committee that is interviewed 1000 people and hundreds of thousands of pages of testimony and emails and text and things like that, transcripts. what do you think happens? jack smith gets this thing, and then what? realistically, this is basically irrelevant from the justice department standpoint. they already have their investigation, going they don t need january six committee to tell them what statutes may or may not have been violated here. it is easy for the committee to say, oh, this clearly violates this, and they re not going to go and meet certain legal standards and so forth and figure out the evidence. i think that this is more about political messaging, it is a function, in a cynical way of saying is that is just way for the committee to get a big headline in a splash as it ramps up its work. i think it is more than that, i think it functions as a super censure. it is something that will be part of the history of this period. to the extent that people are having criminal
arbitrary s. that will be part of how they are remembered for. and in some ways, it is like on several occasions, both bill clinton and maybe the first trump impeachments, the house impeached knowing that the votes were not there in the senate. they had a supermajority to convict and nevertheless the fact that clinton and trump were impeached became a form of super censure and is part of what they remembered for, and goes down in history. this may function similarly regardless of what the justice department does on a separate track investigation. charlie, good to see is, always this rejoining. us charlie started is the water to correspondent the new york times. a pulitzer prize winner in an msnbc contributor. up next, the crossroads of the january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol in the extremism inside the gop. plus, russia continues to target civilian infrastructure, but the u.s. is now set to send a defensive game changer to ukraine. and, loyal velshi viewers know that the bad faith