select committee s only remaining hearing this week. it s on thursday. the hearing will feature testimony from mike pence s former chief of staff or chief counsel, that s greg jacob, who we know spoke with the committee back in february for nearly nine hours. he has a unique window into exactly what trump and his inner circle were saying to pence, what they wanted him to do in the lead-up to january 6th, and according to reporting in the washington post, jacob was among the very few in a meeting two days before the insurrection where trump demanded pence follow the advice of attorney john eastman, who pushed the theory that the vice president had the authority to refuse to certify the election. jacob strongly disagreed with eastman s proposals saying it went against the electoral count act and it was greg jacob who emailed this to john eastman. thanks to your b.s., we are now under siege. pence s chief of staff, a man named marc short, who was also
10:00 and i picked them up at 10:30 as they re walking towards the capitol. and the president doesn t start speaking until close to noon. so, they were well away from the capitol at that point well away from the monument at that point. did they ever talk about their role in being there early? no, but they re in eddie eddie block s livestream footage, eddie brock is a proud boy and livestreams their event. there s a proud boy called milkshake who says, we re going to go and storm the capitol, and dean reminds him to that that s probably inappropriate language. inappropriate language but not behavior? i want to just try to understand whether or not this time that they re marching, being different from the time of donald trump s supporters convening and witnessing the speech, and then trump says, after being told by the secret service that he can t go, that he ll march with them.
particular meeting was for the way that the u.s. government works and for the way this the final few weeks of trump s presidency could have panned out. it s very sobering to think about what might have happened and how things might have been different if the quote, unquote team normal senior doj officials hadn t realized that jeff clark was about to have a meeting with trump and had it rushed to the white house as quickly as they possibly could, even in the case of one of those officials wearing jeans and a t-shirt. the prospect of trump being able to actually install someone at the doj who would have had the department do his bidding is something that would have had enormous consequences. what i also found really striking about this post reporting is that it specifically looks at the fact that trump wanted the attorney general to have a press conference about election fraud.
made against donald trump, but as a figure who continues to believe and spread and insert himself inside state legislative bodies to further the big lie. well, the just on that clip, the question that i would really like to ask herschman in the follow-up there is that if he thought eastman broke the law, did he think trump broke the law? because you know, trump and eastman were working on this together. eastman knew more about the law than trump did, and he gave him sort of a blueprint and a path and a way forward, but trump encouraged it and pressured pence in the process. so, did the president s lawyer at the time, herschmann, who thought eastman broke the law, did he think trump did? again, that s just an opinion. but it would be pretty insightful to know about what a white house counsel lawyer thought at the time about that. look, eastman was someone who was able to worm his way into trump s inner circle.
hearings is evidence that the former president intended to use violent means or force to overthrow the government. suddenly, you have talk of hanging mike pence. you thought trump s comments, and i suspect at the end of these hearings, we ll hear the evidence about trump staying, you know, in the white house, doing nothing, issuing no orders to end the violence, and that s circumstantial evidence. it s not direct evidence. it s not trump himself saying, i d like to use force to overthrow the government, but it s circumstantial evidence of his intent because if he had wanted to end the violence, he could have, and he didn t. and that could raise the specter of these additional charges being considered at doj. does that make trump part of the conspiracy? it s hard to say, because to prove a conspiracy, i mean, i m just going to be nitty-gritty here. people always want to see trump inside of the conspiracy. prosecutors, when they evaluate the evidence, have to prove the actual agreeme