patrick philbin, a senior attorney in the white house as well. frankly that -- i made a reference to nixon before, and the efforts that were used to pierce some of these attorney/client privilege questions. the mere fact that we have -- the nation has seen testimony from senior white house staffers and senior lawyers will absolutely be in the mind of the court that is considering whether it is appropriate to break or pierce these privileges. >> elliot williams, thank you for helping us understand this. we will watch this resolve itself perhaps quickly. thank you so much. in the meantime we're just hours away from two of the most high-profile debates just two weeks out now from election day. in pennsylvania democrat john fetterman and republican mehmet oz face out in their one and only debate in this important contest that could determine chrome of the u.s. senate. fetterman is hoping to convince voters he is healthy enough to serve after suffering a stroke earlier this year. we'll see if the celebrity tv career of mehmet oz will help him in his f

cipollone and philbin repeatedly told trump what he was planning was unlawful. what did he say when you told him that and the response to date has been, i can't talk because of executive privilege. but that executive privilege claim is dubious, and the holding that judge howell made about the vice president's staff indicates it. it might be different for the president, but the argument from the department of justice is, first, biden has waived and that would normally suffice but there is one kavanaugh opinion that suggests maybe that's not enough, but two, and this is basically what south carolina court said about meadows in georgia, they need the evidence and this is what happened in the richard nixon case. if you need the evidence, executive privilege yields. they are really close in a sort of movement on two sides to getting the most important evidence that has been withheld to date, namely just what trump said when he was told things were unlawful or what he said about pence, everything he said on january 6th, that would be the most vivid testimony of intent

patrick philbin was his deputy. and they were there during some of these conversations as the former president was trying to impede the transfer of power in 2020, which is after the 2020 election, which is exactly what the prosecutors of the justice department are investigating. the justice department so far has been winning these secret proceedings that are going on at the courthouse here in washington. they got greg jacob and mark short, former aides to the former vice president pence to come back in and answer questions. these are very, very important questions about conversations that they had with the former president. so, the fact that they're winning these fights does bode well for the justice department as they try to get the compelled testimony of cipollone and philbin. >> evan, thank you very much. i want to go now to the constitutional law professor at harvard law school, who also consulted house democrats for the impeachment of then president trump. so, professor, what does it mean for donald trump if th

the problem that the trump team has on this is that cipollone and philbin did not represent trump. that's public information that and a public client that i'm not sure that they're going to allow -- that the judge would allow their testimony to be shielded by the attorney/client privilege in this case. i think there may be times that they could testify about what they saw, what they heard, you know, other statements made surrounding certain events involving the election and certainly the insurrection on january 6th. there may be times when they pause and say, i can't answer that because it may, in fact, involve some specific attorney/client privilege matter. but that will be taken up by the judge. at this point it looks like the judges are moving ahead. the prosecutors are moving ahead, and it's very likely that mr. cipollone and mr. philbin will testify in the case and i think it's probably appropriate at this point and, again, a lot of these moves especially for the federal investigation are designed to run the clock out through the midterms in the hopes that the committee will b

wants a federal judge to make pat cipollone and patrick philbin come in front of the grand jury again in luke broadwater "the new york times" congressional reporter who has the story. luke, you're reporting prosecutors and i want to quote, trying to punch through the claims of privilege that the former president is using to hamper the investigation of his push to overturn the election. tell me more about what you're hearing from the sources that you're talking to and why they want cipollone and philbin to come back again. >> right, well pat cipollone and philbin, the two top lawyers at the end of the trump white house, they have already testified before the grand jury. but during that initial testimony, they invoked executive privilege and also attorney-client privilege. and what the federal prosecutors are hoping is that they can pierce through those privilege arguments to get a little bit more out of these men about some of those private conversations with donald trump. you will recall pat cipollone's testimony before the january 6th committee, which was played at some of the hearin

great sign when the judge has already ruled in favor of the justice department with cipollone and philbin determining what exactly the justice department and the grand jury can get to. >> you're following every step. thank you so much for sharing it with us. >> there's new data this morning on the updated covid-19 boosters and the protection they provide against the omicron variant. >>> and the justice opening up about the leak of his draft opinion that would overturn roe v. wade. >> it was a grave betrayal of trust. it certainly changed the atmosphere at the court. the first time your sales reached 100k was also the first time you hit this note... ( screams in joy) save 20% with the lowest transaction fees and keep more of what you make. with a partner that always puts you first. godaddy. tools and support for every small business first. imagine having to use the wrong tool at your job. (upbeat music) - let's get into the numbers. - why would a company do that? especially with hr and payroll software. with paycom, employees enter and manage their own hr data in a single, easy-to-use soft

it's one of my favorite games. >> pat cipollone and pat philbin, they would like them to testify to the from myself, with how aggressive the justice is going to be, how high are they willing to go? are they willing to go to the man at the top of this investigation. if you're in the justice department right now, who would you immunize to try to get their cooperation to find out what the potential connection, personal connection was to the violence and the insurrection? >> i think anybody who was going to help put the squeeze play on mark meadows, because i can't stress enough how much of a linchpin he is, is someone i'm eyeing for immunity. cipollone might be someone i might say, you know what, what can you tell me about mark meadows that will make him have to talk and if he has something that's good enough in terms of the investigation that i can piece together and corroborate with whatever else i have learned in reviewing documents, he might be the one i would offer to make queen for a day and give immunity for so i could get mark meadows and get something of value out of him and acces

that is not what we are seeing with responsible lawyers like pat cipollone and patrick philbin.ly need is they they can't on their own way of executive privilege shortwave attorney client privilege. so they needed a judge to say yes you can and must answer these questions. and so i don't think you are going to see these long appeals. they are just seeking court permission so that they don't get an ethical trouble for answering questions. and then far be it for me to correct the new york times. the question of need is something that can overcome executive privilege. the prosecutors need for information, would not overcome attorney client privilege if it's applied. but here, there is no attorney client privilege because these lawyers did not represent donald trump personally. they represented the office of the white house. and so they really shouldn't be an attorney client issue. i fully expect that the chief judge, barrel howell, has made pretty sure the short work of this, that this could be very straightforward issues. >> popular, what do you see has the value that you can get

if cipollone and philbin are compelled to testify here, do you think this grand jury will actually getr could they plead the fifth? >> i don't see them pleading the fifth at all. i think that actually mr. cipollone, for example, provided a lot of sound legal advice to the former president based upon the testimony that he provided to the january 6th committee. obviously, erica, in his testimony to that committee already certain questions he wants to be able to answer and under existing law i expect that the government is going to be able to -- the justice department will be able to get that tempur stimpur sunt to a gy subpoena. >> in your view how important is the testimony from these two gentlemen? what could it really tell us? >> we don't know for sure but it sure sounded to me like mr. cipollone was telling the former president not to have anything to do with the attack on january 6, not to be anywhere near the capitol, to try to stop, for example, the insurrectionists from attacking the capitol, try to warn them or urge them to turn away. in addition to that it appears that mr. cipo

and i take all of your point that what we're really getting at is access to cipollone and philbin and place, what is the importance of unlocking greg jacobs from any claims of executive privilege? >> well, it's twofold. for starters, they figure there are many schemes right in the january 6th committee and that the doj is considering. so the final -- the final desperate move basically to intimidate pence into playing ball and breaking the law, they're going to be very privy to, including as i said this kind of harrowing detail that's in maggie haberman's latest book, that they felt pence was in actual physical danger because of trump. relatedly, they will know about whether or not they were present, the conversation that trump and pence have on the morning of the 6th when he really tells pence this is not happening. and trump nevertheless revs up the crowd by making them think it's still open-ended so when they do find out, they are going really berserk. some of the other schemes, the doj one, the phony electors, pence's involvement as far as we know and therefore short and jacobs' wo

former white house counsel pat cipollone and his deputy patrick philbin are among the top witnesses looking into trump's efforts to impede the transfer of power after the 2020 election. the two men pushed back against trump's false vote claims and legal wrangling that is playing out in a series of court fights, one that the justice department has been winning. in recent weeks they won a justice department order to obtain new testimony to former vice president mike pence. it's opened the way for the justice department's criminal investigation to reach further into the inner circle. all four men declined to answer some questions about the advice. they lost the battle between jacob and short when they lost last month. the disputes are likely to spawn several more court fights that will be crucial for prosecutors as they work to bring criminal charges related to trump's post criminal efforts. evan perez. >>> trump's former communications director already had an informal interview with the january 6th committee and is now being called back for a formal investigation. trump told hicks he lost the

witnesses we're talking about, pat cipollone who was the former white house counsel, his deputy patrick philbinnesses and they were pushing back against these vote fraud claims by the former president, and they appeared before the criminal grand jury, the federal criminal grand jury here in washington, but they declined to answer certain questions because of the former president's claim of privilege, executive privilege and attorney/client privilege, and now the judge is asking them to compel them and ask them about their certain interactions with trump. how this goes, guys, it portends very, very, very largely for the criminal investigation by the justice department because if they can get some of this testimony from these two men, these two top lawyers in the white house, you can bet the prosecutors want to get questions to mark meadows and some of the other witnesses. >> that is for sure. evan perez, thank you. >>> more evidence, the consequences of climate change are already happening. the u.s. government just gave the emperor penguin endangered species protections. we've got details ahead.

passive polonium patrick philbin -- to testify about conversations they had with the former presidentthat's a made a secret court fight trump has been waging to block former advisers from testifying in front of the federal grand jury investigating january 6th. back with us now to discuss, scott jennings, karen finney, and ron brownstein. as we are talking about the greater issue of democracy in peril, the president now, is saying, of course, that democracies on the ballot. we know abortion is on the ballot and crime is on the ballot. there's a number of issues. when you hear about this and think about the reporting, that there still an interest by doj in particular to try to get the testimony surrounding january 6th, is there still the electoral appetite, do you think? >> look, inflation is 9%. presidential approval rating is at 40%. in that climate it's going to be tough for the party in power. one of the reasons they are still in the game -- democrats are still on the game, at least for controlling the senate -- is, in fact, over the summer, they were able to energize and activate t

pat cipollone, pat philbin, christina and all of these folks in the sights of doj. some with potentially criminal conduct mostly as witnesses. it complicates. attorney-client privilege there and the exact thing it normally protects. communications between the lawyer and client, but here also you have an exception. a textbook case of this, because at least as reported, the client is saying to the lawyer, hey you know, i want you to help me do something that really is a crime, right? hiding these documents from the national archives. the lawyer says, no way. that's a case where admittedly after some litigation the court will say, crime fraud exception. those accusations can come out. >> a lot of it getting back to what trump knew, if trump knew it wasn't everything when he asked this lawyer to tell the archives it was everything. that could be a real problem. >> we already know there are three statutes being investigated. additional statutes doj did not name in the search warrant that deal specifically with classified documents. all of them require this as you said. a

we expect that other witnesses, people like pat cipollone, patrick philbin, important witnesses thatormer president has tried to stop from testifying, providing testimony, we expect those people to be called back before the grand jury and to answer those questions from prosecutors. >> important point. and shan, in another blow to former president trump, a legal blow to former president trump, the u.s. supreme court today rejected his emergency request to intervene in the dispute over the highly classified documents seized from mar-a-lago. so where does this go from here? >> well, i think this pretty much ends trump's ability to go to the court on this. he may come up with other issues to try them again, but the court has made the very right decision not to validate this unprecedented interference with a criminal investigation by the judiciary. so i'm happy to see that the court has followed the legal analysis and some of the concerns we've had about partisanship, i they followed the law on this one. >> okay, guys, thank you very, very much. and be sure to tune in later tonight for an

motion asking a federal judge to compel former white house council pat cipollone and his deputy pat philbinvide additional testimony agency part of the investigation into the efforts to overton the 2020 election. both men spoke to the grand jury last month under subpoena but declined to answer somal questions. the doj wants them to come back and this time answer them. prosecutors are hoping the two can provide the grand jury with first hand advice they gave to trump about his plans to overturn the election, as well as the former president's mind-set and activities in the leadup to january 6. >>> still ahead, more fallout from kanye west's anti-semitic rants. and now athletes are distancing themselves from the rapper. >>> and a little later in the show, an urgent push to save a democrat in a district that president biden won by double digits two years ago. "way too early" will be back with all of that, and more. back with all of that, and more it has l-theanine to help me relax from daily stress. plus, shoden ashwagandha for quality sleep. so i can wake up refreshed. neuriva: think bigger. f

york times reports doj is asking a judge to force trump white house lawyers, pat cipollone and pat philbin to provide additional testimony. the times said it's -- in an effort by prosecutors to punch through trump's privilege claims. a source tells nbc news that hope -- one of trump's closest aide is being interviewed by the january six committee today. with that, let's get smart with the help of our lead off panel tonight. nbc news correspondent and moderator of washington week, jacqueline alemany, congressional investigators reporter for the washington post in an msnbc contributor, barry berke he served as counsel to the democrats during the trump impeachment. and his first visit to our 11th hour. -- what are you hearing about it yamiche alcindor? >> what i'm hearing is democrats feel comfortable with the idea is if they were able to get jonathan herman on that stage, talking about the issues that they deem are important. but is clear he still has communication issues, even though his campaign has been very clear. he does have covid issues, but -- the doctor says he's fit to serve. the c

the atmosphere, the philbin. i'm a great believer in the power of inhabiting spaces, where the history actually happened. when we used to these tours, hopefully, covid may go away at some point we detours again. i would take people out to the battlefield at canning in italy, which is just a field, right? but just to be in that place is a special thing. i think that it did... if i wrote the book in the united states, i think it would've been very good. i think the fact that i wrote it in paris, in the places of these things are actually happening, i just think that it gave the pros, gave me, gabe... there is a sensuality to what i'm describing but doesn't exist if i'm not there i love what i did. i still appears. it was lovely city. it's a lovely city. >> a lovely city, i'm good. it's a lovely city. >> i'm good. >> yeah, yeah. >> i want to go back. sara is here. and she is famous in our world. an archivist at the massachusetts historical society. and an expert on the adams family -- john adams, abigail adams -- >>

white house lawyers pass for me and patrick philbin also intervened and warned clark not to communicatelark agreed. but just two days later escalated the situation with an e-mail that set off a series of events that would rock the justice department. >> we came in on monday decembe all were. and then in the afternoon we go that e-mail which i had to sit down and read more than once to make sure i understood what he was proposing. what was he proposing? >>> he was proposing sending ou a letter signed by the three of us, the acting attorney general lysell jeff clarke, mercer-georgia, but also the other states on the other swing states as well, suggesting essentially that day set aside the electors assigned to suppor president-elect biden and hold hearings, and basically have th state legislature take a new slate of electors. the letter claimed the us department of justice's investigations have local unified significant concern tha have this may impact the outcom of elections multiple states including state of georgia." is that true? >>> no. why the letter was sent solely by jeff clarke, i

patrick philbin, that was his deputy, white house counsel, and michael, trump's executive assistant, who went to work for him at mar-a-lago, and that is reporting from the "washington post," cnn, nbc news and "the new york times." how long do you think this investigation is and what specific threat does that group represent to trump? >> pretty far. if you dry a venn diagram of that group, you'll have a little shaded in space in the middle that is donald trump all the way. let me talk about that first row. cash patel, he's the guy who tried to support trump's notion that he had magically declassified the documents. why do you have him in the grand jury, i see one reason only that you have him in the mar-a-lago grand jury, and that's to explore trump's punitive defense, even though it's garbage that he magically declassified. christina bobb, the lawyer who was hoodwinked into the signing at attestation, the man who moved around the documents. the other three, that's testimony that goes to trump's knowledge, we would have them anyway. those three up top, and especially patel to me indic

pat philbin, pat cipollone's white house deputy counsel told the national archives in a september 2021f news clips at mar-a-lago. we know that's not true. christina bobb signed a sworn affidavit in june regarding the documents. we know her assertions are likely not true. evan corcoran alleged all documents had been returned. they may turn out not to be true. and eric herschmann warned trump about having gold markets at mar-a-lago. to your point, it feels like in your instance the obstruction may very well made up of some of these fact patterns. >> absolutely. and the obstruction really -- the obstruction seems to be about donald trump's own actions. we've seen in the reporting that he packed some of the boxes himself, that he knew what was in them, and he was potentially making misrepresentations to his own lawyer. from the justice department's point of view, this is not an issue of whether or not his legal team was not being straight with the department. it's really an issue of whether or not donald trump himself was being straight with the department. now one of the questions that ar