to go to the

let's go to embassies, julie tsirkin, on the judges decision to deny mark meadows request to move his case to federal court. julie, how is this ruling complicating meadows and his codefendants legal strategies? >> alex, it is a major setback. not only for mark meadows case, but also for the other five codefendants who want to make a similar move and made a similar action. that includes former president, trump, who this week said he was considering making that move, trying to throw his case out of the fulton county jurisdiction and into the federal court. that could impact his legal strategy moving forward. >> former trump chief of staff, mark meadows, dealt a major blow with the georgia election interference case. u.s. district judge, steve, jones denied his attempt to move the case to federal court. saying his alleged involvement in pressuring state officials to overturn the 2020 election result was not part of meadows work as a government official. jones writing meadows efforts to prove he was acting in his formal capacity as a white house employee and not on behalf of the trump cam

isn't successful because it's the exact same strategy that mark meadows is trying to deploy.was serving as an official, and it creates the opportunity to get into federal court but achieve some type of dismissal. so we have two upcoming hearings i want to highlight for your viewers on september 18th, there are two evidentiary hearings and on september 20th, two evidentiary hearings for the four attempts who have attempted to move to federal court so far. it includes jeff clark who was an assistant united states attorney at the time of this complete, you know, 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