and that's exactly what steve bannon wants but -- and don't forget, steve bannon has the worst case for privilege of anybody up there because he wasn't serving in the administration. and yet, he has decided to make a cause out of this because it works to his benefit. i don't think it works to mark meadows' benefit, as you were pointing out. or to other trump admin -- administration officials' benefit but bannon's kind of a special case. >> yeah, josh, the difference between meadows and bannon certainly seems, you know, i guess meadows -- at least in the past -- didn't want to be held in contempt of congress. steve bannon seems to want nothing else. it helps him for all the reasons andrew said. i mean, is this battle with the justice department -- i guess, financially, i guess he has a lot of money and -- and it's good for his reputation in the world that he exists in? >> well, yeah. i mean, i think for bannon, you don't have to look any further than the fact that he brought a camera crew to his arraignment and stopped in mid-perp walk to do a live interview to show you what it is that s

whatever steve bannon wants to make of it is fine. day, you have to prove, number one, there was a subpoena, and number two, there was a guy that chose to flout it and you can do that with one or two witnesses. it is not a long drawnout event no matter what steve bannon or his allies might want to do. i would think the court would recognize that, put this on a relatively short timeline because even setting aside whatever anybody might think about who is right or who is wrong, just look at the things he's been charged with and it is really quite straightforward, not a complex financial crime or lobbying crime or something like that. >> elliott williams, thank you. >> thank you, erica. take care, jim. >>> still ahead, he was poised for a leadership role if republicans took back the house in the next election. so why then would congressman devin nunes instead choose to leave congress? what his resignation tells us about the power struggle in the gop. >>> and we're moments away from the opening bell on wall street. dow futures surging thi

two charges against steve bannon. one for the testimony, the other for documents. produced thousands of pages here. is a charge for that, for the documents as clean as it is for bannon, who didn't really supply anything. he's just not giving -- what do you see here as it relates to what garland will do? >> i think evan was on the right track there when he said that this is a different case. i think as for the documents, it's a difficult case for the doj because meadows has had some pressure of cooperation. he's working with his attorney. has a very well-known attorney working on the matter. it's complicated. you can imagine a jury looking at this, if they were asked to convict meadows, i imagine what he would say is i did my best, i gave documents, tried to cooperate, but as evan noted, he's a very close adviser to the former president. there are other issues at stake and so forth. so i think this would be a more difficult case for the doj to make, but it could potentially provide leverage for congress because the committee, i think, you know, could say that they wo

as things are unfolding and steve bannon was integrally involved in the planning for january 6th, it slightly different gloss on the pardon that bannon received a couple weeks after january 6th, before donald trump left office. so we know that he's willing and able to do this for his cronies because he did it with roger stone, and then he did it again with steve bannon. and i wonder to what degree that influenced steve bannon to defy the subpoena from the january 6th committee. i have no information about it, but, you know, once you start to see patterns and you know that someone as corrupt as donald trump is in the mix with all this power, it's not a far leap to think that may have had something to do with it. >> so he's saying that he's going to plead the fifth, which is interesting. i want to read this piece that nbc think published. in a non-criminal proceeding, which of course this is, the invocation of privilege is limited to those circumstances in which the person invoking the privilege reasonably believes his disclosures could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead t

but it also serves steve bannon's purpose.e wants to make it a circus to foster the larger effort that january 6th was part of, an offensive against american democracy. and donald trump is part of that. donald trump is encouraging that. before the clock runs out on this democratic congress, if it does next year, how much can they show the american people and how much accountability can they obtain through the congress itself or the justice department. big question mark. >> everybody is talking about steve bannon, oh, the trial is delayed until july. it doesn't force him to testify. no matter when the trial is. >> that's why getting documents and the people around him is going to be so important. people around him received his texts that day. there were phone calls reportedly in the war room he was in. who was making those phone calls. that information can be found out. and the reporting you had in the books, the news, is being validated every day. it will be more fully validated when you get the phone records. and people who d

we have to remember that the meadows situation is different than that of steve bannon because steve bannonasier for them to cross the aisle. here, meadows has engaged with the committee and provided thousands of pages of records. the case really is different. it could make it more difficult for some republicans to support referring him to the justice department for criminal charges. but the house select committee over the past three days, michael, we have seen they have been making their case certainly in the court of public opinion about why meadows should be held in contempt. now, they argue that, look, you clearly handed over thousands of pages of documents. you didn't think those were privileged. you should at least come in and answer questions about these documents and over the past three days they have slowly been rolling out new details, some of them truly shocking. tonight we're learning more about the kind of messages that meadows was receiving, including a new text message from an official in georgia. now, meadows received this text message according to the committee during that

i think steve bannon wants to do what steve bannon is doing. and i have said before, i will say again, i think steve bannon is having to some extent the time of his life. this is not a felony charge. it's a misdemeanor charge and i think that he -- he feels as if is this more faceable than when he was previously under indictment for a felony and he got a pardon from trump. so i don't know that this is actually trump saying to people, wolf, don't do this. but i do think that people know that they have ways to curry favor with trump and, you know, looking as if you are going to the far ends of the earth to try to support him or defend him is one of those ways. >> maggie haberman, thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you. >>> up next. just a day after their video summit, there is breaking news on russia's military buildup on ukraine's border. >>> also, what president biden is threatening if russia invades the former national security council and russia expert, fiona hill, standing by to join us live. >>> and later, our randi kaye asks the forme

he was subpoenaed a few weeks ago. >> also today, the doj and former trump advisor steve bannon just ourt status hearing with very different ideas for how his contempt of congress case should proceed. the judge today scheduled bannon's trial to begin on july 18th. the doj wanted this to start in april. bannon's attorneys wanted this to start in october. cnn political correspondent sara murray is with us live now. let's start with steve bannon and what more can you tell us about what came out of that hearing? >> well, you know, we have seen that steve bannon and his team want to drag this on for as long as possible. the judge was not buying it. he was essentially, like, i don't know why we need to wait until october to do this. he set a trial date for july 18th, but it's worth noting that is still much later than what the government was hoping for there. that is still a blow to the government and still a blow to the committee that is trying to get information out of steve bannon or at least use him as an example to other witnesses to say, hey, look, defying these subpoenas is not going

because there is a process and get into the weeds here, and donald trump and steve bannon's efforts toet pants to not do with the constitution and the 12 amendment requires to stand up there and take a certificate from 50 states. and in the end of pence did but that was a wobbly course to get there pretty so this can be an interesting issue for the justice department because politically, i'm sure that biden would be seen going after the former president but if there was ever an obstruction of the process in government, this is it ready. >> and everybody must read this and it really takes us over out today and so many ways but are you continuing to follow the narrative thread are you taking a break or is bob woodward always in motion. >> would you ask elsa that question i mean, yes and no i mean, the whole question of an this is for you, what is the trump residency going to be known for in history and we need the evidence and the testimony of the steve bannon's in these other lawyers that we talked about and we talked about the meeting the day before the hotel in washington and all the

steve bannon was involved in the planning for january six. slightly different gloss on the pardon that bannon received a couple of weeks after january six before donald trump left office. so we know that he is willing and able to do this for his cronies. because he did it with roger stone. and then he did it again with steve bannon. i wonder to what degree that influence that steve bannon has to defy the subpoena from the january six committee has on him. i have no information on that but once you start to see patterns that someone as corrupt as donald trump is in the mix with all of this power, it is not a far leap to think that that may had have something to do with it. >> he is saying he's going to plead the fifth. let me read this piece that msnbc accomplished, and a non criminal proceeding, the implication of privilege limited to those circumstances in which the person invoking the privilege reasonably believes that it can be used in a criminal prosecution or can lead to other evidence that could be so used. but of course in practice if t

for steve bannon and mark meadows, their path to score out of this has gotten narrower. this is a bad day for them. steve bannon is being criminally prosecuted for defying the subpoenas for this investigation. the house is set to refer mark meadows for the same kind of criminal prosecution. it looks like that will happen on monday, this upcoming monday, just a few days from now. but i think it's also worth noting here, particularly when we're trying to sort of ascertain the state of mind and potential desperation of some of the people involved here, i think it's also worth noting that this ruling tonight, this unanimous excoriating ruling shutting down trump's efforts to avoid this investigation, it comes at what is otherwise a terrible time for former president trump in terms of his legal woes, in terms of the various ways that he's in trouble and under investigation. "the new york times" today expanded on the reporting from earlier this week that his big new media venture, this thing that he's trying to launch, is already caught up in two serious financial investigatio

steve bannon never having been part of the administration since 2017. counter that to mark meadows, chief of staff, for the president of the united states. mark meadows had a much stronger, more valid claim about the assertion of privilege. the trick here though is he's already provided documents when it comes to content that has nothing to do with executive privilege. and for that too he has refused to actually abide by and comply with the subpoena. so he's made a more difficult case for himself to be able to say that the privilege will attach to everything, and he's made it easier case for the department of justice who probably thought, look, for the institution of the presidency, we know there will be instances you want to have the candid conversations with top advisers, the chief of staff, mark meadows has taken that ammunition that he once had away. >> scott jennings, there is more evidence as you see these texts, communications revealed, that a plan to overturn, to reject the results of elections in several states being discussed from the day afte

steve bannon, longtime adviser to trump, run his campaign in 2016.k meadows, his less white house chief of staff, both of these gentlemen, we think, are preparing to argue to the court themselves that they don't have to comply with this investigation themselves because it is not a proper investigation. but it seems to be one of the grounds on which steve bannon and mark meadows are justifying to the court that they are not complying with the investigation. the problem for them now, is that this ruling tonight, this is the appeals court that holds jurisdiction were both the meadows case and the sea benin case are being heard. so an appeals court ruling, on the legitimacy of the court, it's a definitive thing. that the court in that circuit have to abide by. and in this appeals court ruling tonight, to january six investigation is described us quite legitimate. it is described in this ruling as having a uniquely vital interest in carrying out the january six investigation. so to the extent that steve bannon and mark meadows say, we don't need to comply

steve bannon has -- remember, steve bannon partially complied. sorry, steve bannon completely defied the committee. mark meadows partially complied. he partially defied them. bannon never waived the p privilege. meadows did with writing his book and providing these documents. for both of them, we're talking about the executive privilege by a former president. the d.c. court of appeals has said, that doesn't work here. i think they could both be charged. meadows is going to be a tougher case. doesn't mean he is in the clear though. >> the most important thing for last year, liz cheney making sure, or at least opening the door to the idea that what happened during these hours may have been a crime. inside the white house. >> liz csehheney said something that made my prosecutorial ears perk up. did donald trump, through action or inaction, correctly seek to obstruct or impede congress' proceedings? sounds legalistic. guess what? it is. here's a federal crime for objection of congress. to impede the administration of the law by congress. it almost se

, more than two republicans crossed the aisle to vote to hold steve bannon in contempt. why wouldn't they do the same with mark meadows? >> well, because he is a former member, perhaps, there's some relationships there that may prevent folks from deciding to go that way, but you're right. it will be totally intriguing to see how many republicans join with the democrats on this vote. but you know, alisyn, when we say that trump was m.i.a., it feels like too favorable of a term to the president, because i feel he wasn't m.i.a. he had taken months to sow this lie into the country, and he was watching the fruits of his labor. he wasn't m.i.a. he was observing and reportedly enthusiastic about seeing the very results of his work for months, trying to convince half the country or a little less than half the country, perhaps, that the election was fraudulently stolen by joe biden. so, he wasn't missing in action at all. he was actually -- i mean, yes, he was a total dereliction in duty of what he should have been doing, but he was actually there, obviously, and not reachable to

this exercise happened recently with former donald trump age steve bannon and he was indicted and hisal is in july. the factual circumstances are little different. mr. meadows did cooperate to some degree, he turned over 9000 documents, records, including texts and emails the people are not talking about a lot. so, there is no way to predict necessarily what will happen at the justice department. but, the next step is a possible criminal indictment that could trigger up to one year in jail. ros: mark meadows share texts and emails that would help the committee understand what is happening in the white house while the mob was storming the capitol just over oneile away. liz cheney is one of two republicans on that committee. >> mr. meadows received several text messages that he has produced imploring that mr. trump take specific action that we all know his duty required. i will read a few. mark, one memb said, he need to stop this now. in all caps, tell them to go home. potus has to come out firmly until the protesters to dissipate. so what is going to get killed. -- someone is going to

first, a federal judge denies steve bannon's request to delay his trial until october. it is now set for july. that may sound like a ways from now, but this is a judge telling mr. bannon, legally, you're not going to just run out the clock. also, bannon charged with two counts of criminal contempt. that's for defying openly the congressional investigation. you have heard us report on this if you have watched "the beat." there are ways that people can lawfully and frankly reasonably debate and negotiate around these subpoenas. what bannon did, though, was say i'm not even trying to do that. i'm going to openly defy almost courting the battle. that's the context for what he continues to do out in the public realm. which is use this to try to hype his own big lie while plotting governmental revenge. >> to make sure you can't steal another one, and you did steal it. i don't care if you can't handle that. you stole it. this is illegitimate. and the american people see it when they get wiped out, we're going to start cleaning out the rat's nest this city has been. >> there it

just please make my friend president again. [ laughter ] and i'm sorry, steve bannon thinks americanslawsuit from mike lindell to have a reason to fight at thanksgiving? my uncle ron needs two drinks, and he turns into mike lindell [ laughter ] one minute he's telling aunt debbie she's his light, and the next minute he's screaming, "you pretend to be a loyal wife, but i know about the affairs." [ laughter ] and, again, i know lindell is from minnesota, and not chicago, but, uhh -- i don't care [ laughter ] still, good news for families trying to avoid conflict lindell has failed to file his lawsuit, as promised and he's blaming it on the republican national committee. lindell accused the rnc of calling state attorneys general and pressuring them not to sign the complaint. he also said he was flying to five different states to get attorneys general to sign the document holiday travel is stressful enough as it is. imagine being in a boarding area with this guy, who is definitely going to stand up when group one is called no matter what group he's sitting in. [ laughter ] plus, you know

i expect bernie kerik to end up down the same road at steve bannon. >> and notably, jennifer, both steveiuliani and bernard kerik worked to try to find evidence of voter fraud on behalf of the former president. ultimately what impact could keriko potential impact have on somebody like giuliani or bannon? >> it's interesting because apparently what they really want to talk to him about is his involvement in the election fraud nonsense but also this meeting at the willard hotel right on the eve of january 6th. so, you know, if he turns over enough information and is willing to talk about that and that will, of course, put pressure on all of the other participants in this conspiracy, including this meeting at the willard when they were talking about how to put pressure on mike pence to overturn the election. so these are building blocks. each person if you can get enough information from them it helps in getting information from other people, too. that's certainly one of the reasons they want to speak to kerik. >> do you think there's any chance the january 6th select committee could pursue

we don't have the resources steve bannon has stockton said reference bannon's multimillion-dollar fortuneptions are in many ways limited." and indeed we saw stockton there today and lawrence there tomorrow. >> they're facing subpoenas from the committee. that raises the possibility of intense legal bills. and they feel abandoned by trump. i've reported on how matt and mercy schlapp and matt whitaker, the former acting attorney general, have this legal fund that they've set up for some of the trump aides caught up in this investigation. stockton and lawrence have gotten no such aid. and they also claim to be feeling really abandoned when they watch the rank and file trump supporters who heeded the president's call, went to the capitol that day, and also received no support. one thing i just want to say about paul gosar denying this. when i did the first story where dustin and jen were anonymous he claimed he never met them even though they hadn't been identified. they did in fact meet, and we published the photo of them together on the ellipse on january 6th. and gosar admits he did pursue

steve bannon was the other.the two cases. >> in the most critical respect, mark meadows and steve bannon are in exactly the same position. that is, they refuse to even appear, so they didn't come and assert a privilege. they just basically said, we don't even need to bother showing up. so in that sense, they stand exactly the same way. you're right, bannon was -- hadn't been in the white house for years. meadows was the chief of staff. but meadows is talking about these events. he's talking about it publicly. he's releasing documents to the congress, at least he had, and he's written a book about this. so, if there's anyone who's made the case against meadows being treated any differently than steve bannon, it's mark meadows. >> evaluate that compare and contrast, from mark meadows to steve bannon. >> representative schiff is 100% correct, so, you know, there was a difference between meadows and bannon in that bannon never even worked in the white house during the relevant events of january 6th, so the idea that

remember, steve bannon trying to make the case and he was a private citizen. didn't work anywhere but for himself. >> yeah, steph. no doubt. mark meadows having been chief of staff will have a more robust executive privilege claim than steve bannon. steve bannon has zero claim to executive privilege and basically the courts acknowledge that. here's the thing. there is this thing called waiver by disclosure. i think we'll have to talk about it. meadows put a whole bunch of stuff in a book and it looks like all of this may be a ploy to try to sell as many books as he can. that stuff involves conversations and interactions with donald trump. so here's the thing. the law generally says, even if you have a viable privilege. executive, doctor/patient or attorney/client privilege, if you start talking about information openly and publicly that would otherwise enjoy a privilege, guess what? you've waived it. here is the only way mark meadows can avoid a criminal contempt referral. he has to go before the house select committee. begin answering questions and then if th

. >> steve bannon is already in court because of a criminal contempt. the committee wants the information and wants it now. they are faced with the idea that if you have another court case, a key witness here, yes, year getting other people cooperating and getting documents, but this key with eyes on trump from election day through january 6th, you need to win in court, that could last into next summer. >> right. we've seen when you talk about steve bannon, when you talk about mark meadows, we've seen some of the people who were closest to trump, some of the biggest name republicans in the white house during the last administration, we've seen them trying to delay this investigation, delay this probe, to try to just continue to stonewall, try to, you know, give democrats a hard time. and you know, when you have to go through the court process, these are things that take a long time. i think steve bannon's next court day may be around july, i think -- >> right -- >> that's a long time. and i believe the committee wanted to wrap up its work in the spring.

that's what is being used with steve bannon right now.anism is the inherent contempt authority they could actually jail this member of congress on their own if they wanted to and say look, you know, that's the price for not telling the truth. that's the power that goes all the way back to the founding. i guess the last thing i'd say is they have the power to expel him under the constitution but that would require a super majority vote by the congress. >> i want to ask you about liz cheney. last week she said something. i was just talking to katy about it. she was talking about -- let's play what she said on december 13th about donald trump. >> did donald trump through action or inaction corruptly seek to obstruct or impede congress' official proceedings to count electoral votes. >> remarkable language. did donald trump through action or inaction corruptly seek to obstruct or impede congress' official proceeding to count electoral votes on january 6th. that's meaningful. the committee wants to look into is meaningful because if the answer

were siding with their former colleague and indicated this was different than what happened with steve bannon. of course, bannon at the time was not a member of the administration. mike meadows and january 6th was the white house chief of staff. but the republican leadership made clear they wanted all of their members on the house side to vote no. they recommended a no vote. just two, kinzinger and cheney, members of the committee were the only ones who voted to go forward with this contempt referral. but the seven others who voted for steve bannon's contempt referral, they voted no, including several of those who also voted to impeach donald trump. john katko of new york, anthony gonzalez of ohio. all -- jaime herrera beutler of washington state who were part of that ten who voted to impeach donald trump. at the same time, there are a lot of questions about who these republican lawmakers were who were in contact with mark meadows on january 6th. yesterday i had a chance to ask the republican leader of the senate, mitch mcconnell, about whether he was in contact with mark meadows and he made

and applause ) it's real. >> jon: wow. >> stephen: steve bannon-- steve bannon might finally face justice and, if he goes to prison, take a shower. ( laughter ) this morning-- this morning? just this morning, bannon surrendered to the f.b.i. in washington, and during the perp walk, he said this: >> i just want to say-- tell everybody that live stream on gettr right now. everybody watching in the war room, we're here today. i don't want anybody to take their eye off the ball of what we do every day. okay? you got raheem kassam today, you got dr. peter navarro, captain bannon. >> stephen: he did a promo for his podcast on his way to jail. reminds me of when the press pool surrounded lee harvey oswald: >> i'd just like to say "i am a patsy," and the host of "big lee harvey's morning zoo crew with castro and the gooch!" ( laughter ) ( air horns ) ( toilet flushing ) >> stephen: you never hear about that. you ne-- nobody talks about that part. >> jon: hmm. >> stephen: now, this is a very complicated legal case. okay, let's see if i can break it down for you: congress subpoenaed bannon to testi

ground zero for that is steve bannon. this is a man behind a coup that's almost a year old and somehow hasn't gone to jail. jesse smollett faked a crime. she in jail. steve bannon is responsible for turning around this country and turning it into a reality tv show this man has won the year. none of us are better off for it. that unfortunately is the state of marine makes in 2021. >> it's interesting. because you are absolutely right. this is a guy who has basically got four shirts and none of them fit. none of them i think he laundered. he literally looks like a who hobo. he's mangled to own a president donald trump, he was his sven galli and destroying democracy, he says on his podcast whatever he does, i think he lives for free in some sheik's apartment. i don't know where he makes his money. he has managed to destroy and destabilize the country. i can't argue with you. it's a negative choice. it's accurate. my pick for who won the year kind of off what jason said. i would like to get each of you guy's comments. i would

> you got it. >> first, i think it's a much more difficult case than the contempt case against steve bannonlain why. bannon just refused to cooperate at all. he just snubbed the committee and walked away. meadows not only negotiated with the committee but provided thousands of documents to the committee. where he refused to cooperate, it was based on his invocation of whatever residual executive privilege remains in former president trump. now, based on my reading of the law, i don't think there is any valid residual executive privilege that trump possesses, but the courts have not fully resolved that issue. so it strikes me meadows can do two things. he can cooperate to some extent. provide documents and there are certain questions he can answer and those two make it much more difficult for the department of justice to file criminal charges against him. much more difficult. >> chuck, what are the rules of the january 6th committee, they have to abide by dealing with mark meadows' texts? i say that right now they have, he clearly gave them some texts's they decided, this is what they gave t

in terms of the timeline here, we should note that after the house voted in october that steve bannon should be referred for prosecution, it was about three i weeks later that a fedel grand jury, in fact, handed down thet, indictment of bannon on those contempt charges. what the investigation was actually voting on tonight, what the house will be voting on tomorrow, is a contempt report that investigators prepared on mark meadows. in that report, they laid out all the ways in which mark meadows failed to comply with their subpoenas, all the reasons he has to comply with their subpoenas, but also all the reasons why it was so important the investigation needed to talk to him and get access to his documents. they say, quote, the select committee seeks information from mr. meadows central to its ththy investigative responsibilities.d the events of january 6th involved both the physical assault on the capitol building and law enforcement personnel t protecting it, and an attack on the constitutional process central to the peaceful transfer of power following a presidential election. the c

right now former trump advisor steve bannon is back in federal court. us an idea of how bannon's case is laid out. he is charged with two counts of contempt of congress connected with his refusal to answer questions from the house committee investigating the january 6th riot. bannon has plead not guilty. what are we expecting to learn from this hearing, happening as we speak? >> i think you're right. we're getting a look at how bannon intends to defend his case. his lawyer right now is talking to the judge and saying pretty clearly that just as the committee wants to investigate steve bannon, steve bannon wants to investigate the committee. his lawyer says it will be important to subpoena witnesses, that there's a whole question about the propriety of the january 6th committee being led by someone, benny thompson, who has already sued trump civilly, that they're entitled to know why the us attorney's office decided to go ahead with criminal charges against bannon, even though somebody who has raised the executive privilege defense in the past has ever b

steve bannon recently talked about it.party through the precinct committee strategy. we are taking over all the elections. >> are they going to be successful? >> well, we have yet to see. i -- i will tell you and i -- i said yesterday in wisconsin, i am as scared and worried as i have ever been. we have people now running for positions as election officials who view election denial as a feature, not a flaw, of their campaigns. it is actually one of their primary campaign plat forms. um, we are seeing people who believe it is okay to try to, um, leverage some kind of perceived constitutional cheat code to install someone who lost an election by over 7 million votes in the white house. we have to put this election in perspective. it was the widest margin of any presidential election in the 21st century when barack obama wasn't on the ballot. it was not a close election. and to see this kind of denial -- and it's not just in the states like stoarizona and wisconsin and georgia where the margin was close, we are seeing denial

steve bannon goes around trying to get them all together. forces need to be more unified. applaud the idea. i applaud president biden launched the presidential initiative for democratic renewal. i went through it. i think everything in it is great. it is all focused on the external side. i would like to see a presidential initiative for democratic renewal within the united states as well. they talked about it, let's give them credit, they talked about it. but the best way to help small d democrats abroad is to strengthen democracy at home. it has to be part of the homework after this summit is over. >> without ambassador mcfaul making this about what democrats aren't doing because there is a document, a piece of legislation, federal voting rights election and democrats have a hard time uniting as a party around them. what do you do to make democracy the more politically popular thing in other countries? how can we learn from other places that chose democracy what he it was a tough choice is this some of the tactics by world renowned exposing

that father then joined steve bannon on his show to elaborate.rump is my president and he should still be president right now. the election was 100% stolen. >> i mean, what does that tell you act bout where we are at ri now in terms of the political dialogue in this country? >> it gets to my earlier point, right? i mean, this is a deep, deep sickness in our democracy. um, and i don't know how you address it. you asked me whether the, you know, specifics of what happened in the willard would matter. um, there is not a shred of evidence out there that this election was stolen and, in fact, court after court after court and commission after commission after commission has said no, it's not. and yet, you get guys like this. i mean, set aside the basic indecency. set aside what it says about our country that people talking to the president of the united states can't put aside their petty grudges to behave with some respect. this is a cancer. this is a deep, deep cancer on our democracy, jim. and i really worry what that means for 2024 and beyond. >> a

and the idea of steve bannon wiggling off anything was too much for me. but no one has gotten away.here are folks that they haven't sort of turned inside out in terms of what they know and what they saw. but i think the decision today by this appeals court -- and it's 68 pages. a lot of it is about how extraordinarily important it is for congress to get all these answers. they are making a legal argument that i think at least some of our legal friends, it would be pretty difficult for the supreme court to go in a different direction just on the legal grounds. but i think this idea of a ticking clock is very much on all of their minds. and i think that what we don't see shouldn't worry us as much as it does. it is clear that what they already know is shaping the subpoenas, it's becoming more clear in the letters they put out. if you thought, though, that i was going to stay up and put lipstick on at 11:00 just to talk about the committee, you had another thing coming. i think i can safely say i speak for all three of us in saying that to be on this last broadcast is so bittersweet. i

he has a stronger case as opposed to steve bannon. he's the chief of staff.nstitution of the presidency is really about trying to protect those candid conversations, but the idea of saying nothing, have a carte blanche to say i don't have to do anything for you is absolute foolishness. also, i can't imagine they are fully surprised by this. remember when he talked about the idea last woke, we heard report begun having the first covid test negative after that first debate with savannah guthrie and then trump interjects, suddenly it's fake news and now there's a conversation about i'm willing to cooperate. trump probably weighing in thinking about the conversations in the georgia race about, you know, not liking brian kemp and the like for not promoting the big lie. suddenly meadows has to take a step back. this is not coincidence but it's the kind of gamesmanship that should not win out in congress. >> and the kind of gamesmanship that puts to the test the credibility of this committee. >> when it comes to the privilege claims, it doesn't matter if a lot of ex

and the idea that steve bannon wiggling off anything is too much for me. no one has gone in a way there are folks that they have in said in terms of what they know and what they saw. but i think that the decision today, by this appeals court, and in 68 pages, a lot of it is about how extraordinarily important it is. they are making a legal argument that i think at least some of our legal friends think would be pretty difficult for our supreme court to go in a different direction. just on the legal ground. but i think that this idea that a ticking clock is very much on all of their minds. and what we don't see shouldn't worry us, but it does. it is clear that what they already know, shaping the subpoenas is becoming more clear. if you thought, though, that i was going to stay up and put lipstick on at 11:00 just to talk about the committee, you have another thing coming. i think i can safely say, i speak for all three of, us in saying that to be on this last broadcast disobeyed or street. it was extraordinary. it's the new state that made you want to throw

you will remember that when a similar vote was taken in the case of steve bannon, nine republicans voted along with the democrats. also taking a little longer tonight, there are a lot of folks who are voting for members of congress who are not there. we're keeping our eyes very closely on what's happening, but as you know, mark meadows has refused to cooperate with the investigation after initially engaging with the committee and after he turned over thousands of pages of records. last night the january 6 committee revealed just a few of those records, mostly text messages between mark meadows and unnamed republicans on the hill as well as trump's family and fox news hosts, all asking meadows to urge the former president to tell the mob attacking the capitol to stand down. tonight the committee made public another text message. it was sent november 4th, the day after the 2020 election and before all the votes were counted from a lawmaker to mark meadows. this is how it reads, quote, here's an aggressive strategy. why can't the states of georgia, north carolina, pennsylvania and other rep

the couple had an on again, off again friendship with steve bannon. that working relationship took a turn in 2019 when they held bannon start a group called we build the wall. an organization which raised tens of millions of dollars from trump supporters in order to privately fund a privately constructed border wall. they did build three miles out of it. the whoem thing came tumbling down when bannon along with others was arrested, bannon arrested on the yacht of a chinese billionaire, why not, charged with embezzling the money he duped them into donating. a mean thing to do to people that trust you. never went to trial for it. stockton and lawrence had the r.v. raided by law enforcement. they've been stuck in a state of legal limbo. bannon had that taken care of because he was pardon bid trum -- pardoned before trump left office. stockton and lawrence have not been charged. legal loomed over their heads when cord according to the couple, they were going to be pardoned if they organized a series rallies leading up to january 6th. they call that false a

he should be voted in contempt, referred for prosecution, and indicted. >> we spoke the day steve bannony held in contempt on the day the doj took action against him. was that a signal that folks like mar meadows need to get in line here, and are you seeing any other signals from the doj that they're planning a bigger conspiracy something because there's so much information? it trickles out. it reminds me a bit of the russian investigation. it's coming out, trickling out, and it looks like it could make a crime. but the doj is the one who determines that. >> i hope the doj is conducting a vault-like investigation into all of this i know we see no outward signs of it, but, frankly, if it's being done right, we would not be seeing outward signs of it. bob mueller conducted his investigation in a vault. we knew because he was publicly appointed as special counsel to do so. i can't believe they could see a guy like jeffrey clark, for example, a high former doj official, announcing he committed crimes against the united states, and if he was forced to testify truthfully, he would incriminate

deal. >> in terms of the timeline here, we should note that after the house voted in october that steve bannon should be referred for prosecution and it was about three weeks later the federal grand jury, in fact, handed down the indictment of bannon on those contempt. charges empt charge >> what the house will be voting on tomorrow will be an attempt to report the investigators prepared on mark meadows. in that report they laid out all the ways in which mark meadows has failed to comply with their subpoenas, all the reasons why he has to comply with their subpoenas. but also all the reasons why it was so important that the investigation need to talk to him and get access to his documents. they say, quote, the select committee season formation from mr. meadows related to his investigative responsibilities. the events involve a under salt on the capitol and the personnel and protecting it and an attack on the peaceful transfer of power. the counting of electoral college votes by congress is a component of that transfer of power that occurs every january six, following a presidential election. t

explain this from trump ally steve bannon today. >> there's no difference between kemp and perdue.b blue blazer khaki pants and loafers that are part of the globalist movement that's the problem with the republican party. >> steve bannon was not asking for khaki pants and loafers for christmas. that not the secret play there. his point was perdue did not lie enough, help trump support the lie enough so, therefore, why him? >> right. he's pushing this -- this sort of populist style of politics that trump, you know, did make quite an article of faith for his voters where he says, you know this, whole system is flooded with elites and he's clumping perdue with the rest political elites and it's interesting because trump wants perdue in this race and what it shows you is for this entire primary and maybe beyond pressure on perdue is going to be as trumpy as possible. >> right. >> he's -- the pressure that he's under is not to sort of, you know, make himself broadly appealing. it's to appeal to that base and some of the people that steve bannon talks to on a daily basis on his podcast w

steve bannon is essentially a professional political troll. he hosts a podcast.sident trump. that's his brand. meadows is still something of an active politics. he probably wants a political future. he's trying to sell books. he's got different motivations. could he decide to cooperate later? the committee's holding out some hope for that. >> i will look forward to seeing on social media what kind of dinner you order for yourself and your team. that does it for us. deadline white house starts right after the break. us. deadline white house starts right after the break. they customize my car insurance, so i only pay for what i need. how about a throwback? ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ (vo) t-mobile for business helps small business owners prosper during their most important time of year. when you switch to t-mobile and bring your own device, we'll pay off your phone up to $1000. you can keep your phone. keep your number. and get your employees connected on the largest and fastest 5g networ

remember steve bannon? he's been indicted for criminal contempt but his trial won't happen until july. that's the whole game, right? wait, wait, wait, till it's too late. but bannon is crucial. he is the one who got trump back to washington for the rally. he is the one who said this the day before the insurrection. >> all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. just understand this. all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. it's not gonna happen like you think it's going to happen. okay? it's going to be quite extraordinarily different. and all i can say is strap in. the war room -- a posse -- you have made this happen. and tomorrow, it's game day. so strap in. >> bannon is now silent until next summer, if even then. and he is leading a pack. there is not just meadows' bizarre about face. roger stone now says he is pleading the fifth along with trump lawyer john eastman and former justice department official, jeffrey clark. which is pretty amazing, if pleading the fifth is what they now think is their best