he was working as a trade official. it s difficult again to make the argument in his work as a trade official he would have legitimate reason to be talking about election issues even election security or election integrity issues in any realistic way as part of his work for the executive branch, plus in navarro s case he made public his entire plan to overturn the election in his book, in letters, podcasts and public broadcasts. asking him to explain his detailed plans to overturn the election that he had already put out into the public record. those are very different, i think, from what you see with scavino, perhaps, and then, of course, meadows, who had the role of chief of staff at the white house. the very, very closest official truly to the president. for whom many, many conversations do need to be protected traditionally when you re looking at a president and the chief of staff. so i think one of the reasons
restraint reportedly said, tr try to do that we ll all end up in jail. that s when trump stopped. today mr. navarro in the courtroom considering jail, the guardrails of our system. everybody tough, until they got to go and seat judge. right. everybody has a until hit in the face. tyson has said. doj now has issued indictments. they are trying to get peter navarro to cooperate with their probe in an ongoing way. how does that bjorke citing him with contempt. one side, try to induce him to cooperate. how does this play out? the legal game, strategic game that plays out before navarro, assuming he eventually gets a lawyer and doj and committee for that matter? what s the weeks and months ahead like? yeah. this was the dilemma with bannon. also going to be the dilemma
information that the committee wants than we were yesterday? all very good questions. we haven t heard publicly at least from the committee yet, but the indictment we heard from the doj today might not necessarily actually produce any tangible product or results for the committee. we ve talked about this extensively before. holding someone in criminal contempt will result in a fine or up to a year in prison but doesn t actually compel them to cooperate with the congressional investigation. that is really not the point of it or the way that the committee has been using this, these criminal referrals. doing it more to apply pressure to get people to actually come in and cooperate with their subpoenas. peter navarro along with steve bannon, and then two outstanding criminal referrals including dan scavino and mark meadows, the doj has yet to decide on. using it as a tool to get those people in. the four outliers.
utter disregard for the constitution of the law that the department of justice has. i sent them a letter on wednesday offering a modus vivende. i told them, contact and individual who would discuss this matter. what did they do? they didn t call me. i spoke to the fbi agent that arrested me. i spoke to him wednesday night. i said, walter, whatever you need. you don t have to come banging on my door like you did last week getting me out of bed. i m here to cooperate. okay? what did they do? all right? i was on my way to nashville today to do a tv appearance with mike huckabee s show. all right? and instead of coming to my door where i live, which, by the way, is right next to the fbi. instead of calling me and
other things elsewhere in america. nbc news reporting two states aim to arm teachers, despite opposition from educators and experts. two states, ohio and louisiana are considering decreasing requirements or allowing to fulfill a firearm after training. i ask you, the patchwork of the way these states handle these things. obviously america is a diverse place. what does the country look like if we re headed in opposite directions, our approach to guns becomes as polarized as politics, what does america look like five years from now if there s no federal legislation. it s one way in which the fisher is getting wider and getting to a place you mentioned the laboratory of democracy, beautiful idea of federalism and at some point, there gets to be a place where these laboratories are pursuing entirely different versions of democratic goals. and new york, yes, new york