he's violated fara, the same way they dragged paul manafort through the mud, threw paul manafort in jail to flip on donald trump. that's what's going on with the biden family and the department of justice has been cover up for this, the fbi did not do full investigations over this and so it is incumbent for house republicans to stip and get the job done for the american people. maria: i spoke with kevin mccarthy on sunday, the speaker of the house suggested to me that that impeachment inquiry is coming this september. here's what he said. >> will you bring an impeachment inquiry against president biden this september? >> if you look at all the information we've been able to gather so far, it is a natural step forward that you would have to go to an impeachment inquiry, just so your viewers understand what that means. that provides congress the apex of legal power to get all the information they need, because remember what's laying out there right now. we have an attorney general that could have lied to the american public. maria: congressman, i want to get your take on what's happening i

paul manafort thank you. joining me former trump senior adviser stephen miller. you're obviously in touch with a lot of friends now the trump campaign. what is their reaction and your reaction personally? >> let me just say everybody in trump world everybody who was a friend associate colleague of president trump's staff is appalled and horrified by not just the persecution relentlessly of president trump but of anybody who has ever worked with him, anybody who has served with him, this is an all out effort to use our legal system to purge president trump and his staff out of the political system entirely. you just talked to paul manafort. he was a political prisoner. mike flynn was a political prisoner. michael stone. now they want donald trump to be a political prisoner and as levin said they're adding up indictments that could lead to a thousand years in jail. north korea wouldn't even dream of something like. this my question tonight is at what point are elected republicans going to realize the gravity and the severity of this threat? the radical left just ke

i if he has ever had it. >> but stay on that david, because it is not just cash c patel are paul manafort or stephen miller out there pushing this nonsense, it is ted cruz, it is lindsey graham. u.s. senators, elected by the american people. to focus on policy and to focus on issues to keep americans safe and thriving. pushing these lies about the weaponization of government. does that make you nervous for our democracy which by the way we should remember would be honored tonight that it has held to this point. >> yes, that is exactly right, politicians get to choose whether to follow or delete. and you just named politicians who follow. the most dangerous thing that donald trump arguably brought into our body of politics was distressed. he knew exactly what he was doing in a maniacal way. i'm going to convince americans that they cannot trust anybody, no institutions, they can only trust me. n in that way donald trump represented a cultural movement, and sociological movement, more so than political. he just parked his narrative, inside the republican party. but the result is, the likes

and that is former trump campaign manager paul manafort . my recollection is paul. your home was raided predawn raid guns drawn and the only thing that you didn't have the your your friend roger stone had is . you didn't have fake news. cnn cameras tipped off that you were going to get rated and then you spent two years in jail and one of those years you spent in in isolation. um and you know, thankfully, you got the pardon from president trump . but i ask you this do you especially when we compare and contrast the biden family. the sweetheart deal for hunter. the fact that the media won't talk about joe the fact that you know the fix seems to be in with the appointment of david weiss, who was willing to give the sweetheart deal the hunter. do you see equal justice and equal application of our laws in this country? and if not, why not? no not at all. i mean this watching the hunter biden thing and watching what's going on fold fulton county tonight is bringing back to me the experiences that i went through, which is, you know, having a prosecutor who in bob mueller,

paul manafort went really poorly because state prosecutors in new york charged him after he had been pardoned and the state courts said you can't do that. steve bannon was charged federally, then pardoned by trump and then recharged by the state. that prosecution remains ongoing. this makes me point. why should paul manafort and steve bannon be reprosecuted but not any of the hundreds of other people pardoned by donald trump? are they being picked out simply because they're seen as politically odious by certain prosecutors? i think that's the only answer and i think that's unacceptable. >> the same rules ought to apply to trump as any other defendant. people can send all their negative reaction to you on this one and not to me. >> please do. bring it on. >> i'm going to read something from social media. what do we have that loosely applies to what we are discussing? you asserted the trump leads in the polls because of his indictments. nonsense. you are confusing coincidence with causality. thank you for being here. can you put that back on the screen? i don't know if you have the abi

paul manafort, donald trump's former campaign chair who was jailed for tax evasion talking about the two tiered system of justice. right, ted cruz, a u.s. senator, was standing outside the courtroom as though he was a reporter talking about joe biden vilinizing the justice system for his own political gain. how much of that will make it difficult to push this misinformation or deflect if this thing ends up on tv? >> well, it's a great question actually. what we've seen so far is expectations that an indictment or two or three, eventually four would somehow change the public view. and that hasn't been the case up until now. if anything, of course, donald trump has done better among his republican supporters than after the indictments. especially if it's televised, especially if americans are watching and making a difference. traditionally i would think a televised trial would be important for the public. people have in fact made up their minds, and whether it's open to rethinking that is big question. people will misinterpret evidence and information and everything else so far it seem

that is the argument that the watergate defendants made, that's an argument that paul manafort made. you do not get to go to a jurisdiction where you think there are more people who are friendlier to you. that's a question of jury selection. that's just a dead loser. that will not -- that's simply not the law in any court in this country. >> joyce, obviously, we live in a divided country. there are lots of places all across the united states where people can certainly claim, because of how people vote, that it's biased one way or another. to andrew's point, if this is going to come down to the judge really being very careful about jury selection, assuming this goes to trial, assuming it happens in washington, d.c., what does careful selection of a jury look like, joyce? >> judges are careful about jury selection in every case. when andrew says, this is not the law in reference to trump's arguments, he is dead on the money in that regard. there's no merit to a motion to swap the venue here, because jury selection is about individual jurors. it's not about how large groups of people vo

they did the paul manafort case in the grand jury activity in the investigation were mike pence provided testimony specific to this investigation. host: is there any word of potential protests at the courthouse today? guest: not that we are aware of. there are barricades going up around the capital. they will be an increased police presence around the courthouse for sure. in many ways, it's ironic that the former president is being arranged at the courthouse just stepped from the capital which figures majorly in the indictment. host: our guest is with the guardian and his piece just published this morning early at the guardian.com. trump will appear in court to it respond to charges of election subversion efforts. we welcome your calls and comments for our guest on today's arraignment of former president donald trump. (202) 748-8000 for republicans, (202) 748-8001 and for others (202) 748-8002 the text number is (202) 748-8003 and you can hit us up on social media. i read somewhere earlier today. yesterday that something like almost 1000 january 6 suspects have been tried at that courtho

those attempts failed and it's also worth mentioning it has failed with former trump allies in the paul manafortof peers more resembling one's politics and a judge pointedly noting that's not what a jury of one's peers means. it's not a referendum i'll find me a jurisdiction where people share my political views. so, just from recent history and history over the past half decade, in and near thisjurisdiction, it's a past half decade, in and near this jurisdiction, it's a very tough lift forformer tough lift for former president.— tough lift for former resident. , ., president. ok, so timing potentially _ president. ok, so timing potentially tricky. - president. ok, so timing i potentially tricky. location looking unlikely in terms of a swap. what about things like witnesses and contacts? a difficult will that be? well, that is, difficult will that be? well, that is. as _ difficult will that be? well, that is, as you _ difficult will that be? well, that is, as you can - difficult will that be? well, that is, as you can clearly. that is, as you can clearly imagine, there are quite a few witnesses

there was constant communication between paul manafort and sean hannity while she was out on bail with restriction to not have those communications. and this is honestly what donald trump said as amy said it's not true. it is factually false and something that should be challenged with someone who's a member of the news media as opposed to some kind of, you know, public figure or news figure but not a journalist. and that is a real problem in terms of doling out to -- to republicans this idea that donald trump is being prosecuted simply because he challenged an election. well, you know, he challenged an election in over 60 courts. he had his day in court repeatedly, and he lost all of that. so no one has denied him that. it is that he then took the law into his own hands. that is what he is charged with, and he'll also have his day in court as a criminal defendant to challenge the government's proof on those issues like any other defendant. >> barbara mcquade, i know there are people in the audience wondering where is the line, what is the limit of what donald trump can say about distr

allowed his son to violate being an unregistered foreign agent that is the thing that they fear paul manafortfor so he would flip on donald trump. his son was violating him they stuck it in a plea deal and the only reason we found out they stuck it in a plea deal the judge started asking questions you cannot have this as a country where the first family is essentially getting millions and millions and millions of dollars to sell access to the president, then vice president, don't sit here and tell me the $30 million or $40 million that this family has received over the last six years has all been paid for just because they have a prosecutor fired in ukraine, i don't believe it another does anybody else. >> i change the subject and ask you to look at the headlines is about florida getting a lot of negative press, a lot of it coming from the new york times. the media seems to me there trying to soften up the santos and trump are both floridians, soften them up before the election. >> that is the mo of the times it is funny the new york times reported how bad florida is when you're at the new yo

the trial against trump's campaign manager paul manafort, for example. we know how those trials work. but what about a case against 19 people? what about a rico case? how will this all work? and now that 19 of these individuals are facing serious jail time how soon until someone in this case flips? because make no mistake as much is trump is surrounded by cospirators here in both the federal case and georgia case, even someone like rudy giuliani is ultimately just a capo in this criminal enterprise. the big boss, the end game here is donald j. trump, and the question tonight is does the rico law that rudy giuliani built his career on, does that ultimately ensnare donald j. trump. joining me now is joyce vance, former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama, and laura jarrett, senior legal correspondent for nbc news. laura and joyce, great to have you both with me tonight. laura, let me start with you in terms of the many people named in this indictment down in fulton county. i want to start with the news we have on mark meadows. because mark m

fall, stone was there again suggesting his own long time business partner, stone in the middle, paul manafort next to him, who went on to run the campaign in the closing and through the unlikely win that fall. stone also would do things some republicans would not. he didn't just attack hillary clinton, but he darkly suggested that he knew the worst wikileaks about her were yet to come. eb everyone insinuated he might have some foreign or secret spy help. that's something most people hide if they do have it. people in the cia don't talk a lot about the sources or method of their intel. stone drew heat on himself. both congress and mueller probed whether roger stone crossed criminal lines to -- with foreign powers. nobody knew yet. kicking around as a question. roger stone's approach, we should note, left many others in the lurch. you're looking at four trump allied witnesses from that probe here is what they in their own words told us the mueller investigators asked about most. >> who did they ask most about? >> they asked mostly about roger stone. >> you? >> rojer and michael. >> roger stone.

about trump's twitter account was used, by whom, and whether it was sort of used in a way that paul manafortg ground for what ultimately became his communications. >>. that's a great, great. point lisa rubin, as always, on point. >> thank you. >> the republican front runner for the nomination to be president is facing 19 won charges over four indictments, you probably heard a little bit about that. if that's something that gives you pause, you might actually be a republican primary voter. not the majority of them, but there's a lot of them. david plouffe and jen psaki and some are harboring poll numbers ahead. er ahead. and forms an antibacterial shield. try parodontax active gum health mouthwash. >> one year ago today, the inflation reduction act, the most significant piece of climate legislation in u.s. history, was signed into law. there's a case to be made it's one of the most significant and successful pieces of legislation ever passed. i mean, just look at the, name and look at what it did. and august of last year, when inflation reduction act was signed into law, inflation was 8.3%. o

violating the same foreign agent registration act so many others have been prosecuted for like paul manafort company. >> trace: it's a fair argument, if you had access to the vice-president doesn't matter where you are or what you're selling, it matters the level of involvement you have. what do you think about this? >> that's a good point trace and kash makes an excellent point. that if you are really selling influence and getting some kind of money in exchange for above benefits like getting a prosecutor in ukraine fired from american pressure, then you have the painingings of a bribery case. now, we've got to be clear that we don't know yet. we've got to take the investigation slowly. but at least what devon archer's testimony makes cheer now and it's worth emphasizing is that joe biden is now a witness, not scombluft hands-off guy watching his son get in trouble, he's an actual witness, and that is why we need to have a special counsel, because it's impossible for the justice department to interview and investigate someone who's the head of executive branch. >> trace: but it's selling wh

is some of the low, really low level people in the campaign, one of whom was, what's his name, paul manafort, and his friend were very involved in it and they were involved at a level i can't understand it had to do with foreign money and all of that, they were extremely involved in it and when it was all over, reagan offered those men any position they wanted in his administration. this was published in an article in the atlantic monthly and they turned him down because they said oh, they had-- would make a lot more money doing other things. ... refer to the iran-contra scandal, the truth of the matter is, that's when it really began and that's when it really began. because when the bush was trying to get well when reagan was president and the actually the way it was, the scandal came out that was -- hostages which was illegal, and then they went back to the early part of reagan's presidency. really explained it when george hw bush was up for reelection and what he said from 1989 to 93, he didn't get reelected but when he was up for reelection that is when it really exploded because people

the other is, you know, paul manafort in virginia, we indicted him in january or february. he was on trial in july. that was in front of a judge who also was very conservative. in d.c., his trial took 11 months to go from indictment to trial. i actually found the submission from the defense sort of facially amusing, and if you scratch under the surface, it made no sense at all. to have a diagram of how many war & peace volumes this would be, that's not how discovery works here. in the days where it's electronic discovery, of course, there's mountains and mountains of evidence if you turn it into paper documents. that's not what happened. that hasn't happened for over 25 years. judge chutkan isn't going to be fooled by that. that's something that was done for his base but not for the court. >> and by the way, this is how much of a nerd i am. i read war and peace in high school. and walked around with it, looked like a giant door stop. and it's actually -- >> by the way, you don't need to read it seven times to prepare. you only need to read it once. >> once is enough, trust

hunter got a worse deal than roger stone, who had much more serious crimes or paul manafort, for whom was pardoned after he literally was complicit in an attempt to overthrow the government. this all is crazy. but it is a widespread belief and a deeply held belief, and that's why all the candidates are echoing it. >> and to stay with you for a minute, tim, i feel like it is also what gave the doj pause. and what gave really the response on january 6th pause. there was reporting and there was a sense that because it was maga people, they used kid gloves with them. had that been black lives matter protesters or something else, they would have been armed to the teeth and ready. there has been a standing down and a fear of them. i wonder what you make of that. you have, it seems to me, to be even in the doj a sense that we don't want to go too hard. we have reported on this show, hunter biden, that tax charge, it's normally used for international criminal gangsters. like, they don't really charge that very often. but there is this sense of we have to be proportional and charge a biden wit

saw when i was a special counsel mueller's team and, famously, roger stone violated those as did paul manafort. i think the big issue for her is that there are now through each trials, so you had donald trump, he's been indicted for crimes before, during and after his presidency, and she is going to figure out when she will be able to slot in her trial. i don't know if that will come up and an arraignment. she will be interested in moving the case along. she'll be very interested in whether the discovery as been turned over. i expect that we will hear prior to thursday from the government, a report about what they have done with respect to discovery. you saw that at the mar-a-lago case, and into the way that the government can try and prompted the judge to try and be focused on a day prior to the general election. >> andrew, it's chris hayes, we're in the same room, so you knew that. the tv, the magic of it all, i'm looking into the camera. so, i guess my question is, there is no precedent here for preferred -- i mean, take away precedence, i can't think of a defendant, just a defendant, they

robert mueller said in his report that donald trump tried to obstruct, intimidate or influence paul manafortl cohen and general michael flynn, roger stone, she said i was intimidated by all of the tweets the sitting president put out thargetting smee. >> you said what we used to do in the in the old days, he's going to billy witnesses, youiers, do you come in the country, my advice is you is saw a nonmouts forever. ? i wanted in back to the poll. we put up the larger, poll, when cbs news asked if the indictments against trump are trying to stop the trump campaign, 86% of republicans said it's trying to stop the trump campaign. an attack on people like you, 56% upholding the rule of law only 28% said it's upholding the rule of law and only 26% of republicans said that it is defending democracy. at this point, mehdi, he's poisoned the jury pool. all he needs is one of them on the jury in either of his two trials. that's the goal that his lawyers have set out. they seem to have at least achieved it among a majority of republicans? they are very good at messaging, we have to admit. his gaslighti

about how trump's twitter account was used by whom and whether it was sort of used in the way that paul manafort, as a staging ground for what he ultimately became his communications. >> that's a great point. lisa rubin, as always, on point, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> the republican front runner for the nomination to be president is facing 90 when charges over four indictments, and in that sentence gives you pause, you might be a republican primary voter. not the majority, but there are a lot. david plouffe and jen psaki on some heartening new poll numbers, ahead. numbers, ahead arrive with a replacement we could trust. that's service the way we want it. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ ♪♪ i'm currently out of the office... focusing on a little blue-sky thinking. i'll be taking meetings... with family and friends. and checking voicemail... as my activities permit. i'll connect with you... after reconnecting with me. ♪♪ get 1.9% apr for 36 months plus $1,500 purchase allowance on a 2024 xt5 and xt6 when you finance through cadillac financial. ♪♪ my husband and i have

paul manafort went to jail for years. rudy giuliani's home was raided by the fbi on suspicion of his failure to -- hunter e gets nothing. elizabeth: it was like hunter was doing the same things. the breaking news coming in, the corruption scandals are now hitting biden's polls. gallup now finds a majority, nearly 6 out of 10 americans, think this biden white house is not ethical, and that old was just completed on july 27th. -- poll was just completed. they found similar reaction to the trump white house, but gallup says biden's scores are lower than all other administrations since reagan. or archer also reportedly said, quote, it's categorically false for biden to say he he had no role in his son's business or knowledge of it, saying that, you know, biden was aware of hunter's business, he met with hunter's business partners. critics say biden to begin with should never have been in on those calls or meetings. and for the president to systematically lie about this to the american people is now hitting his polls. you see

that's exactly what happened to paul manafort. he obstructed, went to jail. so i don't know if this particular magistrate does that routinely, but let me say, i have never in my years as a prosecutor or defense lawyer ever heard that, and even for all of the mueller cases, never heard somebody say let me just single one thing out. but again, as we talked about, this is a defendant when you look at his rap sheet, he has been charged now with six counts of obstruction of justice, four here, two in florida, and he's got other crimes in florida and in manhattan. so you can understand the judge saying, i need to warn you about something because if you commit a crime while you are out on bail, guess what the remedy could be? you're going to be awaiting trial inside a jail cell. >> welcome to the show. this is your first appearance. i have to say, there's been a lot of talk about this being a solemn day and a grave day. i have to be honest, i admitted it on the previous show with rachel and our friends. i didn't feel solemn. i'm being honest. if i'm being honest, i

paul manafort should not be pardoned. and she acted out of principle. that is what you are looking for, somebody who is if the government is not prove its case is going to say, you know what? not guilty. they're not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and they have the gonna do with the judge instructs. >> that's so well put and fascinating. you talked about someone who shared the former president's 2016 campaign. not. nobody ballots turned to these trials investigations from three prosecutors and four probes, at least in your day, hush money scheme that we've been following. special counsel smith both overseeing the classified documents probe and the probe into the coup, and there is what everyone has been talking about lee recently, georgia's d.a. reconvening a grand jury in that long running into election interference probe. this is on president. i examined in fort jurisdictions that occurred before, during and after his presidency. the trials for at least some of these indictments will likely occur as trump is trying to win the presidency again

subject is some of the low, low level people in the campaign, one of whom was what's his name is it paul manafort and his friend were very involved in it and they were involved at a level i can't understand, but they had all to do with foreign money and and all of that. they were extremely involved. it and when it all over reagan of both of those men any position they wanted in his administration this was published in an article in the l.a. monthly and they turned him down because said, oh, they had been making a lot more money doing other things. okay as you refer to the iran-contra scandal, the truth of the matter is, that's when it really began and that's when it really began. because when the bush was trying to get well when reagan was president and the scandal came out that he was whatever it was, weapons you know, for hostages which was illegal. and then and they went back to the early part of reagan's presidency and the embryo of all of that was end. it was in october it was in the october surprise. it really exploded and when bush h.w. bush was up reelection. and what he served from. 1989

typically -- and i'm confident this is what will happen because it is what we did in enron and in the paul manafort case, send out hundreds of jury questionnaires that are incredibly detailed. both parties get to have input into what those questions are. everyone then renews those and you weed out people who obviously cannot be there simply based on the answers to those questions. and then the remaining pool of jurors are brought in and the federal judge goes over individually specific questions that are problematic to assure herself that each of those jurors can put aside whatever they have heard, whatever preconceived views they have and just base their verdict on what happens in the courtroom and that they can follow the law. it is a very detailed process and what is the foundation of our rule of law. it is inconceivable to me that this is going to be a case that won't be kept in d.c. there is no other venue where you won't have the same issue. this is widely known throughout the country. and as i mentioned, the supreme court of the united states in united states versus gilling has rule od unite

paul manafort. other close allies. just a couple years, ago i stood in the office of former maricopa county sheriff, joe arpaio. in maricopa county, he had the pardon that donald trump gave him for criminal contempt of court. framed in his office. in large part, donald trump has been a shield for so many empowering and the american political system. so, for battle, trump there's nobody here to pardon him when we watched him go into this jail, he faces serious charges that will ultimately go to trial. when you're talking about his allies, they will use this to their political advantage. because that is the only option that they have. they need to galvanize that potent minority, and the republican electorate, to give him a shot of winning that back the white house. as we go around this country, folks open the talk about some award to me. they made it. because they're concerned, and they see the frustrations over what they believe has been a taking of their own democracy. and their defense of donald trump. >> vaughn, in t

they sentenced people like roger stone, paul manafort, they were there to witness this today, and itlly was just a moment to observe how much this court has been wrapped around special counsel investigations of donald trump as well as the aftermath of january 6th. the courthouse is so close to the capitol building, and this court has had hundreds of prosecutions of january 6th rioters, even some sentenced today by judges in this court. so it really was a moment full circle having donald trump there in court as a criminal defendant now to see his name announced, to see the case announced u.s. v. trump. >> thank you very much. and let's get straight to where kaitlan is talking about this row, elliot. this row of judges. and talking about how highly unusual it is. you got the chief judge and you've got judges ruling in other cases. what -- what do you read into that? >> i have never seen that and i have been an attorney 20 plus years. i have also never seen a former president of the united states indicted on four federal crimes, including conspiring to obstruct official proceedings, so

that we saw when i was a special counsel on mueller's team, and he famously violated that as did paul manafort for her is that there are now through each trials, so you had donald trump, he's been indicted for crimes before, during and after his presidency, and she is going to figure out when she will be able to slot in her trial. i don't know if that will come up and an arraignment. she will be interested in moving the case along. she'll be very interested in whether the discovery as been turned over. i expect that we will hear prior to thursday from the government, a report about what they have done with respect to discovery. you saw that at the mar-a-lago case, and into the way that the government can try and prompted the judge to try and be focused on a day prior to the general election. >> and you, it's chris hayes, we're in the same room, if you did not know that the. the tv, the magic of, i'm looking into the camera. so, i guess my question is, there is no precedent here for preferred -- i mean, take away precedence, i can't think of a defendant, just a defendant, they have seen this ma

paul manafort. other close allies. just a couple years, ago i stood in the office of former maricopa county sheriff, joe arpaio. in maricopa county, he had the pardon that donald trump gave him for criminal contempt of court. framed in his office. in large part, donald trump has been a shield for so many empowering and the american political system. so, for battle, trump there's nobody here to pardon him when we watched him go into this jail, he faces serious charges that will ultimately go to trial. when you're talking about his allies, they will use this to their political advantage. because that is the only option that they have. they need to galvanize that potent minority, and the republican electorate, to give him a shot of winning that back the white house. as we go around this country, folks open the talk about some civil war to me. they mean it. because they're concerned, and they see the frustrations over what they believe has been a taking of their own democracy. and their defense of donald trump. >> vaughn,

paul manafort who worked to elect a pro-kremlin president in ukraine.was convicted in 2018 of bank and tax fraud. ultimately pleading guilty against the united states. obstructing justice. president trump deemed it, quote, a very sad day for our country. in terms of sweetheart deals, and december of 2020, at the end of his term, president trump granted full pardon to his close allies. flynn, stone, manafort, allowing them to escape accountability for their numerous crimes. now, that is a sweetheart deal. they got away with everything. not by hunter biden, pleading guilty, such as the reputational damage an embarrassment to his family, the widely publicized facts of his drug addiction, and this was a trump appointed u.s. attorney. they prosecuted this for four years. president biden did not seem to remove him. it happens when a new president comes into office. mister chairman, i yield back. . >> i'm going to simplify this for the american people. we are here today because our institutions are broken. the doj, the fbi, the irs has transformed from a balan

remember, this is the courthouse where paul manafort violated that position and went to jail. it is the courthouse where roger stone threatened a federal judge and posted a picture of her with crosshairs next to her leading to severe sanctions and restrictions on his ability to communicate. it is not surprising to me if you just treat him anyone else that you have that much obstruction and you are going to have these kinds of warnings being given. >> the judge, per our reporters at the courthouse, tells trump you've heard the conditions of release. it is important you comply. you may be held pending trial in this case if you violate the conditions. the judge then says the most important condition is that you not commit a crime while you are release and then the judge that one moment later or excuse me, two minutes later it is a crime to try to influence a juror. while that is obviously true and something those of us with only legal experience is watching tv, to have that or have the former president bluntly warned while he is being threatened with jail if he doesn't comply is

finger on the scales of justice when it came to the cases involving trump allies mike flynn and paul manafort certainly of ethical and not standard practice, he uses doj to investigate baseless claims of voter fraud. now, i know there's an argument that some members on the committee have made that it's a good thing because it's more evidence that trump knew they were all baseless. but it doesn't slow trump down. and i wonder if you could just speak to this sort of sliding of our frame of reference. i mean, these are -- these are the people that stayed with trump to the end when bill barr couldn't and wouldn't, telling trump as you just said it was all bullshit. >> yes. exactly. look, rich donoghue, there is no person who we met over the course of our investigation who was more credible than that guy. i mean, he was a trump appointee. he was u.s. attorney in brooklyn. he moved to washington to be the principal deputy attorney general and then becomes the dag at the end after attorney general barr's resignation. he is a loyal trump supporter. everyone, nicolle, every witness in this case is in

they did the paul manafort case in the grand jury activity in the investigation were mike pence providedestimony specific to this investigation. host: is there any word of potential protests at the courthouse today? guest: not that we are aware of. there are barricades going up around the capital. they will be an increased police presence around the courthouse for sure. in many ways, it's ironic that the former president is being arranged at the courthouse just stepped from the capital which figures majorly in the indictment. host: our guest is with the guardian and his piece just published this morning early at the guardian.com. trump will appear in court to it respond to charges of election subversion efforts. we welcome your calls and comments for our guest on today's arraignment of former president donald trump. (202) 748-8000 for republicans, (202) 748-8001 and for others (202) 748-8002 the text number is (202) 748-8003 and you can hit us up on social media. i read somewhere earlier today. yesterday that something like almost 1000 january 6 suspects have been tried at that courthous

well let's remember a few things, paul manafort was convicted of passing campaign information to the carter page, who was an advisor to trump during the campaign bragged about being the go-between between anyone who wanted and putin and michael flynn and carter page both sat down with putin in russia. also michael flynn was on the phone to the russian ambassador before he even became national security advisor and lied about it. so i wish these people would quit telling -- quit saying it was a russia hoax because the fbi -- if the fbi had not investigated a, it would been a dereliction of their duty. trump's children sat down with russian agents in trump tower so this repeated line that there was nothing there, it was a russian hoax, why did manafort go to prison? host: last call also from michigan, line for republicans, go ahead. caller: i'm calling in reference to the man that called about marijuana in michigan. children in michigan eating those gummy's, and the rate of emergency visits ages three to 17 has gone up 78% this year. what fool ever thought about putting marijuana in can

paul manafort went to jail and was pardoned by former president trump. host: ok.ob in north carolina, independent line. caller: good morning, i'm happy to be speaking with you this morning. i have a genuine concern about our country. have we gone beyond --host: are you there? you cut out a little bit, keep going. caller: i have real concerns about the well-being of our nation now that we are a divided people, particular politically. they say if you take a frog and put them in a cold pot of water and you gradually boil it, am i still on? host: you are. if you're listening to yourself and the television, that may be a concern. guest: i will mute it. if you put a frog in the cold pot of water and toilet and the temperature rises, he will not jump out. we are like the frog in the pot. the temperature is rising on us as a nation. we are a house divided against ourselves. as there adversaries watches on the outside, what do they think? will we be able to unite once again as a people? america has a history of having been a united people. if you go to the cemeteries today