as a member of the judiciary committee of the house, and now seeing with the senate judiciary committee has revealed, you to have jurisdiction, oversight jurisdiction of what goes on at the justice department, what are your first thoughts about what can be done about this? >> good evening lawrence, great to be on. as always. donald trump's behavior continues to make richard nixon look like a choir boy. there is no bottom, there never will be. that is how corrupt this particular individual, who used to occupy 1600 pennsylvania avenue, is, and how much he has corrupted, the republican party, which is no longer a functional governing party. it's a cult. i think, we came very close to losing our democracy and the more information that is to, fields the clear that becomes. and so i expect that on the house, judiciary committee side, they will continue to explore this information, probate, presented to the american people of course. leading that effort in the house is going to continue to be the select committee, and they were going to have to try to figure out how we can hold some of these i

today at a house judiciary committee hearing, attorney general merrick garland said this. >> the house of representatives votes for referral of the contempt charge. the department of justice will do what it always does in such circumstances. it will apply the facts and the law and make a decision consistent with the principles of prosecution. >> joining our discussion now is congresswoman madeleine dean of pennsylvania, she is a member of the house judiciary committee and served as a house impeachment manager in the second impeachment of donald trump. thank you very much for joining us tonight. i want to begin with where we just ended, and that is the attorney general's comment today. it's difficult to imagine him saying anything else under these circumstances, and yet, there is more suspense tonight in washington about what this attorney general will decide than there has been in a long time. >> and yet, lawrence, thank you, number one, for having me tonight. it's a pleasure to be with you. i was in that hearing room today with attorney general merrick garland, and if you flash back,

as you'll remember, i was a member and still am a member of the house judiciary committee and we saw the trump administration play this exact same playbook time and time again as they stonewalled congressional investigations. but what has changed, of course, and what is different now is that the department of justice is obviously -- you have an attorney general at the head of the department of justice who i think cares a great deal about co-equal branches of government, separation of powers an ebb suring the constitutional prerogatives of the congress are respected. at the end of the day if witnesses can defy subpoenas without consequence, then congressional oversight really no longer exists and it's hard to make the case congress is a co-equal branch of government in that circumstance. i take very seriously the select committee's language that was in the release today with respect to criminal contempt of congress, a referral to the department of justice. time will tell as to whether or not the department of justice under attorney general garland will ultimately implement that referr

he is a member of the house intelligence committee and the house judiciary committee. thank you for joining us tonight, mr. swalwell. chairman thompson is saying that, anything is possible in terms of where the subpoenas will be going next, but it seems like the january six committee does have to calculate how long a fight, a legal fight, donald trump would put up over a subpoena. >> lawrence, we should assume he's gonna fight everything. that's what he does. he is a legal terrorists, as we would call him on the impeachment team. we offered for him to come and testify in impeachment number two. if you recall, he refused that we believe that showed a consciousness of guilt. if he makes the same refusal if he's asked for january 6th, i hope the company recognizes the reason he won't come forward, is that is as it relates to this edition suite at the willard hotel, yes, we should know who paid for and stayed in that suite, at the very least. >> yeah, apparently there were several of them. let's listen to john eastman, the lawyer who was there providing the phony legal mem

attorney general merrick garland was noncommital when testifying before the house judiciary committee yesterday. >> the department recognizes the important oversight role that this committee, the house of representatives, and the senate play with respect to the executive branch. the house of representatives votes for referral of a contempt charge. the department of justice will do what it always does in such circumstances, will apply the facts and the law and make a decision consistent with the principals of prosecution. >>> joining us now, reporter. what sort of backlash will they face within the gop? >> i mean, absolutely these republicans knew when they took that vote, they're facing possibly becoming political pariah in their party. they voted against the majority whip, the majority party. they've seen this before. congresswoman liz cheney was on the select committee when she voted against -- i'm sorry. when she voted for the impeachment of the january 6 select committee and continued to speak out against donald trump, she was stripped of her leadership position with the blessing

member of the house judiciary committee, he joins me now. it's good to have you, congressman. the, i think there's a key distinction, congresswoman uses planning in that tweet. cori bush's resolution says incitement. has it been cleared by members of congress? >> it's great to be on your show again. you know, there is a fine point and i think that that's why it's so important to conduct the investigation that cori bush and so many other colleagues called for early this year. i appreciate the reporting done by rolling stone. obviously there needs to be further investigation and of course this was the entire point of the select committee, which we had hoped would be done on a bipartisan basis earlier this year, but we couldn't get enough support from our republican colleagues in the united states senate to do a simple bipartisan investigation of what happened on january 6th. that's why you're seeing democrats lead the way. issue subpoenas that are uncovering day by day the kind of information that we are seeing reported in rolling stone. >> but expulsion from congress, the 14th

judiciary committee or the routine hearing on the oversight department of justice. he'll very likely be asked how he's going to handle some of these cases. you know, he might actually get some greater insight into how this could all pay out. >> it's certainly a busy time right now over on capitol hill. you're also following, of course, all negotiations within the democratic party with the bipartisan sfrur deal and an attempt to get a deal on the larger reconciliation package. it seems like there's been a sense of optimism the last couple of days, but also there's a lot of stuff that needs to get sorted outst. tell us where we stand? >> on tuesday there were meetings. and in these meetings, according to sources in our room, he delivered these assessments of what could go and what could stay necessarily in their social spending package, and this is leading to a bit of heartburn among democrats about things they have to let go. you have the longer extension of the child tax credit or free community college, but emerging from all this and after meetings the democrats he

the attorneys general coming before the house judiciary committee on thursday will be certainly asked about these issues. >> lastly, i need your opinion about what a new gop gerrymandering map in texas is doing. whites in texas make up 40% of the population but now control 59% of the districts. hispanics have 39% but control just 20% of the districts. and blacks make up 12% of all texans, but control a tiny portion of districts. 2.7%. the texas house passed this bill at 3:00 a.m. thursday night, so democracy quite literally is dying in the dark. is there anything that congress can do about this? >> well, part of the freedom to vote act would prohibit this type of aggressive gerrymandering designed to bring about a republican partisan advantage where the demographics of a state, in that case, texas, don't measure up. we also, i think, are going to see litigation filed against this particular map because, as your numbers so clearly illustrate, this is a racial gerrymander that is a classic one and should not pass muster in terms of the constitution. i expect that the courts will hear th

judiciary committee quizzing the ag over his recent memo targeting parents of school students over comments at school board meetings pick of attorney general saying the justice department defends those free-speech rights and the parents are not domestic terrorists but that issue and others may force some explosive moments at this hearing. correspondent david spunt has the other a top story tonight. >> attorney general merrick garland is standing his ground on several hot button topics brought up today from january 6th. one of the recurring themes over several hours today, school board meetings. minutes after the hearing began, it went off the rails. >> mr. chairman, what are our colleagues on the other side of the aisle afraid of? are they afraid of videos of parents? >> the gentleman was recognized for his opening statement, as he finished? >> republicans push to show a video about school board meetings, democrats said no sighting of rule that requires 48 hours notice for video presentations to be shown. attorney general merrick garland in the hot seat answering multiple questions from rep

here to discuss democratic congresswoman madeline dean, vice chair of the house judiciary committee. the house is voting right now we are told that the -- there are eight republicans who have voted along with the democrats to refer the matter of criminal contempt of congress to the department of justice. they include not surprisingly liz cheney, adam kinzinger, but also congressman upton of michigan, meyer of minnesota, gonzalez of ohio, katko of new york, mace of south carolina, and your fellow suburban philadelphian congressman fitzpatrick of pennsylvania. what is your reaction to the vote so far? >> i am not surprised it is along party lines and i am pleased we have at least eight republicans who see the truth, who recognize the essential oversight role that congress plays, and that we should not be fooled with by the likes of steve bannon. so we will refer this matter by way of this vote to the attorney general, to the department of justice, to hold mr. bannon accountable to his subpoena and to make sure that we continue our oversight role into a heinous set of crimes that took p

trump's first impeachment, as a counsel to the house judiciary committee. he is now with the brookings institution. norm eisen, thank you very much, and welcome back to the "newshour". first of all, what is your understanding of why this special congressional committee wants to hear from steve bannon? >> judy, thanks for having me back. we know that steve bannon, donald trump's long-time advisor for a time in the white house, estranged, then consulting again, was intimately involved with donald trump's decision to, in my view, incite an insurrection on january 6th 2021. bannon is the one who called him and told him trump had to get back to washington for this. there's been reporting that bannon has partially corroborated that he spoke about killing the biden presidency in the crib, judy, and we know that he used very strong language on his podcast about what was going to happen on january 6th. so, for all those reasons, bannon's fingerprints are on the events of january 6th and he is a critically important witness in his own right, but also to understand th

he's the head of the house intelligence and judiciary committees. congressman swalwell, do you agree with steve that democrats have to use all the legal rules of power to do anything they can to protect our democracy. essentially, i think this moment is an inflection point, and a stress test for the other branches of government. >> absolutely, zerlina, right now we are squarely in extremes. i'll use that they and analogies the giants are beating the dodgers right now. we thought the 2020 election would resolve this matchup between trumpism and democracy, instead we are an extra and it's. and everything matters. and making sure we protect accessing voter rights at the polls, that matters, making sure we understand what happens on january six, so that no candidate cadaver a mom violently at the capitol. and those have to be the priority. and i cannot stress enough, to our president, that getting the senate to break the filibuster, to pass voting rights, we have to do that in extremes. getting this january 6th commission to press subpoenas even if it m

and judiciary committees. congressman swalwell, do you agree the democrats need to use all the levers of power to do everything they can to protect our democracy? essentially, i think this moment is an inflection point, as i said in the open, and a stress test for the other branches of government. >> absolutely, zerlina. and right now we are squarely in extra innings. we thought -- i'll use that analogy as the giants are beating the dodgers right now here in the bay area. but we thought that the 2020 election would resolve this matchup between trumpism and democracy. instead, we are in extra innings and everything matters. making sure we protect access and voter rights at the polls, that matters. making sure we understand what happened on january 6th so that no candidate can ever aim a mob violently at the capitol, that matters. and those have to be the priority. i cannot stress enough to our president that getting the senate to break the filibuster to pass voting rights, we have to do that in extra innings. g

. >> all right senator sheldon, white house, sit on the senate judiciary committee which we will be hearing testimony tomorrow. thank you so much. >> thank you, chris. >> another day in court for -- this guy caught on camera allegedly assaulting michael fanone and stealing his badge which was eventually recovered after being buried in his backyard. today judge said that man can be released from jail, we'll tell you why that's next. s next the sleep number 360 smart bed is on sale now. it helps keep you effortlessly comfortable by sensing your movements and automatically responding to both of you. and, it's temperature balancing to help you stay comfortable all night. it even tracks your circadian rhythm, so you know when you're at your best. in other words, it's the most energy-building, wellness-boosting, parent-powering, proven quality night's sleep we've ever made. save up to $1,200 on select sleep number 360 smart beds and adjustable bases. plus, 0% interest for 36 months on all smart beds. ends monday. at some point during the fighting i was dragged from the line of officers into the c

if jeff rosen told the house committee the same things that he told the senate judiciary committee about jeffrey clark, then jeffrey clark is living in fear of criminal charges tonight of attempted election fraud and conspiracy to commit election fraud. joining our discussion, jill wine-banks former assistant prosecutor and matt miller former spokesman for attorney general eric holder. i want to begin with this key question that i think has left a lot of us confused. why were you so effective in getting compliance to subpoenas against president nixon and his administration during the watergate investigation and the democrats in congress have been so ineffective in relative terms in pursuit of the same kind of subpoenas against team trump? >> it's really a very simple answer. because president nixon, despite his crimes and despite all the wrong that he did, actually believed in our system of laws and government. and when confronted with a supreme court decision, he agreed to comply. so he never tried to stop people. he did try to claim executive privilege, but the supreme court said, no,

to have had footage of what we saw in the senate judiciary committee. the january 6th commission out there still looking at this question. there's going to be, i think, a good public airing of it. >> in the report you talk about some potential fixes. it does seem as if some of these fixes, it's really limited. you know the law, know the constitution very well. separation of powers. do you really think congress can pass a law that would prevent this kind of communication between the justice department and the white house? >> you know, we're working on that. i've been working this issue for a long time, and the white house and the department of justice have for a long time had a rule between the two of them of who is allowed to talk to whom about various issues. it appears they broke those rules this time. it appears, frankly, that they break those rules in every republican administration, and then we have to patch it back together again. that's always been done by rule, memorandum between the white house counsel and the department of justice. there's not

where ultimately, the white house counsel was required to testify to the judiciary committee that there was no privilege that had overcome the need of the congress to get the information. so, we'll get it. i -- i think the former president's bag of tricks has always included da delay and obfuscation. we are aware of that and we're not planning to let him win in that way either. >> so i wanted ask you because the original document that went out, just a request, right, for documents. there were, i mean, thousands of pages, documents that would come back from that, right? now, specifically, president trump. they didn't want any of it to go out, right? but then they rejected specifically to 45 documents on that list that would come from the national archives. they -- they said 45 of those, they did not want to be shared with your committee. that they believe are protected by executive privilege. what is in those documents? why do you think he doesn't want you to have them? >> well, i don't -- i would never speculate as to the former president's state of mind. but i will say this. the curren

one of the surprise revelations in this report just released today by the senate judiciary committee -- what they are investigating is what was the justice department's role in trump trying to seize power, trying to stay in power even though he lost the election? one of the surprise revelations is that the committee, based on what it's found already, they've asked the d.c. bar to open a disciplinary investigation into the behavior of jeff clark, give whan he did as lawyer, given what he did with his justice department role in that scheme with trump. there's an interesting question i think as to whether or not what jeff clark did might be criminally prosecutable. his law license may be on the line. whether or not there's a potential crime, something for which he could be prosecuted, the committee said it's not willing to pronounce judgment on criminal matters. but i feel like the thing that's missing from the analysis of this today and all of the revelations here is the disturbing facts, the now disturbing time line we've got about other senior justice department officials including a

so, one of the surprise revelations, in this report, just released today by the senate judiciary committee. what they were investigated was, what was the justice department's role and trump trying to seize, power even though he tried to stay in power after he lost the election. at the committee, basin when it's found already, they asked the d.c. bar to open a disciplinary investigation, into the behavior of jeff clark. even what he did as a lawyer, what he did with his justice department role in that scheme with trump. there's an interesting question i, think as to what jeff clark did, maybe criminally prosecutable, as well, and his law license may be on line if the barr investigation is not go well. whether or not there's a potential crime, here something for which he could be prosecuted, the committee said today that it's not yet willing to pronounce just judgment on criminal matters. i feel like the thing that's missing from the analysis in this, today in all the revelations here, is that disturbing facts, the now disturbing timeline we have, about other senior justice department offici

what more do we need to know about that, what the senate judiciary committee has already referred to? >> what i wish is that we had people that wanted a credible, total -- people on all sides doing this study because i get too much of -- there are too many people, our democracy is being undermined. i was in belleville, michigan, talking to a group of union workers, spent 15 minutes with them. had a good discussion on many things, but at the end of it, they said to me, but we still think donald trump won the election, and that's what worries me. the fact of the matter is we have had state after state has gone in and done audits, president biden accepts what h is a fundamental undermining of people's confidence in their democracy. when that happens, your democracy is in trouble. so we really have to get at the answers of that and how people understand. we have a man that wanted to go back to the white house and a man who was trying to undermine our democracy and that we all have to fight back and which is he undermines people's belief in their government. >> talking about people's belie

the fealty shown by republicans on the senate judiciary committee today ranking member chuck grassley who in the past has stood up for moral causes and been one of the biggest boosters of whistle-blowers in the history of congress out there saying, you know, yes he basically, i'm paraphrasing, yes, president trump talked about committing a coup but he didn't really actually do it. you have something you call the side show bob defense. >> the side show bob defense drawn from the animated series "the simpsons." one of the villains is imprisoned for trying to kill bart simpson and in one scene is shown on the phone angrily deploring his fate saying attempted murder? what is that? do they give out a nobel prize for attempted chemistry? the idea being if he was thwarted in his efforts to kill bart therefore he is innocent. obviously the two aren't the same. what i will say about this argument from republicans is it is not new. you've been seeing it from conservatives on social media for months and months. the idea that because ultimately donald trump did not trigger this replacement of the

i asked the attorney general when he was before the judiciary committee yesterday whether in his view that was still good law. and he said it is. it's still good law. we don't have absolute immunity. if you have a privilege that you want to claim, you have to come into the committee and claim it. let's take it out of the executive privilege area and say that you have a fifth amendment right not to incriminate yourself. you have to go in and assert that claim for each question and for all you know, the congress may grant you immunity from prosecution. then you'd have to answer the question. you can't just say to the congress, no thank you. that's not what a subpoena is all about. >> you just heard our reporter note that it is extremely rare for a prosecution of somebody who defied a subpoena. what will you do if attorney general garland decides to take a pass on prosecuting bannon? >> i'll just say it's extremely rare for a violent mob of 10,000 people to attack the capitol and try and overturn the constitution and the counting of the votes of the electoral college. so i think the atto

committee, of which i am vice chair and a member. and then literally going to the floor of the house, to hold bannon in contempt of congress. and i want to remind people that mr. bannon is a small player in this, he is a bit player in the corruption. but, much more importantly with the facts will come before the american people, come before congress, we will uphold our oversight responsibilities. and let everybody know exactly what happened so that we never let happen again. this was an attack on our democracy, and attack incited by failed former president, and attack of americans by americans, i know you know this part, an attack by americans on americans. where there was destruction, there is violence, there is literally desecration, and there is ultimately death, an attack on our democracy we, must never let it happen again, and we know there's a threat that will happen again. know there's a threat that will happen again brought back feelings about that was like to be on that floor, on january 6th when the people, steve bannon was

committee. they are doing that. and moving forward is going to be very helpful. and our report here which is, you know, uncovered a bunch of new stuff, i think will be helpful to them in that effort as. well >> final question for you, is about accountability for jeffrey clark, i want to know that there is a letter from the chair, dick chairman of your committee, asking to open an investigation of clark's compliance with applicable rules of professional conduct. why is that important? >> well you have got a lawyer who was basically not, in my line, when i look at this report, sitting in on a lot of the questioning, when i look at this i think wow,, this is a lawyer that wasn't following the line. he took an oath, and his job. your oath is to protect and defend the constitution of the united states. it is not to be the president's lawyer. when you are at the justice department. so when i look at what he did, and the pressure, and what he tried to do, i understand why senator determine believes we

that house investigation which is bipartisan over in the house where they're really digging deep, issuing subpoenas, something that we are unable to do unless we have bipartisan support in the senate judiciary committee, they are doing that and moving forward is going to be really helpful. and our report here, which as you know, it uncovered a bunch of new stuff, i think will be helpful to them in that evident as well. >> final question for you is about accountability for jeffrey clark. i want to note there's a letter from the chair, dick durbin in your committee, asking the dc bar to look at clark's appliance with applicable rules of misconduct. why is that important? >> well, you have got a lawyer that was basically not -- in my mind when i look at this report sitting in on a lot of the questioning, when i look at this i think, wow, this is a lawyer that wasn't following the law. he was -- he took an oath in his job. your oath is to protect and defend the constitution of the united states. it's not to be the president's lawyer when you're at the justice department. so when i look at wha

thanks to the recent report by the senate judiciary committee we also know that trump made multiple attempts to get in the department of justice to interfere. speaking with the doj, according again, to that senate report, nine times just between december and early january. where he repeatedly asked to initiate investigations, fall off suits on his behalf and publicly declared the 20 2020 election corrupt. the acting attorney general at the time, a man name -- the acting attorney general named jeffrey clark is set to testify before house committee investigating january 6th this week. so we can learn more about the nature of those calls from the president soon. it was not just donald trump in this legal advisors pushing to delegitimized the results of the election. and placing january six in the forefront of their attempts to do so. back in december of 2020, it was reported, the house republican led by abbott trump supporter congressman of alabama, they're meeting with the -- about ways to overturn the election result. again, not our secret, not doing this behind closed doors, in political. an

a report from the judiciary committee is breathtaking. it's not totally surprising because of what we know, but you have direct evidence and direct testimony in here of the white house whether it's the president of the united states directly or mark meadows putting pressure on the department of justice. more than that, try to take over the department of justice. trying to kick people out who wouldn't help them overturn the election. and to put in place people who would. now, rudy giuliani as you say and others were very bold and brave on cable news hits and on talk radio shows. when the rubber hit the road and they had to go before judges, did not present any of this evidence. the select committee in congress that is investigating the january 6th attack on the capitol now issuing a third round of subpoenas yesterday. these ones targeting additional organizers of that stop the steal rally that proceeded the insurrection. that comes as former president trump is instructing his former aides and allies not to comply with their subpoenas from

senator dick durbin, chairman of the senate judiciary committee. thanks for being with us. >>> we've got more straight ahead to lift the debt ceiling. live from capitol hill. >>> plus, the white house says vaccine requirements are working. officials are pointing to more evidence to make that case. "morning joe" is coming right back. ♪♪ this isn't just a walk up the stairs. when you have an irregular heartbeat, it's more. it's dignity. the freedom to go where you want, knowing your doctor can watch over your heart. ♪♪ ♪ ♪ i can turn anyone into a beach bum. i bring families together for a living. i make memories for people i don't know yet. i know this view is too good not to be shared. i am a vrbo host. ♪ ♪ bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪♪ you pour your heart into everything you do, which is a lot. so take care of th