i'm ari melber. our top story is this new gag order that binds defendant donald trump in his new york civil trial. the gag order is back on. the judge also noting they'll be enforcing it regular rousely and vigorously, and we've seen the judge deliver on that promise before. as discussed, these things matter but only become this big a fightf you have the rare case of defendant who is flout the law against their interest. trump's already been fined on for this on two occasions, violating this order and been forced to payorit. you may say, what does he care about fines? itas fines that forced him into deposition as well. it is how the system, however slowly, enforces theseul trump's move comes after court filings show the judge and law clerk were receiving threats, a deluge of threats after trump was deliberately using his public following and online profile to try to whip up antagonism or worse, potentially other things, menacing things against these individual who is administer the courts in new york. now, donald trump is expected to be the last defense witness called to the stand on december 11th, but remember, everyone has the right to silence and everyone has the right to speak as long as they don't violate the basic rules of court. no one's saying the defendant cannot explain under oath what he was trying to do. the gag order is about having fair rules of the road so people with following or certain type of supporter fans cannot use their words to cause illegal actions that undermine the court process. now, trump will be testifying after eric trump takes the stand again on december 6th. it will be after the holidays to conclude, because the judge set the closing arguments for december 6th. jack smith is also pushing for a gag order on trump. i mentioned even though they're separate cases, how they work, the resolution are completely different jurisdictions. one is state and civil the other is federal and criminal. if you're wondering, why so many gag orders? well, what all these cases have in common -- sometimes the news is simple, sometimes the truth is simple. what all these cases have in common in this instance is the defendant and the civil defendant who was just gagged in new york today also faces calls to gag him in the federal case, where jack smith is arguing that a targeted -- what we would call a partial gag order is necessary to protect witnesses and other people in that case. so we are still awaiting a decision in that case where that issue went all the way up to the d.c. court of appeals. now, things are not looking very promising for donald trump there r a variety of reasons. in the special counsel case moving beyond the gag order to the trial he actually faces in march, there are outts reporting one of trump's lawyers testiied to the special counsel she told him it woul billion a crime to resist complying with the subpoena for the mar-a-lago documents. jack smith overseeing both trump federal cases. that's the documents espionage case and the coup case we have been talking about more recently, and that is, of course, scheduled for an earlier trial. nbc news has not confirmed the reports you see on your screen from the reports from "the new york times." but they are damning. the lawyer telling trump clearly, it's going to be a crime if trump refuses to comply and that trump, quote, understand the warning. there's also the advice, advice of council. you may have herd that term. quote, you've got to comply. now, when we show you this quote and this type of evidence, the reason this is bad for trump is that sometimes you can argue that you were confused or that you were so confused that you didn't evince -- you didn't have the level of criminal intent required to prove that you should go to jail for a crime, for breaking the law. sometimes people say, gosh, ari, seems frustrating. why is it so hard the prove? the reason is this ain't a parking ticket. in the united states, when the rules are enforced correctly, the defendants not only have rights but they have the burden on the government. the government has to prove that not only you did it, but you meant to do it. wasn't a mistake, blunder or accident. car accident where people die is a tragedy, but it's not a murder unless the government can prove you set out to take someone's life. that evidence is really bad for trump if a jury's going to hear that not only did he did do it -- because there's no factual debate about the documents. they found them. you've seen them on tv. not only did he do it, but he was warned doing it would be a crime and he did it any way. that adds the criminal intent. as for counsel device, you're able to find some lawyer, some memo to say, i thought i was doing what they wanted. i was trying to follow the rules. there's someone who knows a lot about that type of defense and how donald trump may allegedly misuse it. take a listen. >> donald cares for no one or anything other than himself. he will now start blaming things on the lawyers. well, the lawyers told me to do it. quite frankly, the lawyers told me. i'm not a lawyer. that's what i hire them for. and he's going to throw them under the bus and they know it and that's why they're all out there protecting themselves. >> michael cohen speaking to our colleague katie phang on this program. he even did a bid for crimes partially on behalf of trump. he's talking about what trump does os a client. there are also new details about the coup efforts. we've talked about all the ways you get evidence. yo all these other ways that some of this evidence has been held. ando texts from republican congressman scott perry have become public, revealing he had th vast web o concontacts he was tki to where they were scusng how they might overturn or steal the election, and it included a who's who the republican party. people like ronna maniel, mark meadows, white house counsel's office, dector of national intelligence, the trump campaign lawysnd -- and this is an interesting on see upper middle right there, trump official jeffrey clark. that name is familiar because it ties a link from the justice department to the republican congress to donald trump's alleged conspiracy, because mr. clark is an unindicted coconspirator in jack smith's coup case. when we take this all together we've shown you some of these individuals have already pled out. they are guilty. they are convicts. basely you have some from the washington case and the georgia case, and you see clark in the lower right, a coconspirator in the doj case now tied to this republican congressman. at the time nobody knew in public -- there wasn't even a single article about that level of advance plotting. mr. clark, as you can see in the yellow lower right, has been indicted in georgia for that stuff. legally presumed innocenting but there's a ton of evidence prosecutors say they can convict him. you'll see people like ms. ellis already convicted in georgia and pledged to cooperate with prosecutors. . so all of this together shows that rising heat. take a look how some of this fits in. >> was it your understanding that representative kerry was pushing for a certain person to make over the department? >> he wanted mr. clark to take over the department of justice. >> he said something to the effect of, jeff clark is great, and i think he's the kind of guy that can get in there and do something about this kind of stuff. >> the kind of guy who can do something about this stuff has to be translated to, one of the few people working inside the justice department who would actually partner up with the outgoing losing candidate, donald trump, to try to overthrow president-elect biden. that's what jeffrey clark was. and look, i've said this before -- donald trump's not running for a second term, he's running for a life term. these are the type of people, some of whom are indicted some of whom are convicted, that would come to power in a second term. this is exactly what he wanted to do when he thought he was losing power. he's going to continue, and said in public, he's going to use the doj. said it in the last week or two. we're not running every sound bite of everything donald trump says as candidate, but this is going to be what people need to consider as they cast their votes next year. to punitively potentially go after his critics, enemies. it's a playbook from donald trump's failed coup. clark went through perry to get more sensitive information about election results than he had as doj official. telling perry, quote, the tell the president the cia chief needs to get me the security clearance tickets. perry replies, referring to then outgoing president trump, potus is giving you a presidential security clearance. you've got to ask yourself as we learn more and more about this, why do you need all these cutouts? why would someone in the executive branch, mr. clark -- who as i mentioed is now indicted in state court and an unindicted coconspirator by the doj where he used to work, why does he need to go to the branch -- head of the branch donald trump? it's not normal. it's secretive. it's suspicious. and while the answer is complicated it may shed light on why so many people are worried about going to jail for this coup. so, why? andrew weissman knows about this stuff. even worked for the fbi, doj. andrew, i want your view when we're back in 60 seconds. e backs make the switch. it's your business. it's your verizon. the virus that causes shingles is sleeping... in 99% of people over 50. it's lying dormant, waiting... and could reactivate. shingles strikes as a painful, blistering rash that can last for weeks. and it could wake at any time. think you're not at risk for shingles? it's time to wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist about shingles prevention. kate is going big and going home for the holidays. that's the plan. at michaels she got everything to make cookies that were anything but cutter. turn ideas into i-did-its. ♪ (holiday music) ♪ we're back with andrew weissman a former senior prosecutor in the mueller probe as well as an experienced lawyer and official from doj, fbi. i ended with that question, and andrew, i'm curious, would it be the normal process to go from executive to congress back to executive to get emergency security clearance like this? and if not, what might that tell you with an investigative lens as you look at all this? >> well, of course it's not at all common place, and it's also not common place to be doing this with respect to somebody who was in the civil division, and part of that was the head of the environmental division. it had nothing to do with the department of justice looking at potential voter fraud. that's not his purview as has been very, very clear. so this is really because they wanted jeff clark to issue a letter that was false on the part of the department of justice saying they were looking at fraud allegations. and in fact, the d.c. indictment refers to jeff clark going further than that and saying -- drafting a memo saying he actually found indications of fraud. it reminds me very much of what the foreign president did with zelenskyy. he wanted a foreign country to say that they were investigating his political rival. so to me it's exactly of a piece, which is using a trumped up claim of a prosecutor looking into wrong doing to say, ah, see, there's wrong doing there with respect to either the election or two a political adversary. but to me it also goes to the idea that we now have not just information from senator grassley being complicit, we now have information, as you referred to, with respect to senator perry being complicit. and these are the key people who enable what donald trump is doing. and it's sort of shocking that they're sitting members of congress. >> yeah. as you say, part of the one branch that's supposed to be the most concerned, at least as the founders saw it work direct democracy, yet they're understood mining it. that's one of the points that lets you know we're in the breach. a lot of legal issues are complicated. some are not. i don't know if you'll agree, and it's fine if you don't, my legal reporting that the only thing connecting the gag orders in new york and d.c. is the defendant. otherwise they're quite different cases and they'll go different ways. but what does that tell you and what do you see in the more significant question of whether jack smith will win the partial order he wants against jack smith going into march? >> well, they are different other than the defendant, obviously. the one in new york, it's a civil case and it is the mildest of gag orders. it literally was do not denigrate and cause potential harm for the staff of the court. like, you shouldn't even have to be told that. it's so obvious that that is a rule. i also think with respect to a criminal case -- i know this sounds like i'm a real -- and it's probably true, but i don't think of it as a gag order. i think of it as a restriction that's part of his bail conditions. he's a defendant out on bail pending trial, and it is true that it does gag what he can say. but you know what else is restricted? his second amendment rights. he can't have a gun when he is out on bail pretending trial. his fourth amendment rights are restricted in terms of search and seizure. there are all sorts of rights that we all enjoy that are different because we are not under indictment. and under indictment you are restricted in various ways. >> andrew, i know you're not flexing. it sounds like you know a lot of the amendments. >> [ laughter ] yes, i do teach law, and at least i can count up to four. >> and as you say -- it's interesting, later in the broadcast we're going to talk about how elon musk has been attacking free speech so much. sometimes we hear about these things as bumper stickers -- freedom, liberty, american, rights. yes. and what you're reminding folks, if you could build on the point you're making, if donald trump were to violate this enough or do other things, then he would be the one further forfeiting the right. in other words, you're getting a deal that you don't have to be in prison before trial. some people end up getting incarcerated before trial for various reasons. but that's the deal you make. if you then -- again, talk about freedom. you exercise your so-called freedom by breaking the deal you might lose your freedom. that's been how it is and it's supposed to be for every defendant. >> absolutely. so there can be restrictions, for instance, on where you can travel, or getting permission as to where you can go. you can have to surrender your passport. as i said, you can't carry a gun. there can be restrictions if you are threatening somebody. restrictions on that. roger stone was a classic case of that. paul manafort is another case. if you actually engage in obstruction of justice and coach witnesses to lie, you know what can happen? you can be in jail awaiting trial. that's true for many people. sam bankman-fried, who was recently convicted for a large white collar crime -- economic crime, so underlying crime that's a lot less dangerous and with a lot less import than being charged with undermining a presidential election, he awaited trial from jail. so there are all sorts of things that you can do and choose to do that will result in a judge taking appropriate action. and so to me, what happened in new york and what is on appeal in d.c. does raise interesting legal issues, but it doesn't seem like a terribly close call to me, because it's not just restricting what you and i can say. it's really about the conditions for a defendant while they're out on bail. >> yeah, and we talked about before, you have previously prosecuted mafia organizations and others, and there are special challenges. the system is supposed to get everything back to fairness. the defendant has rights. mr. trump is presumed innocent, as i mentioned. but the court and system must hold, and if violence or having a following of several tens of millions of people, some of whom resort to violence, undercuts that court system, those people would be exempt in a way from the rules that are supposed to bind the rest of us. so you remind people how that actually works, which i think is useful. andrew weissman, thank you, sir. >> you're welcome. >> appreciate it. i told folks what's coming up about elon musk. he is having a heck of a year, losing money, not only seeing his repeated efforts to attack free speech get noticed, but now he's having a spiraling freakout and undercutting his own claims like this one. >> well, i think it's very important for there to be an inclusive arena for free speech. >> sounds good. the problem for musk is, he has broken violated and been caught violating those very pledges while he's also losing money, and we're going to show you new stuff he said that his right-wing supporters are freaking out over tonight. first, more from this liz cheney book as she scorches the gop. jen psaki our special guest next. n psaki our special guest next hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking dofetilide. this can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. if you have a rash or allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. serious or life-threatening lactic acid buildup and liver problems can occur. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems or if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. dovato may harm an unborn baby. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. we're talking about cashbackin. not a game. not a game! we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. we're not talking about practice? no. we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. not a game! we've been talking about practice for too long. -word. -no practice. we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. i mean, we're not talking about a game! cashback like a pro with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. [city ambience sounds] [car screech] [car door slam] [camera shutter sfx] introducing ned's plaque psoriasis. [camera shutter sfx] he thinks his flaky, red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. [ned?] it can help you get clearer skin and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing it for nearly a decade. otezla is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. [crowd gasp] ♪♪ with clearer skin, movie night is a groovy night. [ting] ♪♪ live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. hi, my name is damion clark. if you have both medicare and medicaid, i have some really encouraging news that you'll definitely want to hear. depending on the plans available in your area, you may be eligible to get extra benefits with a humana medicare advantage dual-eligible special needs plan. all of these plans include a healthy options allowance, a monthly allowance to help pay for eligible groceries, utilities, rent, and over-the-counter items. the healthy options allowance is loaded onto a prepaid card