herschman, cippilone and barr. this was the president of the united states taking legal advice on how he could use his power at the most critical moment of his presidency from a college professor who was not part of the administration. i mean, joyce, you listen to that clip and you listen to mike s analysis of the role he played inside the west wing, and you got at least one federal judge on the record saying that it is more likely than not that trump and eastman committed felonies. how is it that mr. eastman is not under criminal investigation? it would be surprising if he wasn t under investigation. it s entirely possible that s happening and we haven t seen signs of it. back in january, attorney general merrick garland promised that he would follow the evidence, go wherever it led, no matter who was involved, whether they were there on january 6th or not, and here we have the
against mike pence? i know he said to you, for your book, oh, he had secret service, but there s reporting by mike s colleagues that he thought mike pence deserved to be hung. well, not only that, trump told me directly, and it s on tape, it was on the record, i asked him if he was concerned for trump for pence. he said he wasn t. and then, i said, but those chants were terrible. you know, hang mike pence. and what trump said to me, i mean, it shocks me to this day, shocks me that anybody that could hear that could still support him, he said, well, they were angry. it s common sense. these are the words he said to me after i said they were saying, hang mike pence. and trump s response is, it s common sense. how can you pass on a fraudulent vote? and that tweet, when he tweets the mob is inside the capitol, you saw in the presentation from the january 6th committee, in its first hearing, one of the rioters reading into a bullhorn,
extraordinary the extent to which shouting matches in the oval office essentially dunk fests determined i don t want to sound hyperbolic here, but kind of determined the course of the end of donald trump s presidency. it absolutely determined the course of the last days of donald trump s presidency. we know that from evidence already introduced, harry litman. we know that from incredible reporting from chief among them betsy woodruff swan. we know that the decisions of a handful of individuals are the only reason that we didn t sit around and wait for some even graver constitutional crisis than what we witnessed. that is clear in the evidence presented to date. i want to come at this the other way, though. we re scrutinizing donohue and rosen on one side and clark on the other. i mean, what is what would the investigation look like into whether clark was just acting at
the, you know, the guardrails were completely gone. trump was not listening to anyone who had kept him on track before. bill barr was gone. pat cippoloni was not being listened to. what happens is there s a vacuum around the president and it s in that vacuum where he s only listening to what he wants to hear that the eastmans and the flynns and the sidney powells have a direct line to him. this comes back to the incidents in december where flynn and powell are in the oval office pitching the president on the ideas of using the military to seize the voting machines and rerun the election. herschmann is in that meeting, trying to stop them and trying to push back there. so what was going on inside of the trump administration was that those who had enabled trump for much of his administration but had basically stopped in the final weeks, and that being the
right? it s not a contract. but there has to be a meeting. there has to be an agreement. there are some opportunities here. we have heard evidence throughout these proceedings. there s the late-night meeting at the white house that takes place that involves rudy giuliani, sidney powell, and trump and others that you ll recall is the meeting where trump manages to get into the room with them alone, and the meeting is only terminated when people on his side when he finds out. that s not the burden of proof for the slekt committee. is that where it s heading? i think the question of a criminal referral is in some degree beside the point for the committee. the committee is trying to convince, in the court of public opinion, to make the case that donald trump was directly responsible for what happened on january 6th and his actions not just on that day but in the months and weeks leading up to it was a high crime and a