the wider public through the right wing media concocting with that man, steve bannon, they called the green bay sweep involved persuading members of congress to challenge the college electoral results setting off a chain reaction by their theory also by their cockamamie theory lead to stage legislators appointing trump elengthers. months after the january 6th committee made a criminal reseveral navarro to the department of justice, turn over records including communications with donald trump. at the time navarro s contempt with congress, cited executive privilege as a reason for stonewalling the select committee even though he wrote a book and went on television to boast about his role in the insurrection and how his plan for a bloodless coup would have succeeded if it weren t for the violence on january 6th. here he is. peter navarro on this very network with our amazing colleague, ari melber. we ll see ari in a moment. on yesterday. the very same die the indictment unseal
of then president trump january 6th as mr. trump learned about the attack on the u.s. capitol and decided whether to issue a statement that could help stop the rioters. so i guess my question is right now, does the, the committee must whatever it feels about what s happened with navarro at this point they must have their eyes on this larger prize. what s your sense how expectant they are or the timeline they re hopeful getting action on mark meadows or a building frustration, meadows the most player may be outside their grasp? why this is such a complicated question. as katie pointed out the justice department historically defends the right of executive branch to assert executive privilege and pass legal department, legal opinion, justice department legal opinions asserted congress can t made a president s top adviser talk as their official diets and members on the house
publicly. think that is i think that is what coats is doing. i have high expectations and crossing my fingers but i don t have that same trust in this attorney general. he s already misinterpreted to the public the results of the mueller report and why won t he do it again. he s signaled where the investigation is going and said he doesn t like what he s seeing and said rules might have to change and we should never use opposition research to predicate an investigation. that tells me he s figured out where he wants this thing to go. and katie, this week trump said he believes four former fbi officials committed treason. how is the justice department reacting to the president s comments. the justice department historically has not reacted strongly to some of the comments that trump has made particularly when trump has made mistakes on points of law or points of statute. certainly the crime of treason would mean to either raise an army and do battle with the government and try to