possibly, you know, on the secret service side, they say they had a pre-planned migration of phones, but if that s the case, how is it that nobody thought after the inspector general specifically asked for communications on january 5-9-and 6th, why did nobody say we need to stop this pre-planned migration? each if it s something they had planned before january 6th or for reasons related to january 6th, it s hard to imagine why nobody realized we need to stop this because preserving the evidence is far more important than whatever technological reason they had for giving up the migration and the reset in the first place. do you find it suspicion that people s memories seem to be going. kevin mccarthy says i don t remember talking to cassidy hutchinson. you don t remember? she s probably the only 23-year-old that you probably ever talked to when you were working in congress? hutchinson testified that mccarthy, she answered the phone, he sounded rushed and says he s marching to the capi
just sit by and allow that to happen. we re going to raise a stink about it. we re going to refer information publicly to the department of justice if witnesses are intimidated because it s a crime to do that. renado, how difficult is it to prove witness intimidation? it can be difficult to prove, particularly when, as in the case that we heard in the last hearing, the person who is trying to intimidate the witness is deliberately setting it up to make it hard to prosecute, right. there i think it was mark meadows had a oral conversation with the lower level aide who sent a text to cassidy hutchinson that he deliberately worded in a vague way to try to influence her testimony. could she make a case out of it? yes, potentially. what i think the committee was actually doing is putting a marker down and basically telling anyone who is trying to intimidate their witnesses, we will call you out. we will make this public. we re putting a shot across the bow. if you do this again as love
her fourth and most recent deposition to the select committee. what i can also tell you is that the final slide the committee shows is a specific presentation of a conversation that hutchinson had with a person who was an intermediary for mark meadows. in the final conversation, as depicted on screen by the select committee, this unnamed intermediary said, meadows is thinking about you. he knows you re loyal. he knows you re going to do the right thing. clearly, hutchinson was troubled enough by that communication that she brought it up to the select committee in this final deposition. also, it must be noted, that conversation that hutchinson had with this unnamed intermediary happened the night before her second deposition, which came all the way back in march. the timeline here is important, of course, because the committee only learned about these weird
testimony or ateast be c when she spoke openly to the committee? setting aside the meadows slide, the other slide was a characterization of multiple communications that hutchinson said with other people, talking in the plural. that is referring to folks in and very close to trump world. based on what the slide says, it doesn t appear she was zeroing in on a specific individual in that characterization of what the committee views to be attempts to influence her. trump world is a really big place, but it is not as big as it used to be. so the people who are going to be the most interesting characters in all this are the folks who are still very close to trump and who are still tracking the january 6th problem and its political consequences, as well as its legal consequences for trump s future in the republican party. hugo, i know you were able to confirm some of betsy s report ong this question of potential
they can t ask you to pull punches or lie or forthcoming as you would otherwise be just because they re being paid. and the letter to cassidy hutchinson warned, trump does read transcripts. i m not sure what is that supposed to mean. is it suggesting that one of the trump lawyers may have been passing deposition transcripts to former president trump, does that matter? well, i think number one, we don t know there would have been accessible to donald trump, so the fact that he, if he is actually reading transcripts, does that suggest that he gets some improper access. what i think it tends to mean is watch what you say because donald trump is going to know every word that you said, and so be careful, be loyal, remember who s team you re on here, all of those kinds of things. i think that they are really careful not to go so far as to say be sure to lie for the boss,