during that search. first though, we do want to begin with former white house counsel pat cipollone. his deputy appearing before a january 6 grand jury today. evan perez is outside u.s. district court in washington. this of course separate from the investigation to the handling of classified documents. this relates to january 6th. how significant is the testimony of cipollone and his deputy? reporter: jim, this is a very important testimony that we re going to get from the that the grand jury is going to get from pat cipollone and patrick philbin. these are two men who are inside the white house counsel. they were in a lot of the meetings that the president was organizing, as he was trying to overturn the election. he was trying to find ways to remain in power. and the importance of this grand jury is that this is the grand jury that is going beyond the 850 rioters who have been brought here and are facing charges for the violence that happened at the u.s. capitol. this
Robbery thats burglary, ill get it right. And in this situation youve got somebody really caught in the middle of it, and that doesnt excuse the person from the consequences. Professors, weve talked about abuse of power and bribery. When we started we said we would also discuss obstruction of congress. So i would like to ask you some questions about obstruction of congress. Professor gerhardt, in your view, is there enough evidence here to charge President Trump with the high crime and misdemeanor of obstruction of congress . I think theres more than enough. As i mentioned in my statement, just to really underscore this, the third article of impeachment approved by the House Judiciary Committee against president nixon charged him with misconduct because he had failed to comply with four legislative subpoenas. Here it is far more than four
that this president has failed to comply with. And he has ordered the Executive Branch as well not to cooperate with congress. Those together with a
tell the whole and complete truth and make sure it doesn t happen again. if given the opportunity the former president said what he d do, using the levers of government to effectuate the result that he wanted and not the result that the american public wanted. congressman, thank you for fielding the questions today. we are grateful. thank you. we ll talk about that and more when we come back and discussing the fallout from the ex-pfrt s pardon dangling. plus, the president of the united states is in new york city today holding a summit on combatting gun violence. balanced with a message for some much needed police reform with the backing of the mayor.
and the first of those instances was the president s ordering his then d-white-house counsel don mcgahn to fire the special counsel, or rather to have the special counsel fired, in order to thwart the investigation of the president, correct? that is correct. and the second was the president ordering mr. mcgahn to create a false written record denying that the president had ordered him to have mr. mueller removed. that s correct. and you also point to the meeting of the president with his former campaign manager, corey lewandowski, in order to get him to take steps to have the investigation curtailed, right? yes, sir, i did. and you also point to pardon-dangling and witness-tampering as the paul manafort and michael cohen, former campaign official, former personal lawyer of the president. both individually and
congressman heims, this e-mail to michael cohen that he could, quote, sleep well tonight because he has friends in high places, i wonder how you interpret th interpret that. it points to something i can t get into specificity and the conversation with michael cohen before he was before the intelligence committee and there are real questions and coming from public as well, there are real questions on the topic of pardon dangling. and again, i can t be terribly specific about it but i think it is far from the end of that conversation. i think that when the intelligence committee transcripts are released, there will be some very uncomfortable days for a number of people and there will be questions to follow up on. so, again, as you said, you can t go into specifics, but you re saying based on what you learned in the committee investigation, can you say if you have a clearer picture of what actually happened here in regards to a pardon?