of the house s argument here that they should be held in contempt which means they could be indicted? the house has an incredibly strong argument, ari. as you say, mark meadows had some sort of arguments to maybe not be prosecuted for contempt and merrick garland s is evaluating that now. these guys have squat to use the technical legal term. i mean, it s astounding to me that they are making the same executive privilege arguments that trump s inner circle made six months ago and trump made and it got rejected bit united states supreme court in an 8-1 decision. what s next for these people? i mean, i don t know what the next big legal move is. something like sourdough starter and listening to folklore or something? we have been through this. and mr. navarro is different in that he has been very vol usual. i want to remind everyone that
evidence. now, it s a temporary, temporary win-win here because it looked like we were headed towards a potential contempt vote and contempt prosecution of meadows. now, the committee at least gets some information out of meadows. some is better than none, and meadows avoids the possibility of being federally indicted which to most non-steve bannon people is a good thing. however, the big question is, how initial will this initial cooperation be? what happens when the committee starts asking mark meadows those really tough questions that may be really damaging for donald trump? will he answer? and if not, does that make this deal fall apart or does the committee take what they can get and move along? let s talk about the executive privilege arguments. you listened to them today. the judges seemed, let s say, skeptical. what s your sense of how this turned out and where it goes next? yeah, victor, i would say a mixture of skeptical and exasperated at times. i don t like to make pred
that people can see for themselves, quickly. quickly. is this about keeping trump off the ballot in 2024 or making him toxic? it is both. anything that trump did or anything this administration thinks that trump did they are against and with biden s numbers tanking so dramatically and with the democrat numbers in the house tanking so dramatically they are scared to death of one, losing the house next year and losing the white house very possibly to trump in 2024 so they are taking a shortsighted approach with this executive privilege arguments. it will come back to bite democrats over and over again if they stick to this.
or even days, they will tell you that one of the people he brings up most frequently when he talks about the executive privilege arguments is former white house chief of staff mark meadows. and he gets in a little bit of a tizzy about why any white house chief of staff should have to be subjected to this quote unquote harassment. kevin mccarthy s answer on the local news program was interesting. and i thought the response from thompson and cheney was also interesting. you had a great piece about just sort of recalling a thing that had sort of vanished down the memory hole, which is that mccarthy himself and other republicans had called for some kind of of inquiry into january 6th. and so you followed up on that and found that basically there s no i mean, not surprising. no appetite for that anymore. chris, would it shock your audience that this maybe wasn t the most good faith declaration of investigative intention? this was a situation where back
and trials have witnesses. and they are still relevant witnesses. and the point is, if what the house has proved is not enough and i think we have shown abuse of power that s jeopardized election integrity if i. will these four individuals have information that is relevant. it s relevant that the president is telling them not to go forward because innocent men do not conceal or hide evidence. they are forthcoming and cooperative. they do that because they have nothing to hide. martha: all right. well, they also protect executive privilege which presidents have done up and down the line in the course of all of these impeachment prey says cease that we have seen. do you think though, martha, if the president had exonerating evidence he would say you know what? i m going to sit back and make these executive privilege arguments even though i know i m innocent. i really care about executive privilege. i don t buy it. martha: i get that i have no idea what the president feels. but just