i'll be talking with committee member zoe lofgren as well. >>> we're following breaking news out of england. the queen has, in fact, tested positive for covid. >>> at the scenes of anti-vaccine protests in canada, familiar to those of us in the u.s. there's a very good reason for that. at "the daily show's" jordan klepper pointed out. >> oddly enough, that wasn't the only thing canadians were appropriating. >> i hate to use that slogan, but make north america great again. >> make north america great again. i don't mean to use that guy's word. >> maga tactics at the heart of a confrontation that has fox news cheering on demonstrations hurting the u.s. economy, begging the so-called freedom convoy to come to a neighborhood near you. more on that. >>> we want to begin with breaking new information on biden'sassertion that -- biden's comments came after intelligence showed russian military was given the go ahead on invasion. it is coming as president biden wraps up a rare sunday meeting with his security council moments ago in the situation room. discussing the latest buildup of russian troops

again, we go back to zoe lofgren. my understanding is they would like to review that, modernize it, bring it up to date if we are to go forward. yes, i support what he's asking for, but we probably should be -- probably should be modernizing it. reporter: madam speaker, my question for is about the 14th amendment and the january 6 activities. there is an effort in north carolina by some voters to keep madison caw thrown off the balance -- cawthorn off the ballot saying he's not eligible because of the 14th amendment. and what it says is that members who engage in insurrection or rebellion against the united states are not eligible to hold office. so my question for you is, do you think members of congress who participated in january 6 activities should be ineligible to run for re-election? speaker pelosi: well, i am not familiar what's happening in north carolina. i appreciate what you had to say about it. but i would hope that members of congress who participated in insurrection and sedition would be held accountable

bringing in democratic zoe lofgren of california. judge here, but one of the questions, how closely are you watching as some of these parallel legal tracks play out and you see comments from defendants who might be directly pointing the finger at the former president? how does that play into the committee's work? >> well, we pay attention to everything, obviously. you're right. this is a, civil lawsuit, we're not involved in that, however, i do expect that there will be discovery in that lawsuit, that discovery could be of value to the january 6th select committee as we pursue our legislative investigation. >> from where you're sitting especially given all the interviews and documents so many we've not seen or heard about to this point sddoes it go beyond e rhetoric of the president? schemes to overturn the election. is that your view of things? wnk >> we can't get into that at this point. the investigation is still ongoing but let me say i think it was a very wide plot to over three the election and it didn't begin on january 6th. t

but what zoe lofgren suggested, that he might get immunity, to be very telling. they won't do that, however, anderson, unless they know what he's got. and that's very possible from the senate hearing and from the others in the justice department they know, it would be worth while to immunize him. and that could force him to testify everything he took the fifth to. >> and is that something that then the committee would work out with clark's attorneys, saying, look, we've considered giving you immunity if we know -- if, you know, you get to tell us right now everything you know and then we'll, you know, without harm, and we'll judge whether we can give you immunity or not? >> there actually is a formal procedure. the house has a statute. it's a federal statute for both the house, the senate. they can immunize any witness they want to by a vote of the committee, a majority of the committee. the attorney general has no choice but to accept it. a district court judge has no -- he does the -- grants the immunity. but it's not anything he can decide on and deliberate. h

congresswoman zoe lofgren, thanks, as usual, for joining us. >>> it was one of candidate trump's staplested attacks on hillary clinton over missing e-mails. now we're learning president trump's own recordkeeping was shockingly reckless and possibly illegal. l let's bring in brian todd. >> tonight, watchdog groups, historians and others are questioning what could be missing from president trump's records while he was in office. we have new information on trump ripping up some records while he was in the white house and taking other material with him when he left. >> this is the biggest scandal since watergate. >> this from the man who would not stop slamming hillary clinton in 2016. accusing her of hiding something after she used a private server for e-mails. >> they should lock her up. likely including classified information. honestly, it's disgraceful. >> hillary clinton is guilty. >> but three former white house officials now tell cnn they saw donald trump on several occasions while he was president, rip up documents, drafts, and other materials that he'd finished reviewing or otherwis

i'll be talking with committee member zoe lofgren as

and then, there is congresswoman zoe lofgren -- she is a member of the committee saying that they are considering granting him immunity to get him to answer questions. sure seems like there is a whole lot of things that he doesn't want the committee to know, right? it's a different story for pence world, though. sources telling cnn that two aides to mike pence answered most of the questions they were asked in an exclusive interviews -- extensive interviews, excuse me -- only declining to discuss direct conversations with the then president. they saw a lot and they know a lot about what happened on that day when pence had to be hustled out of the capitol. well, he had to do that while rioters were chanting about m hanging mike pence, remember? hang mike pence. the pieces of the plot are co coming together. and they are coming together slowly but they are surely coming together. the committee has talked to 475 witnesses. they have got 60,000 documents and they followed up on 375 tips to their hotline. meanwhile, "the washington post" is revealing a previously-unknown last-ditch effort t

congresswoman zoe lofgren. thank you. appreciate it. finding those tapes and the pieces of paper. >> thanks a lot. >> thank you. >>> coming up, michael bloomberg's housekeeper. a bizarre story. rescued after being kidnapped at gunpoint by a man who rammed his way into the billionaire's estate. how police later found them at a hotel using an ipad. baffling story, next. ♪ ♪ what a wonderful world ♪ >> woman: what's my safelite story? i'm a photographer. and when i'm driving, i see inspiration right through my glass. so when my windshield cracked, it had to be fixed right. i scheduled with safelite autoglass. their experts replaced my windshield and recalibrated my car's advanced safety system. ♪ acoustic rock music ♪ >> woman: safelite is the one i trust. they focus on safety so i can focus on this view. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ >>> we're learning new details about the dramatic kidnapping of an employee who borked for billionaire michael bloomberg. a man broke into his estate demanding to know whereabouts of bloo

so joining me now to discuss is democratic congresswoman joe zoe lofgren. she is a member of the house select committee on january 6. thank you so much for being here. we appreciate it very much. the national archives telling trump they're going to turn over these records in 15 days. can you tell us more about these laws? will they show anyone who entered the white house grounds and exactly, you know, what do you hope to learn from these? >> well, we haven't seen the logs yet so we can't say what we'll learn, but we do think it's important to find out who came into the white house. you know, we've had various witnesses give testimony on that. but it would be important to certify those facts. the -- as you know is former president is a litigious individual. he fought this in court and lost, in the trials court, in the court of appeals and the supreme court declined to intervene. he may try some frivolous lawsuits, but we think the legal case is very clear. and we expect to get the documents promptly. >> will these documents cover just january 6th or also the

then there is congresswoman zoe lofgren she is a member of the committee think that they are considering granting him immunity to get him to answer questions. sure seems like there's a whole lot of things that he doesn't want the committee to know, right? sources telling cnn that two aides to mike pence answered most of the questions they were asked in an exclusive interview only declining to discuss direct conversations with then- president. they saw a lot, and they know a lot about what happened on that day. when pens had to be hustled out of the capital. well, he had to do that while rioters were chanting about him. the pieces of the potter coming together and they are coming together slowly but they are surely coming together for the committee has talked to 475 witnesses. they've got 60,000 documents, and they followed up on 375 tips to their hotline. meanwhile, the washington post is revealing a previously unknown last ditch effort to stop joe biden from taking office. one more aspect of the big lie there. then there is the fake electors piece of the plot. the almost laughable effor

. >> and then after that we heard from zoe lofgren a member of the committee, she heard that interviewt she said. >> i heard mr. short's comment that, you know, we wouldn't want to ask him about his conversations with the president. it is not clear that that would be off the table. but clearly the conversations that the vice president had with professor eastman and others are of interest. but we may find out everything that we need to know from other sources. >> so what do you think? is this the time to, they a it is unprecedented, a lot of this is unprecedented, to subpoena the former vice president to get answers about the pressure from the former vice president and the scheme to try to overturn the election? >> you know, i see where mark is coming from. i worked with him extensively and he's was a very pragmatic voice of reason if the white house quite often. do see where he's coming from, but as you just said, this is all unprecedented. i would hope that perhaps vice president pence would go and speak to them voluntarily and i believe that the january 6 committee would keep it targ

. >> congresswoman zoe lofgren, member of the january 6th investigative committee. thank you very much for starting off the discussion tonight. and joining us now is and you'll catch a, a law professor at georgetown university, a former acting service general. he is an nbc political analyst. and let me begin where we left off with donald trump ripping off many eyewitnesses quoted watching him rip up government records, clear violation of the law. what does the justice department need in order to investigate this one? >> this is fine, this is easy, not hard. trump's defense is, i ran my business this way i used to evidently terrible records like a toddler there too. that is not a defense. jimmy carter doesn't get to apply georgia rules when he's president, the first president trump brushed does not get to play by cia rules. the second president bush doesn't get to play by texas ranger rose. the president of the united states, there is a law passed to deal expressly with this after president nixon's attempt to destroy daca. this is called the presidential records act.

this is what zoe lofgren, a member of the committee had to say about approaching the vice president yesterday mr. short's comment that, you know, we wouldn't want to ask him about his conversations with the president. it's not clear that that would be off the table, but, clearly, the conversations that the vice president had with professor eastman and others are of interest but we may find out everything we need to know from other sources. >> so again, would they even need a subpoena? and would a subpoena be too confrontational as it relates to vice president mike pence? i think that's the question that the committee is wrestling with right now. and, of course, what they want to do is compile as much information as possible and learn as much as they can about this investigation before they get in front of them because if they do get that opportunity, they don't want to twwaft it. they want to make sure they have all their ducks in a row. >> i know you'll keep us on top of it. >>> with me in studio cnn's melanie zenona. let's listen to more about marc short. mike pence's chief of staff. donald

speaker pelosi said she has the house administration committee, zoe lofgren, former ethics chair lookinggh assignments. she is a long time member, lawyer, very, very accomplished member, legislator, so she'll develop this legislation. she'll make some recommendations to leadership. we'll see how far they go. republicans will probably -- house minority leader kevin mccarthy is all for this. he'll probably come up with some version of his own or have some ideas, you know. i think they'll work out a bipartisan deal. we've seen senate majority leader chuck schumer supports this. the minority leader mitch mcconnell, he is noncommittal. that is where he usually stakes out positions though on stuff until he sees where his conference is. so i do think it passes. i do think, like you said before, the details are really important. this is going to be toothless or is it going to be real effective oversight here? that is a huge question. >> thank you so much for being on and sharing some of the punch bowl reporting. thanks to all of you for watching this hour of "hallie jackson reports." i'm off for

zoe lofgren says maybe we should give him immunity and force him to testify.ecause of the fact that in many ways like the call is coming from inside the house. they are investigating actions that happened that members of congress were involved in. they were involved in some of the things happening with january 6th. and they were involved with talking with the president and so how do you do that. it is unprecedented, and i think that if you are going to go the route of trying to get a subpoena, that is going to be a huge issue, and it's going to be a huge fight. so that's a lot for them to weigh. >> and so again, keep coming back, i think, a, the committee is surprised us by being so thorough and meticulous, getng so many witnesses. mike peninsulace's former chief staff, they have both testified. but they have not -- they have refused to talk about specific conversations with the then-president saying that those conversations can be privileged. and those conversations can be priv privileged. a conversation directly with the president can be privileged. but a me

south bay congresswoman zoe lofgren, seen here at a 2020 judiciary committee hearing says now is theake action. she introduced a bill to create an independent immigration court system to handle trials and appeals. the real courts. rule of law act would remove immigration courts from under the justice department and the attorney general who is a political appointee, lofgren says that would make the process more consistent and fair. you don't want politicians going in and making the decisions when it should be a judicial decision. under lofgren's bill, immigration judges would serve for limited terms and be able to control their own calendars, which she says they can't do now, often leading to costly delays. getting something heard and decided. efficiently is cost effective. law experts say the constitution does allow for courts to be established through article one in an article one court, the president does not have to make the appointments they can be made in some other way. they are not for life. they are for a term. you see, hastings law professor david levine says other article o

south bay congresswoman zoe lofgren, seen here at a 2020 judiciary committee hearing says now is the time to take action. she introduced a bill to create an independent immigration court system to handle trials and appeals. the real courts. rule of law act would remove immigration courts from under the justice department and the attorney general who is a political appointee, lofgren says that would make the process more consistent and fair. you don't want politicians going in and making the decisions when it should be a judicial decision. under lofgren's bill, immigration judges would serve for limited terms and be able to control their own calendars, which she says they can't do now, often leading to costly delays. getting something heard and decided efficiently is cost effective. law experts say the constitution does allow for courts to be established through article one in an article one court, the president does not have to make the appointments they can be made in some other way. they are not for life. they are for a term. uc hastings law professor david levine says other articl

zoe lofgren part of your committee suggested the possibility of giving clark immunity to try to force him to answer questions. what's that consideration? >> well, what i would say is that those internal deliberations and all of the tools that we have at the committee and congress to seek testimony on are still on the table. and the committee is going to, you know, make choices for the things we think are most effective to get the information we need in order to fill out and paint this picture that we're trying to establish of what happened before and on january 6th so we can prevent something like this from happening in the future. >> how would that work, theoretically, the proposal? >> well, there is a means by which someone can be granted immunity, specifically for testimony to a congressional committee. that information then can't be used later on if there were some attempt to do criminal proceedings. but, again, if that information is obtainable from other places, you know, that person could still, you know, be liable for any actions that could be deemed criminal in the future, ho

and after that reporting, i want to go straight to zoe lofgren of california because she is a memberhe select committee. congresswoman lofgren, pence's former chief of staff and former counsel sat down for lengthy un uncontentious interviews with your committee. did you learn important new things from them? >> well, let me -- as you know, the committee rules prohibit us from discussing the contents of these interviews without a vote of the committee which has not occurred. but the committee is learning new things every day. um, and, you know, the press has found out that mr. short came in for an interview and it went on all day so you can reach your own conclusions on whether it was substantive. >> right. right. but important, that you are -- i know, you know, many things -- you are connecting dots, you are reconfirming. you are, indeed, as you say, learning new things each day. we have also, congresswoman, learned that pence's aides would not talk about their conversations with trump because his legal team, you know, are -- are saying this is under executive privilege. now, obviousl

south bay congresswoman zoe lofgren, seen here at a 2020 judiciary committee hearing says now is the time to take action. she introduced a bill to create an independent immigration court system to handle trials and appeals. the real courts. rule of law act would remove immigration courts from under the justice department and the attorney general who is a political appointee, lofgren says that would make the process more consistent and fair. you don't want politicians going in and making the decisions when it should be a judicial decision. under lofgren's bill, immigration judges would serve for limited terms and be able to control their own calendars, which she says they can't do now , often leading to costly delays . getting something heard and decided. efficiently is cost effective. law experts say the constitution does allow for courts to be established through article one in an article one court, the president does not have to make the appointments they can be made in some other way. they are not for life there for a term, uc hastings law professor david levine says other article

we kind of saw this enterprise theory and pressure thing play out last week when we saw zoe lofgren, committee, hint on the air that they're considering offering use immunity to jeffrey clark. i don't like that idea because use immunity is fraught with peril. you can't really prosecute someone after giving them immunity. i don't like letting jeffrey clark off the hook. but it snacks like hey, we're working this like the mob. we want to flip him so we can get to somebody bigger. but he's already a big fish. and i get worried about coordination or lack thereof between the committee and doj. anything that impacts potential prosecution should really be coordinated carefully. >> ryan, i want you to feel free to add any reporting you have on this idea of it being some type of pressure campaign. but i also want to bring in your new reporting on the fbi's online data base of 1/6 suspects. you write, "the fbi has in some cases removed images from the data base and individuals who haven't been arrested, sparking conspiracy theories from trump supporters who are trying to paint january 6th not

but you know, we heard zoe lofgren and we've heard some others talk about the discussions behind thepeaking, use immunity only means that someone like jeffrey clark would not -- would be immunized to speak truthfully in front of the january 6th committee -- i'm not going to get into the details, but the way it functionally works is that it's almost impossible to prosecute him. by the department of justice. not by congress. and there are lots of reasons for this, but the practical effect of it is that it basically makes it almost impossible, and ollie north was a great example of why it's so bad for any prosecution, if congress gives immunity. and so if they are actually seriously discussing giving immunity to these january 6th witnesses, that means those witnesses are not under serious investigation by the department of justice, and what we know about jeffrey clark from both the senate judiciary committee but also the inspector general of the department of justice is that he was involved, to some degree, with these efforts to reverse the results in georgia, at a minimum. we don't kno

congresswoman zoe lofgren is reportedly working through options and is suggesting suggestions to leadershipriends at punch bowl for noting it. speaker pelosi previously opposed things like this she is supporting stocks that have momentum. it's something that has support on both sides of the aisle. democrats and republicans support this. certainly a new light was shined on this issue in the early reports of the pandemic when there were reports they were trading healthcare and stocks when they recognized we were about to hit this global crisis. there does seem to be momentum to get this done. they still have issues to clear thorny ones. it feels there is momentum here and it feels like an election area winner for both parties. >> the new york sometimes i times columnist tom freeman and transportation secretary pete buttigieg will also be our guest. plus. >> the republican party's whitewashing of the insurrection isn't just a pathetic capitulation to donald trump and his big lie. it's a dangerous revelation of the mindset of the leadership of america's republican party. >> majority whip dick d