for the paddle and it was useful. i will say that pat cipollone did appear voluntarily and answered questions. he did not contradict the testimony of other witnesses. i think we did learn a few things which we will be rolling out in the hearings to come. so, there is that and there is also reporting on what could be a big step of obtaining testimony from another figure, steve bannon. what else can you tell us about what mr. pat cipollone told the committee ? he was behind closed doors for a significant amount of time . as you heard from congresswoman loughran, and what he had to say was productive. they got information from him that they were looking for. now, the question is how much of what they heard from prior witnesses was pat cipollone able to specifically can confirm and there was a little bit of a caveat that was provided today. take a listen. he could say so-and-so was wrong which he did not say. there were things that he might not be present for or in some c
with costly hutchinson s testimony. if cassidy hutchinson who had never and cannot afford a lawyer. had been offered this free lawyer from what she called it cassidy hutchinson s the mid to remain under the control of that they are paid by donald trump. she would have of the testimony. is now the basis of the committees criminal referral with a former president united states. for prosecution by the dust apartment. cassidy hutchinson s testimony reveals another point that standing alone would ve been enough to get that lawyer disbarred in most restrictions in this country. he refused to tell her who was paying him to represent her. here is how castillo johnson described her very first words with a criminal defense lawyer of that trump world provided.
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
his assertion of a reason why he couldn t testify for privilege or some reason like that. there is no time to go to court. they could fight it out in the seven hours and what we don t know is how much of the seven hours of testimony today was actually the lawyers are doing about what mr. cipollone could testify about. unfortunately, for the committee, mr. cipollone held the cards and he could testify and make the rules and presumably, it sounds like through congressman lofgren that they did get some productive stuff that they only got what mr. cipollone wanted to give them. do you think that has any kind of impact on a potential investigation by the justice department? well, you know, that would be that is kind of mr. cipollone testifying under a entirely different rubric, right? if the dust apartment is interested in talking to him in pursuit of criminal investigation that they might