And what the Biden Administration is actually doing. On its face a hearing this week with Donald Trumps former Chief Of Staff mark meadows revolved around what might sound like a sideshow legal issue compared to the larger problem facing the former president hooch he wants to move his case from state to federal court, but what we learned from his nearly four hours of questioning has implications far beyond a potential Change Of Venue for his trial. In addition to giving us the first sense of what the argument may be from one of trumps other coconspirators of which there are many, the testimony was also another Flashing Warning Sign of what a second trump term could look like. I mean, lets zero in on the key defense we heard from mark meadows. He argued that the allegations outlined in the indictment, you know, the unrelenting pursuit of baseless claims of Election Fraud, the Pressure Campaign on georgia officials to find votes, the conspiratorial behavior to keep trump in power, he says all of that, was quote part of my role as in his role. And he doesnt think anything he did including overtly Political Campaign activities wus outside his scope as Chief Of Staff. They may sound outlandish to, even laughable but it does tell you a heck of lot was going on inside the white house at that time. Meadows himself acknowledged he helped coordinate the fake elector scheme for Trumps Campaign because trump might yell at him if he didnt. Thats literally what he said. Heres the thing, the job of white house Chief Of Staff is their job is to tell the truth hard truth tuesday the president and sometimes you get illed at. A chief of that is a card core conservative but also a protector of the constitution. Thats a pretty big warning sign that a second trump term could be far worse. Author Chris Whipple wrote this in the new york times, quote, for mr. Meadows his place in history is secure as a primary enabler of a president who tried to overthrow democracy, but his example should serve as a warning if mr. Trump regapes the white house. All guardrails will be gone. That is something ive heard from many, many people who have worked in administrations about their concern. Should trump be reelected in 2024 there should be no doubt hell surround himself with even more damaging men and women than to date. People like Jeffrey Clark who tried to blackmail other member of the Justice Department to do the former president s bidding. That guy would probably be on the short list for attorney general, people similar to or worse than Rudy Giuliani, yes, that guy who just this week was found liable of defaming two Election Workers so relentlessly that he put their lives in danger. These are the type of people he all but certainly would install in his second term, people at the top level of government who will tell him exactly what he wants to hear, not the hard truths, who he can basically control. People who will agree to attack and even prosecute any of his adversaries. People who will say, yes, sir, law be damned. My biggest take away this week was not just the legality of the actions taken in trumps first term, theres a lot to dive in there, too, but also the damage that could be done if he gets by staffing the government with loyalists and blind sycophants. You follow this all closely. Were you surprised watching mark meadows testimony of anything he had to say on monday . Not surprised so much by what he had to say as the fact he said it at all, that he felt the need to take that gamble, that big gamble by taking the stand. I think its a Dedication Both on the fact he feels he needs some kind of a hail mary to escape a potential conviction but also that if he were successful in removing the case to federal court, he has the potential to knock it out completely by arguing immunity, but listening to that testimony, reading what he had to say, i think its very weak case both for removal but also for immunity. If actions of a Chief Of Staff to try to subvert an election, to try to overturn an election, to try to defraud and violate the laws of a particular state are somehow within the Job Description of a federal Chief Of Staff, then the constitution becomes in Justice Jacksons words, a suicide pact. And as he wrote in that dissent, that famous dissent, the constitution is not a suicide pact and shouldnt be interpreted in such a way as it would negate itself, but i think he feels it necessary to take such a profound risk with this testimony. Given as you just said profound risk that he took by testifying for more than four hours, that now can all be used by other prosecutors. Did you hear anything that might be useful for jack smith and his team as they are working to put together their case in prosecuting the federal election interference case . You know, mostly the absurdity of the argument that he did this as part of his role in order to determine what further reforms might be necessary to election laws or to see the election law was faithfully carried out. That i think will be very successfully mocked during the course of the trial, and it should be. Its absurd. I think he was, you know, by and large pretty careful about what he was saying, using repetitive words and phrases by accounts of his attorney, but just the absurdity of the argument i think will ultimately be used against him. Its worth telling everybody, reminding everything its not your role as Chief Of Staff to work to overturn an election, to state the obvious. One of the things, congressman, that stood out to me is when meadows was asked directly by State Prosecutors if he had any role in courting fake electors, he said no, i did not. The prosecution then submitted into evidence an email he sent to jason miller where he wrote, quote, we just need to have Someone Coordinating Lectors for states. Youve been in a range of position in these courtrooms. Did he perjure himself there . Or how problematic is that for him . I think its problematic. This is why most attorneys would have counseled against him testifying other than as a last resort but because he is completely familiar with the discovery, and maybe he remembers these emails and maybe hes flat out lying and hes exposing himself in that way as well, but it may also be he hasnt familiarized himself with all the volumes of material yet. This is the risk, this is the peril trying to get out in front like this to remove the case. And i think prosecutors are only showing a fraction of what they have under various issues so that they can prepare a trial to use this testimony against him. But theres an argument circulating about whether the 14th Amendment that prohibits anyone, quote, engaged in insurrection or rebellion from Holding Public office bars trump from running for president. Now, this hasnt been tested in our system before. What is your thought on whether thats a valid argument . I think it is a valid argument. You know, the 14th Amendment section 3 is pretty clear. If you engage in acts of . Surrection or rebellion against the government or you give aid and comfort to those who do, you are disqualified from running. It just requires you have engaged in these acts. Its a disqualification from Holding Office again, and it fits donald trump to a tee. I think it will be tell used when either the Secretary Of State refuses to put him on the ballot or puts him on the ballot and is challenged by a litigant. I will imagine it will go up to the Supreme Court, and thats the big Question Mark through all of this, which is what will the Supreme Court do . There are prominent constitutional scholars as well as prominent progressive scholars who believe that he should be disqualified, but will the court take that step . Ultimately only time will tell, but i do think it is a very legitimate issue by the clear terms of the 14th Amendment he should be disqualified from Holding Office. Congress is not returning for a couple of weeks but republicans are already ramping up talk of an Impeachment Inquiry into president biden. Heres what Marjorie Taylor greene recently said. I will not vote to fund the government unless we have passed an Impeachment Inquiry on joe biden. Now, shutting the government down has implications on the public broadly. What is your reaction to her tying a Government Shutdown to an Impeachment Inquiry . Well, it just shows the extreme lengths theyll go to carry water for donald trump. Theyll shutdown the government. Theyll do whatever they can to initiate an impeachment of joe biden, and part of the motivation here is of course to distract from Donald Trumps multiple indictments. Part of it is to somehow dilute the stain of trumps impeachments, but the common denominator is this just unswerving, undeniable willingness to debase themselves in the service of donald trump. I think many of them would like to shutdown the government anyway. This would just give them further leverage to try to shutdown the government having failed to default on the nations credit. Many see this as the next demonstration of their commitment to god knows what. So i fear that were on a path to Government Shutdown because there are a enough members of the republican conference who want it, and Kevin Mccarthy will do whatever it takes to remain speaker one more tay or one more week. Thats his sole motivation. Congressman adam schiff, always a pleasure to have you. Thank you so much for joining me today. Thank you. Coming up, some republicans in georgia are taking aim at District Attorney fani willis, but Governor Brian Kemp is having none of it. A former State Senator who testified in front of the grand jury joins me next. Plus Election Workers ruby freeman and Shaye Moss Notch a huge victory against Rudy Giuliani. Their attorneys going to join me on set as well. Next ill ask about addressing the violence and new polling. Were just Getting Started today. Well be right back. Were just Getting Started today. Well be right back. Every busins deserves a great deal. Thats why Comcast Business is launching the mobile made free event. With our business internet, new and existing customers can get one year of unlimited mobile for free. Its our best internet. Powered by The Next Generation 10g network and with 99. 9 reliability. Plus one line of free mobile for an entire year. Its the mobile made free eventhappening now. Get started for just 49. 99 a month. Plus, ask how to get one free line of unlimited mobile. Comcast business, powering possibilities. Donald trump and his allies are digging in and lashing out as the former president s four criminal cases continue to move through the courts. They have tried discrediting the indictments, calling them among other things political prosecutions. Now theyre casualty talking about Political Violence and civil war. I told one senator, i said, listen, i said weve got to put our Heads Together and figure this out. We need to be taking action right now because if we dont our constituencies are going to be fighting it in the streets. Do you want a civil war . I dont want a civil war. I dont want have to draw my rifle. I want to make this problem go away with my legislative means of doing so, and my first step to getting that done is defunding fani willis. And dont have to want to draw my rifle. That was someone who donald trump has praised for planning to nee cap the georgia investigation. The republicans seem to be drawing a line and instead of interfering many of them seemed to promise to abide by the basic tenants of the law. Governor kemp flatly rejected calls for a Special Session or any act against willis for an indictment against trump. Ive not seen any evidence that d. A. Willis actions or lack thereof warrant action by the prosecuting attorney oversight commission. A Special Session of the General Assembly to end run around this law is not feasible and may ultimately prove to be unconstitutional. As long as im governor were going to follow the law and the constitution regardless of who it helps or harms politically. In this day and age it is kind of newsworthy when republicans dont blindly do Donald Trumps bidding believe it or not in 2023. Hes always benefitted from a tremendous amount of political cover from members of his own party, but it does not look like its going to be universally the case this time in georgia. Joining me now is the former senator who testified in fulton county. So great to see you today. Thank you so much for being with me. I want to start, first of all, with kemps rejection of the Special Session. What do you make of that, and what should we all take away from it . I think, a, he knows he shouldnt do that because whatever acts that happen it would be illegal. Theres something about separation of powers in the constitution, and you cant just do anything you want no matter what republicans in georgia or some republicans in georgia think. And then separately, look, what willis is doing is shes prosecuting a case. If trump is not guilty or going to be exonerated, then let the process play out. But just bringing charges in and of itself is not grounds, you know, for going after her or defunding her office. So this past may the governor did sign a law that setup a commission that has the power to investigate complaints and remove District Attorneys, that that commission will not be setup until october. Its currently being challenged in the court, but you know georgia politics well. I mean do you think there are a bunch of republicans going to try to take advantage of this . Or what should we beimenting here . Absolutely because anybody can make a complaint. Its not even you have to be someone who has a problem. They are going to use this as a political vehicle to go after prosecutors they dont like or they dont like what theyre Charging Decisions are. And, look, one of the biggest things is there were a lot of democrats that were you know, people of color that got elected in 2020, and so the law originally was really kind of a push back on all of those folks winning office, and now its just rolled into the trump stuff where now theyre using this law specifically to go after willis because they dont like that shes prosecuting trump. I mean you mention the separation of power, which im so glad you did because its important to remind people that is part of the tradition of our country. Is there any repercussions for people going after willis, for politicizing these cases, for trying to prosecute her . I think so. Whats interesting is what i always try to tell people and specifically even in the political context is be careful what you wish for, right, or what you push because the door goes both ways. Now weve got this prosecution Oversight Committee that goes after prosecutors who dont make appropriate Charging Decisions. You know, if we think about ahmaud arb r. A. And that prosecutor in south georgia. Really there folks politically are there going to be repercussions for that, there should be, but you never know. Thats the problem. We seem to have a very short political memory in terms of what people are doing and their policies and whether or not theyll vote for them in the future. So lot to watch there. So you there are a number of codefendants in the case that had demanded a speedy trial. Hence some of them are going to have their trials start in october. What do you make of that strategy . I know you kind of questioned whether thats a good strategy for them or not. Why would it not be a good strategy . Look, one of the biggest things is you dont know what a prosecutor has. A lot of times as an attorney you would do it because youre trying to call the hand. Under georgia law if you demand a speedy thiel, you have to get it. And if you dont get it by a certain time, then you are effectively acquitted as a matter of law. Its one of those things when you make that demand, youre going to go to trial effectively within two to three months, and you dont know what the prosecutor has. Here with respect to d. A. Willis and her office, theyve been working this case up for two years. They are red to go. She wasnt going to launch until she was ready in terms of the indictment. So thats why i que