0 at the justice department s ability to compel their testimony. it is highly sensitive to go after information from a sitting member of congress. but they re not being targeted because their members of congress. they re being targeted because of the conduct, the conversations with donald trump on january 6th. so, i don t see how you investigate this case without talking to them. and maybe their witnesses, maybe their defendants. we ll see how that shakes out. charlie, before we. go just a big picture question. the degree to which generally six committee exceeded expectations and the degree to which there added in terms of the information landscape around january 6th. how much they actually changed? for broader swap the american public. let s hear assessment there. i think they did a good job. they surprise a lot of people who thought they already know this stuff. the video was on tv for all to see. the media reconstruction the events that day. so trump was openly urging those peop
new laws that coup proof the u.s. against future maga-style tricks, tactics or outright insurrections. if you re saying, gosh, ari, that sounds new, if there s going to be a big new law why didn t i hear about it? that was actually part of the strategy, which is pretty interesting. our top story is the new transcripts that keep dropping. five more in the past hour. they show the rift between the stone wallers, eastman, clark, stone, no pun intended, and some of those who cooperated, including what may prove to be damning testimony from witnesses in any future criminal trials. take hutchinson who s now blowing the whistle on a trump lawyer who coached her to exploit the fact that the committee doesn t know what you can and can t recall. this is what she says the lawyer said. so we want to be able to use that as much as we can, unless you really, really remember something clearly. the lawyer goes on to tell her, we re taking care of you.
going on with the referrals, they did introduces of interviews. hundreds of transcripts released. text messages, emails. there s no question that the justice department has been doing their own active investigation, there are things they know in the grand jury that the committee doesn t know. but the committee feels that they can fill in, or perhaps bring brand-new information. well, there s no doubt that the justice department and the fbi have been conducting investigations that have surpassed what the committee s been doing when it comes to the oath keepers, when it comes to those individuals, the far-right militias. but individuals that i know who have been close to the process say, their impression is that the committee on the hill is far ahead of where the justice department is, when it comes to charges against donald trump or anybody affiliated with the white house. right. there s no question that the doj was late when it came to that
case. as the attorney general said to lester yesterday there are some things the committee found out that justice didn t know and said things justice knows that the committee doesn t know. he said that s to be expected with two parallel investigations. it simply means that as the justice department continues this massive investigation they are getting closer to the oval office. asking people around the president about his actions but asking about his actions. and i think it s important to point out as you did this doesn t mean that the justice department quote unquote opened an investigation of president trump but it is worth noting. they re asking about what did his lawyers tell him? what was he saying about pence? what about the efforts the try to get states to send in other slates of electors? a justice department investigation is opaque and in
and with people working over at the department of justice. it s likely that meadows would argue any communications that fit in those categories it would be covered by attorney/client privilege. it is likely the select committee would say absolutely not. the committee doesn t know what they don t have because meadows hasn t played ball with them thus far by actually producing all the documents that are responsive to their requests? these texts are obviously extremely newsworethy, eyebrow raising, notable and important. ped dose gave them a lot. but it looks like there is a lot that he is still not giving them. the fact that he hasn t gone in and answered questions in real time on the record with investigators to explain the back stories, context, the way that these texts fit into the day as a whole, it helps make more sense as to why the committee despite these messages is still so frustrated with them and is hoping the justice