for some breaking news from the january
six select committee to tell you about
news that broke just a few moments ago a
brand new subpoena targeting a name you
will surely be familiar with kimberly
guilfoyle remember her she's a former
fox news host a former republican
operative who worked for donald trump's
reelection campaign she also happens to
be engaged to donald trump jr in a
statement committee chair benny thompson
writes this quote ms guilfoyle met with
donald trump inside the white house
spoke at the rally that took place
before the riot on january 6 and
apparently played a key role organizing
and raising funds for that event the
select committee is seeking information
from her about these and other matters
because ms guilfoyle backed out of her
original commitment to provide a
voluntary interview we are issuing
today's subpoena that will compel her to
testify we expect her to comply with the
law and cooperate joining us now msnbc
legal analyst neil katiel former acting
u.s solicitor general now a georgetown
law professor here at the table jonathan
carl abc news chief washington
correspondent author of the book
betrayal the final act of the trump show
john carl first on the breaking news
about kimberly gilfoy this is clearly
part of the follow the money part of
their investigation oh absolutely i mean
obviously as you just read she was there
on january 6 she was in the oval office
when
donald trump had that conversation at 11
in the morning with mike pence and told
him as he admitted to me uh you you can
either be a patriot or you can be a
whatever right um and but but i think if
you look at this letter from benny
thompson the key thing is her role in
the grift in raising money by lying
about the election
it talks about how she was at that rally
bragging to somebody we raised so much
money for this literally one of my
donors julie at 3 million so she's
bragging about how much this was all a
big cash cow and and the potential
criminality there is that what the
committee has focused in on is that it
was a lie it was fraudulently raised
money is that where she may face some
jeopardy
and keep in mind the committee is not
only looking for criminality here but
but that is the potential you could have
potential wire fraud you could have you
could have uh you know they were clearly
marketing in a fraudulent way but the
committee is also i think trying to
build a broader case about what was
happening here we know trump's obsessive
uh attempt to keep power but there was
also this other thing which frankly
hasn't gotten as much attention which is
how much this entire operation was an
effort to raise money and raise money
with lies and raise money that had
nothing to do with overturning the
election i mean this was about raising
money to raise money yeah i mean you
know neil i remember before trump left
office obviously after he'd lost but
before he'd left
a very close former trump adviser said
to me this is all about padding the
legal defense fund because he leaves
he's under investigation in new york
city and new york state she wasn't yet
under investigation i think in georgia
but he already faced tons of legal
fights and it and he knew he'd lost it
was all about raising money at some
point he seems to become convinced of
his own delusions but what do you make
of this probe and its focus on the
fraudulent funds
yeah no i think that's absolutely right
i mean donald trump only created jobs
for one segment of the american economy
for lawyers and now he's got to pay him
and so it's not surprising that you have
this investigation into this because
they were just trying to clearly
fundraise off of it and it's really not
surprising that kim guilfoyle has been
subpoenaed at this point because she
said last week oh i'm going to
voluntarily cooperate but i don't think
anyone who knows anything about the
trumps thinks that was likely she just
said that in order to delay things out
and now she said she won't cooperate
when she's learned what those questions
are like tell the truth
and so
the subpoena is done to try and enforce
that and so now she'll presumably try
and claim privilege i have no idea what
privilege she's going to try and claim
here i mean uh it wouldn't shock me if
she gets a quick hitch marriage to don
junior such an income spousal privilege
um you know for that um it turns out
there is nothing in the law like fiance
uh privilege for the fiance of the
person who's the czar triggering the
libs or something that's not a thing in
the law so i'm not sure what she's got
um and you know coming nicole on on you
know on the heels of the news yesterday
that chilling filing by the congress
saying there was just tons of
mischievous planning and nonsense all
engineered by donald trump and john
eastman to try and steal an election um
you know in informally accusing uh the
president of a good faith belief that
they think he committed federal felonies
serious ones i mean it's all an
astounding 24 hours out of this 1-6
committee hey nicole one thing really
important about the grift is is they
were raising money for the legal effort
but they weren't actually paying the
lawyers rudy giuliani wasn't getting
still hasn't been uh and uh the the rnc
was covering legal bills so they were
raising money for a legal effort but not
spending any money on the legal effort
well pick up on what neil's talking
about and i think he used the word
chilling and what's chilling about it
frankly is that the first place we learn
about stitching together the evidence to
accuse the ex-president of a
felony conspiracy to defraud the
government is congress not doj yeah well
there's a lot of frustration there and
ultimately we'll see
if this ends up being a referral and if
and if the doj will actually act upon it
what i thought was really interesting
here is the way that they
framed the case uh the they point out
that the president went through all of
these efforts in the courts to challenge
the election results as you know 60
cases losing all of them and then
this line really struck out to me he and
his associates began to plan
extrajudicial efforts to overturn the
results of an election and prevent the
president-elect from assuming office
this was an extrajudicial effort he had
every right to challenge to go through
the process of challenging results to
the courts that was failing so then they
went and tried to do something that was
extrajudicial that was frankly illegal
um i think extrajudicialism in most of
our vocabularies neil and it reminded me
of mueller's sort of riddle if i could
say he hadn't committed a crime i would
i mean the opposite of that is he
committed a crime the the the
extrajudicial means as john carl just
said illegal talk about the the the
framework that was laid out that you
described as chilling i think that's the
right word
yes so i think that this is basically a
criminal referral to the justice
department it's not formally one but it
informally has the exact same you know
you and i are reading this but so too is
merrick garland and all the prosecutors
at the justice department and i
understand jonathan's frustration you
know we've waited years for trump to
finally be held accountable but
congressional committees of course are
not going to idly throw out language
like what we saw in yesterday's filing
and you know that filing is signed by
doug letter who's like one of the most
respected lawyers in dc uh bipartisan
individual at the just department for 40
years and what this filing says is look
we're willing to take this to a judge
for you know in camera kind of ex parte
review of these documents because we
think a crime has been committed and you
know it's going to be very hard for the
justice department to ignore that and
yes you know i think a criminal
investigation is a different standard
than the filing yesterday because you
have to show criminal intent a kind of
state of mind but now we have over 550
interviews with the select committee
we've got hundreds of documents and some
very very shady emails so we don't just
have at this point a solid basis for a
doj investigation we have a month's
worth of trial exhibits and the best
they've got in defense on criminal
intent is well donald trump thought that
he won well the documents that were
revealed yesterday suggest otherwise
that he was told repeatedly not and even
if so you know being an egomaniac is not
a defense to a criminal prosecution and
that's why the filing yesterday is so
important yeah i mean i think i'm tall
it doesn't make me tall i want to read
this piece of evidence because it
clearly comes from something they learn
through their probe
according to the president senior
campaign advisor jason miller soon after
the election a campaign data expert told
the president in pretty blunt terms that
he was going
to lose the president knew he lost and
and if you just stitched together you
know extra judicial he lost in the
courts because they were
immune to his fleet you know fake news
stuff that washes on oan and and fox
anywhere where his lies ran up against a
state or a local court it failed but it
almost prevailed inside the government
he ran just talk about this this filing
building on your reporting
and how close
the committee has now sort of run down
all the evidence of how close we came
well i think what's really significant
here is is the line you just read and
not so much for what it said but who
said it uh the footnote it comes from
jason miller's sworn deposition to the
committee so this is somebody this is
one of the president's top advisors on
the campaign so close to the president
that he stayed with him after january
sixth he stayed with him after january
20th went down to mar-a-lago with him
and he is telling the committee that
look we told donald trump bluntly that
he was going to lose uh that there was
no no i described that in my book i
describe
a scene saturday after the election
where the top advisors come along and
say look pennsylvania's gone you really
don't have a chance here there it's
really a really really long shot uh mr
president but it's one thing for me to
write about it this is one of his top
people going before that committee that
he's vilified and telling them under
oath that he was told not just by jason
miller but by his other advisers that he
was losing the election well and i want
to ask both of you about this i mean
in other words i think this deal was a
lie well and that's the
lie and that jason miller didn't lie to
the committee i mean
the news is sort of on three levels one
that jason miller went in and two that
jason miller went in and told the truth
and three that that this whole charade
that they all keep up of attacking the
one six committee is just that they've
gone in and taken it very seriously
they've taken it they've cooperated and
they have you know i mean there have
been the steve bannon's there have been
uh the john eastmans that have tried to
fight but
a great number of people very close to
the president and we've only seen a bit
of it in these filings have gone to the
committee and testified under oath and
presumably testified truthfully
[Music]
you