same thing, that the details show why so few republicans voted to have a january 6th commission in the first place. they were afraid how bad this looks. yeah, look, i don t understand how mark meadows doesn t place criminal charges here, not testifying in front of congress but for what he s done. i don t understand how you re an elected official or an american, but say an elected official, and you see or hear about a powerpoint that details how to end the peaceful transition of democracy in america, and you don t sound an alarm? i mean, i don t know what other base test of failure on a moral level, on a governing level? why does the republican party exist if it can t fight a conspiracy in its own ranks to end democracy? it s really it s hard to wrap your mind around it. and anybody that thinks mitch mcconnell didn t know about this, i think is incredibly naive.
then after his former boss made it clear his disappointment and displeasure, he did a 180 and refused to answer a single question from his former colleagues or even to show up at all. so laura coates, kinzinger says meadows knows what he s doing. what gives here? listen, what we heard today forces the hands of three different groups, members of congress in the full house to be able to vote and say are we really going to allow not only the idea of mark meadows thumbing the nose, but there are people within our ranks who actually actively sought to conspire in this way to try to overthrow the legitimate election, the fair and free one and had ideas even after the insurrection? he also forced the hand of the department of justice because, of course, one of the things that they re concerned with is trying to persuade the courts to be able to say listen, this
pretext. obviously, he s worried. by the way, his argument is i m not going to cooperate anymore because how dare you subpoena my phone records? that s the most normal routine investigative subpoena in the world. these service providers have endire br entire branchs that do nothing but respond all day. all the committee will get is a list of who called who and when? you don t get the substance. there is obviously something in there mark meadows doesn t want the commit totee to see. who mark meadows was speaking to on january 6th. if i m on the committee, that s piquing my interest moore. charlie, we know once pence aid is cooperating and a former vp in new hampshire today a signal he s thinking about 2024 but what chance does he have really in this trump gop? is that even at all realistic for him?
lasted. don, this gives the committee potentially the ability to draw a web of communications what was going on before, during or after that january 6th riot. look, the other point here is the committee believes it may be able to learn what was actually in, let s say, those texts or phone calls from those cooperating in the investigation. if mark meadows doesn t cooperate, maybe the former vice president chief of staff maybe texting. maybe mark short has that text exchange. and my sense is it s likely they re already seeing some of these text exchanges. interesting. so what can the committee piece together from these phone records, elliott? so here is just put it in concrete terms, don.
why mark meadows doesn t certain things is a mystery. what about describing the former president s bronze hue. i thought that was odd. it might be on the line of what would upset trump. what is confusing about watching this, particularly from what you showed from news max, he is showing so hard to not offend the former president. he is trying so hard not to say things that are going to upset him. yet describing and i m not saying meadows did something wrong. it s just a fact. we also know trump considers covering him accurately to be covering him unfairly or a way that he doesn t like. the fact that he described how bad he look, skin hue, dark circles under his eyes. certainly is true. anybody who watched that debate thought he didn t look good in the first debate with joe biden. this came out the same day,