about why they wanted to stop those kind of maga attacks on trump democracy and the loss after the insurrection. but we have the receipts from those you see on your screen today, including senator graham, a loyal trump supporter then criticized what trump was leading on the insurrection on the night of january 6th. but now as he faces legal pressure to testify in georgia for his own role in helping a trump effort that he claimed was over when he gave his famous enough is enough speech after trump fans stormed the capitol, clambering to kill mike pence. i hope he runs again. if you think trump is bad for the party, i disagree with you. i think president trump is good for the party. [ cheers and applause ] all i can say is count me out. enough is enough. it is over. i ve travelled the world with joe. i hoped he lost. i d pray he would lose. he won. he s the legitimate president of the united states. some of this is pretty simple even though people would wish it otherwise.
you know, obviously the january 6th hearings have been an important news event. they have been very successful television. former president trump s previous campaign kicked off with, you know, wall to wall coverage on channels like cnn, the rallies he was doing. it was a lot of really free air time for him that boosted his candidacy. and so i think it s important for tv networks to realize that they need to be covering things that are newsworthy. yeah, and specifically i agree with everything you said. makes sense. fox, will cover some things that are not newsworthy or even true, and yet even with that somewhat lower bar respectfully as we say in the streets respectfully, they still didn t cover this, emily. right, you re right. it s a more surprising development. they were at first very reluctant to cover the january 6th hearings, and so watching them figure out how to kind of thread this needle, what
the way, fox news have done live broadcasts airing about six of the daytime congressional hearings by the january 6th committee, with all that evidence on trump, and now none of mr. trump s return to washington in his speech today. i want to start with the experts, nyu law professor melissa murray and emily bazzleon. emily, i m not sure anyone would have expected if you told them a couple months ago, that donald trump s return to washington speech during daytime, where you can take all kinds of things live, would not make air while six of these hearings would on fox. i m curious what you think that tells us both on substance and beyond. well, it s an important signal that the media is learning something about what s important to cover.
will ever come out. i do think that is a crucial point and helps answer the question of why were people writing things down that could get them in trouble later. also seems from the tone of these emails they lost sight of what they were doing, which is trying to overturn the legitimate election results of a u.s. presidential election. should be a momentous weighty scheme to engage in, and yet somehow with the wink-wink, nudge-nudge, alternate, fake, it seemed not like the very serious infraction that it actually could have been if it had worked and was, as a kind of attempted conspiracy, if that s what we re seeing here. exactly, and that s why it is more serious than the emoji, but as you say, how do you normalize that, how do you get more and more people on board? that matters. thank you, emily. melissa, i want to you stay with me on this other legal item. lester holt actually just sat
know what they re doing is fraudulent to some degree. there is i think in this email chain some evidence of intent here. like, they know that these are electors that are not the electors selected by the people of this jurisdiction, that they are instead alternate electors or fake electors, there for the purpose of essentially defrauding the people of the electors that they had initially chosen, so to my mind, the real question here is, who are these geniuses that are writing this down in an email? because that seems to be the real problem. emily? well, that is an excellent question melissa asks, but maybe it s not the problem, because in some sense it s the clue we have now to what s going on. i think it s also important that we know that people who were on these email chains were reporting what they were doing, not only to giuliani but also to mark meadows, trump s chief of