the capitol to leave and stop the violence and, you know, the committee put out numerous times, we waited 187 minutes, over three hours for the president to take action and it s very clear, you know, the bottom line on this is there are people, there are people who, within the white house, who knew the right things to say. they tried to put that message forward. someone drafted this speech, it was very eloquently and appropriately written for the moment, but did the former president make a choice to deliver those words? no. he did not. he said essentially, the opposite of that. he said something like we love you to these rioters and that was just, you know, obviously, not the leadership the country needed and, you know, as we said from the committee is really a dareliction of duty, he had the opportunity to stop this violence and didn t do it. it is striking to read the words if you go to politico and read the excerpts, like great, this is the obvious thing a politician should say.
investigative reporter, book cal called the big cheat, i ll start with you, the judge said he reviewed thousands of documents for this investigation laticia did uncover copious evidence of financial fraud, that s a significant thing to say, isn t it? it s very significant. frankly, with all these different legal cases that the trump legal team keeps losing, this one is unique because it s an example of a judge passing on what we talk about as the merits of the case. he has reviewed actual documents here and actually said that the evidence here is damning enough that if the new york a.g. didn t do anything at all, didn t have investigation, it would be a dareliction of duty so there s fire within the smoke. so david, you ve been through