demanding more transparency and they argue a special master could provide that. he could also provide a delay in court proceedings. cnn s senior justice correspondent evan perez leads us off. this all boils down to one judge. that s right. she came in over the weekend and said she was inclined to grant the former president s request for a special master without seeing anything from the justice department. that s what we re doing to see today. the justice department asking for to exceed the page limit that normally applies in this court in southern florida. they re asking for about 40 pages. now that s longer than the affidavit that we saw unsealed last friday. what we expect to see is, you know, more description of what s been doing on behind the scenes. we know that there s a group of fbi agents who are not involved in the investigation who have been looking specifically at these documents for anything that could be attorney-client privileged and they are removing that a
and it s all on the record. but what exactly did the panel learn? does donald trump have a lot more to be worried about tonight? mr. cipollone did appear voluntarily and answer a whole variety of questions. he did not contradict the testimony of other witnesses, and i think we did learn a few things which we will be rolling out in the hearings to come. so, i think it was a, you know, a grueling day for all involved. mr. cipollone and the staff and the members. but it was well worth it. well worth it, says committee zoe lofgren on cnn earlier tonight. she did not get into specifics, but she thought cipollone was candid with the panel today and believes that his answers were, quote, honest. congresswoman lofgren did note, quote, some complications when it came to attorney/client privilege belonging to trump. but she said executive privilege was not an issue because the holder of that privilege is in fact president biden. in another interview, she said the former white house
learn? does donald trump have a lot more to be worried about tonight? mr. cipollone did appear voluntarily and answer a whole variety of questions. he did not contradict the testimony of other witnesses, and i think we did learn a few things which we will be rolling out in the hearings to come. so, i think it was, you know, a grueling day for all involved, mr. cipollone and the staff and the members. but it was well worth it. well worth it, says committee zoe lofgren on cnn earlier tonight. she did not get into specifics, but she thought cipollone was candid with the panel today and believes that his answers were, quote, honest. congresswoman lofgren did note, quote, some complications when it came to attorney/client privilege belonging to trump. but she said executive privilege was not an issue because the holder of that privilege is in fact president biden. in another interview, she said the former white house counsel never pleaded the fifth. so, what does that mean for
first line. politics cannot be allowed to impact the administration of justice. so we ll focus on the filing ahead and the chances that a judge will agree with any or all of it given how late in the process it is. we ll also examine how the various assertions of fact in the filing actually stand up to the facts themselves. also tonight, a cnn exclusive. late word that the justice department has issued a new subpoena for more january 6th-related documents. cnn s kaitlan collins starts us off. what is the former president and his legal team seeking in this filing? reporter: a few things. one is this third party attorney, which is known better as a special master, that can really go through these documents if they re appointed, see what has legal privilege, what doesn t. it takes up time though, so it s a little unusual they waited two weeks to file for this because there s a chance the justice department has already gone through this, the investigators looking at it, becaus
good morning. 11:00 a.m. eastern, 8:00 a.m. pacific. i m jose diaz-balart. we begin this very busy hour with breaking news from the supreme court. in a major 8-1 decision, the court upheld a statute that bars people subjected to domestic violence restraining orders from having guns. joining us now, nbc news washington correspondent yamiche alcindor. good morning. break this down for us, if you would. reporter: this is a supreme court saying there are limits to the second amendment and in this case if you are somebody who is found in violation of domestic violence laws, and restraining order, you can temporarily have your firearms and access to firearms be taken away from you. i think it is interesting here because as you said, it is an 8-1 opinion. we talk about the supreme court being a 6-3 conservative majority. here in this case, you had liberals and conservatives on the same side, with chief justice john roberts writing the majority opinion here. the one dissenter is ju