host: so does this go to merrick garland or does this go to the special counsel? guest: i think based on the referral by merrick garland to the special counsel, this would be within the power of the special -- authority in the special counsel, that as well as the mar-a-lago documents taken out of the white house. host: why is that? guest: because the way the regulation works, just so people are clear, the special counsel takes jack smith out of the direct line of command to merrick garland. merrick garland can step in but has to expire to congress why he might interfere with what mr. smith does but referral gives the topic he is responsible for. one is january but only the top brass on january 6, the people at the capitol, the 900 plus people now in the criminal justice system, that stays with local u.s. attorney's office in washington and the second big topic that has been carved out from maine justice to jack smith is the mar-a-lago documents investigation. host: this week jack smith asked officials in three states with communications with former president trump

whether charges are filed or is it up to merrick garland? what what's the deal the special prosecutor? well, under the under this and the special prosecutor statute. >> the special prosecutor has essentially the discretion to do and whether or not based they go to the make that finding that to the attorney general before they go forward? i think it's a matter between the special prosecutor and the general. but under the special counsel statute, they have the authority to independently to bring in action against for missus. expect, for example, one of the things that none of us really fallen very much was that special counsel barr pointed toward the end of a stir. but when it went after the michael steele to for a lot of charges lost every single one of them. it was well beyond the time that barr was in office. so this person, i think the name anymore went off on his own file charges when federal court what the trial lost. time moves on. jack smith can do the same thing. you can find his own charges during his own case and decide when to brin

my guess is also that that would be something merrick garland will be doing as well.ination will be made, i suspect, in washington, d.c. >> all right. general holder, thank you for your time today. we'll be right back with much more "face the nation." >>> we turn now to the economy and the mixed signals about its future. brian moynihan is the ceo and chairman of the board of bank of america, and it'ssood to be bac. it's been a couple years. last time was right when the pandemic started. >> i know. i know. and i remember what a chilling moment that was. and yet we are still living through the implications of that pandemic. your firm is predicting a recession in 2023, but a brief and a mild one. i wonder when it hits and what a mild recession feels like for the average american. >> just to sort of be concrete on numbers, they basically picked negative growth around 1% or so for the next -- for the first three quarters of '23, and then comes back to positive growth. that means the year is negative overall, but it's just 1%. you think about a recession, we were sitting he

many merrick garland ignores what "the times" and the guardian and -- if merrick garland ultimately dunksfrom the trump era doj, nobody knows how future administrations will use this power. in a time of rising and open calls to overthrow elections and stifle the press and do authoritarian things on the right, to censor or pun tish press. there are many examples separate from the last president. you have governor ron desantis who's rumored to be a possible presidential candidate. he's cracked down on the press and played favorites. to a senator blasting a landmark win, the "the new york times" victory over nixon in the famous pentagon papers case. that's taught in law schools and often hailed as a bipartisan standard for confronting bipartisan power and abuse. conservatives say the federal government is powerful and you need freedom and support for free actors to check government power. that's how the pentagon papers case has long been thought, but this week senator tom cotton says that case is wrong, and he has plans to limit press freedoms arguing basically the losing side in that landma

-- top merrick garland constitutional law when he was a law student -- and professor tribe will joins next. oi us next. research shows people remember commercials with nostalgia. so to help you remember that liberty mutual customizes your home insurance, here's one that'll really take you back. it's customized home insurance from liberty mutual!!! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ hey guys, detect this: living with hiv, i learned that i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is for some adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment or replacing their current hiv-1 regimen. detect this: no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. research shows people who take hiv treatment as prescribed and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit hiv through sex. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you take dofetilide. taking dovato with dofetilide can cau

merrick garland has made that public. if i'm sitting at d.o.j., my position toward congress would be when it comes to a referral is thanks but no thanks. the last thing you want is the appearance from a democratic panel. that will make it look political. better for d.o.j. to have no referral at all. >> you have an interesting perspective here because you've worked boatth on the hill and a d.o.j. what's the risk-reward for this committee to recommend the referral? >> picking up on elie thought, if you are a member of congress, you must commit yourself to the first co-equal branch of government and has the power to cut off the salaries of the exec executive branch. that is their right and duty. it's not going to drive a prosecution, no one will go to jail because of something congress says. it's really about how the branches interact with each other. the right thing is for congress to issue criminal referrals. >> we just heard that house republican leader, kevin mccarthy, who may be speaker within a few weeks is about to ho

you mentioned merrick garland, they decided to not hold a hearing to become a supreme court justice.emocrats could've voted on that. they could've forced republicans to take a stand and the people would've had a chance to weigh in more aggressively. they chose not to. that really highlights a big source of dysfunction in the united states senate today with the confirmation process. both lawmakers on the right and left seem to be more interested in using the senate as a sounding board and media platform so that they can make statements that appeal to the people and make forward leaning public addresses instead of rolling up their sleeves, looking themselves in the mirror and i will hustle and scrape and do everything i can to prevail to get my nominee confirmed. to get my bill passed or get a vote on my amendment. we don't see that anymore. we see a drive-by vote and lots of talking points, lots of ads and other things. we see very little action in the united states senate today and that speaks to his dysfunction. host: from san diego california, on the republican line, this is robert

they blocked merit portland -- merrick garland from being on there. think everybody on the supreme court is fine except for thomas and cavanaugh. -- brett kavanaugh. they should not be up there. they probably would not even be able to get a good job with those kinds of charges. it is ridiculous that they blocked brett kavanaugh's sexual violence tips and trump covered it all up so that he wouldn't be on the supreme court. -- would be on the supreme court. i think it is an honorable position and i think they should have a life term. host: lambert in new york, independent. we will go to you, next. caller: good morning. i have no problem with the structure of the court, even in terms of the different people. my problem is how it is hard -- the constitution and the laws of the land are agreeing between -- an agreement between individuals. and if someone violates those agreements and the lower court, you will know if it is being violated. they make loss that are attractive loss and they apply to you as a person -- laws that are -- laws and they apply to yo

"wall street journal" about this story saying loudon county pages merrick garland saying that it shouldave taken the election of a new governor, meaning youngkin, an executive order for parents to get the real story of what happened to make public schools accountable. mr. garland hasn't rescinded his memo. the loudon county superintendent was just indicted on three miss demeanor counts. this all goes back to when the parents were angry at that school board meeting for what happened in the bathroom to a child. >> thank you for asking that question. merrick garland owes every parent, conservative parent and apology. he used that concerned parent, whose daughter was victimized in the bathroom as the poster boy and basis for calling parents domestic terrorists. now a grand jury has indicted the school officials for their failure to act appropriately. garland owes the american families an apology. but don't expect it because when they are caught being wrong, this administration, like the border patrol whipping migrant and there is a secure border, they won't apologize. merrick garland has no

doing merrick garland has been very careful about getting out in front of the investigation.nk when you talk to people, especially when i talked to sources at the white house and on capitol hill, what you really see is the doj that is what the democrats want them to be, which is independent, seen as not doing just the busy political work of whatever the president wants. they're very clear that they want to make sure that while donald trump is a political being and that they want to be, and they've had this special counsel to be independent, that this is still a doj that doesn't want to be seen is doing political work. >> joyce, for months we've been talking about the rise of hate, antisemitism in this country. but the fact that the dhs is now putting out an official warning about these threats, what does that tell you about what the feds are up against here? they know a lot more than we do. >> it's incredibly disturbing to think that we are only just now focusing on this situation. look, staff, this is something that has been a pervasive problem in the partly country i live i

over the weekend, attorney general merrick garland was present for the lighting of the national menorah in d.c. to mark the beginning of hanukkah. he denounced the rise of anti-semitism and called on americans to stand up against hate and bigotry. you, rabbi. hello everyone. i'm so happy to celebrate the first night of hanukkah with all of you here in our nation's capital. it is my great honor to lead the united states department. >> before world war i, america gave my family refuge from persecution. my grand mother was one of five children born in what is now, three made it to the united states including my grandmother. two of them did not make it. those two were killed in the holocaust. if not for america, there is little doubt that the same would have happened to my grandmother. this country took her in and under the protection of the laws, she was able to live without fear of persecution. that protection is what distinguishes america from so many of the countries. the protection of law. the role of law is the --rule of law is the foundation of our government. i will never stop worki

because merrick garland, jack smith said that's for our trump investigations. they haven't received a referral yet. that said the committee might want to make a strong sort of final political statement in its final days and if they do make a referral they're going to have to figure out what does that look like? do they name names and specify donald trump? do they specify those around him, john eastman, jeffrey clark, rudy giuliani and michael flynn? do they specify what particular crimes might have been committed? also important, will the committee give all their evidence over to doj? doj has been asking for that evidence for months now. they've gotten some of it but not all. we know because merrick garland told us, he said the ahis press conference, we would like to have all the transcripts and evidence so that we can use it in the ordinary course of investigations. the committee members since then said they'll get it but if they do it'll be important information for the criminal investigation. >> the lingering things related to subpoenas that haven't been res

what impact does that have on merrick garland's thinking? on the doj? possibly on donald trump?think we are now at this point that the justice department, the new special counsel is going to have to indict trump or explain why they are not indicting him. now, that's certainly possible that they won't -- prosecutors have discretion, but the case of the violation -- i'm sorry it's technical 18 usc371, conspireing, working to subvert a lawful function of government is right there in plain sight. >> huh. well, attorney general merrick garland says the justice department will continue its work to hold accountable those responsible for trying to overturn the 2020 election. the ag made the comments at a news conference yesterday while praising the verdict in the oath keepers seditious conspiracy trial. on tuesday, a federal jury found the group's founder stewart rhodes and his deputy kelly meggs guilty of seditious conspiracy. three other members were convicted of various felonies in connection with the january 6th attack on the capitol. >> these convictions were the result of tireless

that has to go to the attorney general, merrick garland.rrick garland has to sign off. whether they're going to charge or not, look, we know the committee has provided a solid foundation of evidence. we can't know everything they have. we know more next week. in my view based on my time as a prosecutor, i think there is a rock solid foundation for prosecutors to move on. >> thank you. we'll take a quick break. we'll be right back. that l lets you shop over 17,000 cars from home. creating a coast-to-coastst network to deliver your car as soon as tomorrow.w. recruiting an army of customomr advocates to make your experience incredible. and putting you in control of the whole thing, with powerful technology. that's why we've become the nation's fastest growing retailer, because our customers love it. see for yourself at carvana.com ♪ energy demands are rising. and the effects are being felt everywhere. that's w at chevron, we're increasing production in the permian basin by 15%. and we're projected to reach 1 million baels of o per day by 2025.

josh campbell, riverside california. >> our thanks to josh for that, today attorney general merrick garlandaddressed the first seditious conspiracy convictions in connection with the january 6th attack on on te capitol. plus, a look at where the oath keepers of a group stand today with its founder and other leaders likely going to prison for a very long time. next, and later, incredible images still coming in from china's people later continue to push back against the state. ♪ what will you do? will you make something better? create something new? our dell technologies advisors can provide you with the tools and expertise you need to bring out the innovator in you. my name is wendy, i'm 51 years old, and i'm a hospital administrator. when i talk to patients you can just see from here up when you're wearing a mask. and i have noticed those lines beginning to really become not so much moderate but more severe. i'm still wendy and i got botox® cosmetic. and i'm really happy with the results because they're very subtle, and i feel like i look like myself, but just less lines. botox® cosmetic is

if they do decide to submit criminal referrals, they go to the department of justice and merrick garland. garland then would have a decision to make. should the matters be handled individually or to the newly appointed special counsel jack smith overseeing the larger investigation into trump and his role in january 6 and the attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election. and then either garland or jack smith will have to make it even bigger decision, do they prosecute? this is no longer hypothetical. it is no longer academic. the ball is in the doj's court. now i want to turn to matt miller. matt, thank you so much for joining me. given everything that is happening here, this moment we're in which isn't -- this kind of, i don't want to say limbo, key moment when the committee turns it over to the doj. how do you think the convictions the doj received yesterday, how does that inform all of this when we look at other targets in terms of january 6 and the prosecution? >> there was real internal debate about whether they should bring the charges or stick with lesser charges like they

that could just be a letter to merrick garland as part of their report and merrick garland decides what to do with it. >> both of you tell me if i'm wrong and i know you will because that's the relationship that we, have it seems the discussion is more on the latter rather than the former. no? >> look, i think this is eformgsly complicated. i think you've hit on it and ryan has hit on it. you could see, an historic number of referrals here. i mean when we're talking about criminal referrals in the past, that i've covered, and i've covered this for a long time, you're talking about specific individuals here and, there steve bannon, mark meadows, they were specific, they didn't respond to a subpoena, and i mean you could be talking, you know, high single digits, dozens of referrals, i mean it depends on how far they want to go, and your point, what you opened with, how important do they want to go down the scheme to overturn the january 6th, or the 2020 elections, how far do they want to go? and do they start with trump? do they start with meadows? do they start with other white house sta

>> merrick garland is known for being very thorough, very cautious, very steady. you put all those things together, he's been in no hurry to get things done, but he's moved along at his own pace. we see now with jack smith coming on, an effort to really move things at a faster pace. it seems that garland is thinking to himself, it's time to really put this together. yes, i think the stuff from the committee will help. he probably already had a lot of that material anyway. and so now it's one thing to make charges. it's other thing to really have the facts to go along with it. i suspect garland will go ahead not so much because he's pressured from the select committee but because he's been putting together a very well-constructed case, and it will pop. it will pop in the not too distant future. >> let me ask you, larry. doj -- even if doj doesn't bring any charges against him, trump has announced that he's running for president again. what kind of a tarnish will having that, especially that last charge, aiding an insurrection -- how much will democrats use that in

we had watched merrick garland with her. the republicans change the rules so they could get the supreme court justice they wanted and they keep changing the rules. when you talked everyday people, our communities understand the impact supreme court has on our lives. our members of congress, not all of them but many of them, act as though you don't have to worry about it. we will pass a law and it will change everything in this cream court has shown us they don't care about laws. they care about controlling power. when we talk to everyday people about the court, we are saying when you vote, your vote has so much power. that means when you vote for the right candidate, they will have the opportunity to put supreme court justices and federal lower or justices on the bench. that's when we have our day in court. we have to have a pipeline of justice to make that happen. when rbd passed away -- when our bg passed away -- when rbg passed away, they said the court was broken. when the rules aren't working, the republicans change the

i think merrick garland in bringing in special counsel jack smith has tied his hands because garland'sthink would be devoid of the political considerations, would simply be nose down to the grindstone evaluating what is the conduct and what was the violation of law. if so, he makes a recommendation to merrick garland. if smith looks only at the facts and if the facts are that he took documents that didn't belong to him, whether they are classified or not, people get hung up on that issue, it really doesn't matter, takes them to mar-a-lago and doesn't can give them back, so smith says he broke the law, you know, got to prosecute him. how does garland say, well, i'm not so sure. he is a former president. i think it probably happens. i think it probably happens. what i say to rinado is that a large part of the country will then say, if you remember the peggy lee song, "is that all there is?" they looked at him in georgia, in new york, the feds looked at him, in the end all they could get him for is that he took the documents to mar-a-lago because he liengd to have that stuff around to imp

i think merrick garland has tried to appoint a special counsel. that act in and of itself was viewed to be a political act. and the amount of detail that is going to come out in this report is going to make it very, very difficult for him or jack smith to decline to prosecute. the public has been detailed. what do they think they can get convictions on. the ones they don't choose,ing the ones they do choose, will be heavily politicized. >> yeah. so which of the charges that the committee is expected to refer to doj carries the most weight legally? >> i think it's probably the insurrection is likely to carry a lot of weight. >> really? >> and certainly the obstruction of the official proceeding carries a lot of weight. those are very different. different pieces of proof. the insurrection, you probably need more of a link to trump himself. but as a former prosecutor, one thing i would be thinking about is how to explain this best to a jury. there is a huge amount of legal analysis they're doing. lots of commentators and analysts are doing it about w

the question for jack smith who doesn't have to sit here and think as merrick garland would, i'm in theinet of the president of the united states, who defeated donald trump, oh, this is going to look like a banana republic. we don't want to be part of this. jack smith is i'm a prosecutor. i have a question to ask, can i prosecute this case and another element is, can you probably win it before a jury. that's his job. that's what he's going to do and he's going to look at that. >> thank you. >> an interesting thing -- yeah, thank you so much. they're going to release this report, part of it today, all of it wednesday. the justice department is going to learn a lot too, they don't know everyone that interviewed, they haven't seen the transcripts of the interviews. >> we don't know how much it'll expand what they know, but surely it will. it will give them a breath of information. >> thank you for being here. >> glad to be here. >>> president zelenskyy's message of peace blocked from the world cup. we have exclusive cnn reporting on how he is reacting this morning. >>> the people have spok

merrick garland works for joe biden and ultimately smith works for merrick garland.he pretense of having a special counsel is an attempt to pretend that the investigation of president trump or anybody subject to a special counsel is somehow going to be done in a perfect nonhuman way but it's just not true. i think that's what we should really say what smith does is ultimately the responsibility of garland and what garland does is ultimately the responsibility of joe biden. trey: where is jack smith going to start and how long do you think it'll take in. are we going to be living with us throughout the pendency of the 2024 primary season? how long will this take? >> that's a really good question. the longer it takes the more likely it's going to get the justice department more embroiled into politics when merrick garland hope he was pulling the department and biden out of politics. one thing that smith has in his favor is that the justice department as you pointed out has already been running the two investigations into january 6 in the classified documents at mar-a-l

but we do know this, jack smith and merrick garland are very aware of need for speed here. when jack smith was appointed he issued a brief statement saying, quote, the pace of the investigation will not pause or flag under my watch. jack smith clearly understands they need to move as quickly as possible. >> thank you as always. >>> asa ditches conspiracy sequel. a trial is under way for a second group of alleged oath keepers members charged with this very serious crime. and it comes less than two weeks after federal prerls secured a historic conviction on that same seditious conspiracy charge for leaders of this far right group. cnn's whitney wild joins us with more now. whitney, how does this oath keepers trial differ from the first one? >> well, this case really focuses on the lower level members-oath keepers and that presents a challenge for doj. the first trial focused on leadership. remember, doj's argument was there was a specific plan prior to january 6 to storm the capitol and attempt to overturn the election. nirndz, the very basis of this seditious conspiracy char

the subtext of the report of what they did today, it's all about merrick garland. language to bear down on what trump knew, the criminal mindset, which is a requirement for convictions and bears down on what trump caused. because the more serious charges require more than a pile of mistakes or even irresponsible leadership. they require proving trump caused or aided the insurrection, which brings us to a line that really jumps out in the new material. congress states the conclusion of the central cause of january 6 was one man, trump. the same passage says none of the events of the january 6 incident would have happened without him and that he was personally involved in the attack and, thus, the most serious recommended charge aiding insurrection is on him because he's involved. the blueprint stating trump intended to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power, and the purpose and effect of his actions were to mobilize a large crowd to descend on the capitol. this is all from today's new materials. today's meeting makes more sense when you read along with this other ev

that is certainly a very compelling backdrop as the doj and merrick garland received this beaten for the january 6th committee. if they do decide to submit criminal referrals, those would go through the department of justice and merrick garland. he wouldn't then have a decision to make. should those matters be handled individually, or should they be handled with the newly appointed special counsel, jack smith. he was overseeing the larger investigation into trump and his role in january 6th, and the attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election. then either garland or jack smith will have an even bigger decision, will they prosecute? this is no longer a hypothetical. it's no longer academic. the ball is in the doj's court. i want to turn to matt miller, former chief spokesperson for the justice department during the obama administration. thank you so much for joining me. given everything that's happening here, this kind of moment we are in, which is not an interest in them, but this limbaugh, the key moment when the j six committee handed over to the doj. how do you think that

amy: that's attorney general merrick garland. the oath keepers verdict could give momentum to cases against other major players behind the push to keep trump in power. for more, we're joined by kristen doerer, managing editor of right wing watch. welcome back to democracy now! talk about the significance of these convictions for could -- for seditious conspiracy. >> this is the first time in about 30 years we have had a guilty verdict when it comes to seditious conspiracy. it is very notable a win for the justice department and it also sends a message that the legal actions against the government will in unpunished. i would say there are also a number of other oath keepers who are charged with seditious conspiracy you're going to trial next week and members of the proud boys, another far right extreme organization, are also being charged with seditious conspiracy and they go to trial december 12. this sends a message to those who have pled not guilty that they have a tough trial ahead of them and that a jury has already found sim

an official effort by congress to conduct an investigation, i wonder what merrick garland will do about clear the purpose to interfere with operations of congress, there is no need to make a general threat to prosecute people for defamation in advance of testimony. that anticipates an event that is yet to happen. to have a chilling affect. to threaten people, and prevent testimony. if i were lawyer for hunter biden, mr. kevin morris, or hunter biden, i would watch what i say. be very careful, any criminal violation by conticontempt of congress can be prosecuted. i en encourage you talk down names and you find out who is threatening to interfere with you're investigation, and whether this goes to highest levels of the white house. what is this? nixon 2? i don't know, but this is troubling, and this special counsel how the hell do you have all this evidence of this kind of activity of enriching a family, a vice who becomes president, what foreign governments and foreign corporations, serious questions about whether their taxes are accurate. the clause with the president of the united stat

on the issue of our criminal referrals, merrick garland announced that the department of justice investigation would follow the evidence. that is our sense of the law as well. we believe that donald j. trump, that there was evidence he violated multiple criminal laws. if the justice department concurs with that, then he should be prosecuted like any other american. nobody should get a pass. i think the day start giving passes to presidents or former presidents, that would be the day that would be the beginning of the end of our democracy. we hope that while low criminal referral from congress does not carry legal weight, we hope the evidence we presented and the way we have identified the offenses will be taken seriously by the department of justice. thank you very much. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television companies and more, including wow. the world has changed. fast and reliable internet connection is something nobody can live without. wow is there for our customers. now more than ever it all starts with great internet. wow supports c-span as a public

one, when merrick garland got this case he treated it like a mob investigation. start with the lowest people below and work your way up the chain of command. and unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on what your perspective are -- is, there are hundreds and hundreds of low level actors. so they had their hands full with probably the largest prosecution, the largest investigation, the department has ever undertaken. and that lights of people, including myself, to be quite concerned that they were not going after the main planners, that they were gonna spend all their time on these low-level people and that didn't seem very just, that the guy who listened to donald trump would go to, jail without trump wouldn't go to jail. and think would happen, frankly, the january six committee lit a fire under the justice department. i don't think they are going to acknowledge that, but i think that once this evidence started coming out that was so compelling, you saw merrick garland be a lot more publicly forthcoming. and i think that since then, we've seen much more alacr

if you look at merrick garland's career historically, this is not a political animal. he's a judge, the consummate attorney. jack smith will look at those same facts and make the decision regardless of where the political winds are. the political ramifications will likely happen on the campaign trail, not necessarily in jack smith's office, wherever he is sitting right now in europe. >> i'm not a lawyer here. i think it depends on what they can prove. can they prove insurrection? that's really tough. can they prove obstruction of a congressional proceeding? >> to don's point, important to view it through all that is happening to trump this week. this is not the only thing. he's got all these other investigations we've been covering. lawmakers have his tax returns. all of that when we look at a broader scope, what does it mean for someone like trump who is not just a former president but is also running again. >> it puts the focus on him. i believe the weighs and means committee is also planning to meet this week. they have access to several years of his tax returns whe

i don't think merrick garland will do it but congress will investigate.ave: we heard from hillary vaughan the ftc is investigating elon musk. janet yellen may look into twitter and elon musk's relationship with foreign investors. is this a target on elon musk? or are they seriously interested in investigating? >> they are serious, investigating whether twitter lied, engaged in covert propaganda with fake accounts. all kinds of devious stuff that twitter long denied not just publicly but under oath in sworn affidavits. those are crimes if they can be proven. dave: but shouldn't use regulatory power to go after a single individual you don't like. some of that is going on with investigations into elon. thanks for being here. florida senator rick scott, martha mccallum and former defense intel officer rebecca koffler. the 11 am hour of "varney and company" next. ♪ i will be home for christmas ♪ >> heading into 2023, i have a lot of peer. i'm calling in the federal reserve budget because i believe there's a bubble in the stoc

we had watched merrick garland state and weather. the first black president put up a supreme court nominee. the republicans changed the rules so that they could get the supreme court justice that they won. here they keep changing the rules. you talk to everyday people. our communities are understanding the impact the supreme court has on our lives. our members of congress, not all of them, but many of them, and they are saying, well, don't worry about that. don't worry about the courts. it's fine. if you fall for me, we will pass a law. it is going to change everything. the supreme court are shown as they don't care about it. they don't care about any of your losses. what they care about is controlling the power. for us, when we talk to everyday people above the courts, we are saying that when you vote, your vote has so much power. that means that when you vote for the right candidate they are gonna have an opportunity. that puts the supreme court justice on the bench. they are gonna put lower court justices on the bench. not where m

if merrick garland fails to act and fails to indict and only the footsoldiers suffer consequences, ine of the greatest acts of appeasement in us history. but i believe he will. apologies, we havejust froze in there. we will try and get him back at that critical moment, but i think he was about to say that he thinks the doj, the department ofjustice, will will bring charges against donald trump. do we have him back? ., ~' , ., donald trump. do we have him back?_ allan. - donald trump. do we have him back?_ allan, we - back? thank you. allan, we literally just _ back? thank you. allan, we literally just lost _ back? thank you. allan, we literally just lost you - back? thank you. allan, we literally just lost you at - back? thank you. allan, we literally just lost you at the | literally just lost you at the moment you are saying you believe he will. carry on that sentence for us. i believe he will. carry on that sentence for us.— believe he will. carry on that sentence for us. i am sorry, i couldn't — sentence for us. i am sorry, i couldn't hear— sentence for us. i am sorry, i couldn't

. >> merrick garland also praised the justice department's victories including the convictions secured against several members of the oath keepers militia for crimes against the insurrection. >> these convictions were the result of tireless work by justice department agents, attorneys, analysts and support staff beginning in january 2021 with a methodical collection of evidence and continuing through the presentation of that evidence during the seven-week trial that began in october of 2022. their skill and dedication are in the very best traditions of the justice department and we are all extremely grateful to them. >> house republican leader kevin mccarthy has told the january 6th committee to preserve all of its records. he's vowing to become the house leader and mccarthy has vowed to hold hearings on alleged security breaches. he's one of five republican lawmakers who refused to comply with a subpoena to appear before the committee. it's likely this is just a taste of what's to come. >> reporter: elections have consequences. republicans soon will have the power to hold hearings. th

. >> merrick garland held a news conference on the convictions of members of the oath keepers, including on the charge of sedition for the group's founder and leader, stewart rhodes. attorney general also talks about a recent court decision to appoint an interim third party to oversee the water crisis in jackson, mississippi. a.g. garland: good afternoon, everyone. it's been a busy couple of days. just now i met with the trial team whose work secured the conviction of five defendants associated with the oath keepers organization. and yesterday afternoon i was briefed by the attorneys and staff who were involved in a major environmental justice matter, addressing longstanding failures in the city of jackson's public drinking water system. today i want to share more about these two significant matters of public interest. i also want to highlight several other matters that did not garner the same level of attention but that are emblematic of the work that this department does every day. when i began my tenure as attorney general, i laid out prierlts for the department of justice. to uphold

>> well, from my understanding, merrick garland and the top lawyers at the doj will say that this has no influence on them one way or the other, that, you know, they're running an independent investigation, yes, it's thank you congress for sending us this letter with your thoughts, but, you know, you're a different branch of government and we're doing our own investigation. you know, that said, i do think what's quite important for the committee is to lay things out for the public at large. and when you do that, you can create a pressure on the justice department. now, the concern from the committee was that this could actually backfire in a way, that it would look untoward, if the political branch is trying to influence the judicial branch. ultimately, they came to the view, if they have evidence, if you accumulate all the testimony from interviews, you've gotten all the documents, you need to give it to the justice department. it's almost your duty, that's where they have landed in the end, and i suspect we'll see very specific language about which civil or criminal statutes were vi

merrick garland and the biden doj they won't prosecute him.ome in front of congress and perjure themselves, i am sadly confident that merrick garland will not prosecute them. it's why i wrote the book that you just mentioned. justice corrupted how the left has weaponized the legal system because i explain how barack obama now joe biden have turned the fbi and the doj and the irs and the entire alphabet soup of washington into a political weapon to attack their enemies. it is dangerous. and what we have got do is fight from congress. we also need to win in o'24, throw these clowns out so we can clean house at the fbi and doj and put in people who will enforce the law and not simply turn it into a partisan weapon. >> jesse: all right. and big race tomorrow in georgia. herschel walker, again, very, very important in terms of these committees. >> if you are in georgia, come vote. turn out is critical. >> jesse: all right. senator ted cruz, everyone always lies to congress. it must hurt your feelings, senator. i will talk to you later. [laughter] >

and that really being a public problem for merrick garland.e me at all if the january 6th committee, even in the minority, if those members continue to put pressure on merrick garland and to try to encourage him to pursue an aggressive investigation against donald trump and his allies. >> thank you so much for being part of our coverage today. >>> when we come back, 2022 was the year in which millions of women all over our country lost the right to abortion health care. now both sides of the debate are gearing up for the next phase of this fight. where the battle of reproductive rights goes in america in the new yore. that conversation after a quick break. don't go anywhere. break. don't go anywhere. a must in your medicine cabinet! less sick days! cold coming on? zicam is the number one cold shortening brand! highly recommend it! zifans love zicam's unique zinc formula. it shortens colds! zicam. zinc that cold! ♪ what will you do? ♪ what will you change? ♪ will you make something better? ♪ will you create something entirely new? ♪ our dell te