committee at politico where she is a national correspondent, she joins me now. betsy, that announcement today took us a little bit by surprise. there s some talk about this happening. what do we know about this hearing that s coming up? what we expect is that this upcoming hearing which is set for next week is going to kind of zero in on the extremist groups that were responsible for the kinetic violence at the capitol building on january 6th. it s been widely reported that this particular hearing, which we know was in the mix at some point of the timeline for quite awhile is going to be helmed by congressman jamie raskin. this is going to be the big project he s been working on. this hearing has also been interesting because it s probably the only opportunity, or only risk moment for the committee to take a look at the major tech platforms that we know have been the focus of their investigation. we know the committee issued a subpoena and not a friendly
covers political where she is a national correspondent, she joins me now. betsy, that announcement today took us a little bit by surprise. there s some talk about this happening. what do we know about this hearing that s coming up? what we expect is that this upcoming hearing which is set for next week is going to kind of zero in on the extremist groups that were responsible for the kinetic violence at the capitol building on january 6th. it s been widely reported that this particular hearing, which we know was in the midst at some point of the timeline for quite awhile is going to be helmed by congressman raskin. this is going to be the big project he is been working on. this hearing is also been interesting because it s probably the only opportunity, or only risk moment for the committee to take a look at the major tech platforms that we know have been the focus of their investigation. we know the committee issued a subpoena and not a friendly
testify at a public appearance as early as next week. why do we know about that? sarah matthews is unlikely to be part two of the cassidy hutchinson project. she just wasn t a senior in the white house, wasn t in the, quote unquote, in the room as often as hutchinson was. certainly did not have the access to very senior people that hutchinson did. of course, we don t know what we don t know. she was a white house official, she worked in the press shop, she would ve been connected to the white house s external and internal communications on january 6th. and she resigned in the immediate wake of the violence, citing the attack on the capitol building. without question, she s an interesting person. she would bring a new voice. she had been cited in prior hearings. i think they ve played brief clips of her. she is someone who certainly has not had main character status that so many other witnesses have had. and the fact they are bringing her in live suggest she has something important in
subpoena to some of the largest platforms, including youtube, facebook, reddit, as well as others several months back. basically demanding more information for them. and suggesting those companies are withholding things they needed to know. of course, the key focus when it comes to those companies is how much did the people running them know about the way their platforms were being exploited to prepare for not just violence, but also insurrection on january 6th. if the tech companies do not come up in this hearing, i think it s unlikely they will come up live at all. that s something to keep an eye out for. that s interesting. there s some news today about an individual name sarah matthews, a former deputy press secretary for president trump when he was president. it s interesting because during cassidy hutchinson s testimony. i saw sarah matthews tweet saying, look, believe, me cassidy hutchinson is a trustworthy person. something to that effect. she is now been subpoenaed to
incitement. i said before the supreme court cases make that a very difficult charge to make. the d.c. attorney general got a lot of press saying he was going to investigate and potentially charge the president for incitement. he never did. why? it s not like he likes the former president. why didn t he charge? the answer is, it s not as easy as these members suggest. bill: katie, come back to the conversation here. one thing i was keen on learning before this hearing began, maybe we ll get it and maybe we won t. i wanted to know if this committee could tie two individuals together that had contact, say, on january 5th, who stated clearly that their intention was to go inside the capitol building on january 6th. that hasn t happened yet. it may not happen at all. i am just wondering about if that evidence is lacking, does that tell us something about