A momentous day at the nations capital. Also for the entire country, the start of something that i think will carry on potentially to, through an election. Everything matters right now. Hours from now, former President Trump will appear in a d. C. Courtroom to be arraigned for the third time in the last four months. Law enforcement officers put up barriers. They did that overnight, preparing for the former president s arrival. We are live right outside the courthouse. And one of trumps alleged coconspirators, isa soares, alleges implementing a pan for thenVice President pence to block the certification of one of these attorneys joins us ahead. Three dancers who worked for lizzo filed a lawsuit, accusing her of creating a hostile were Work Environment. Lizzo issues a new statement about their claims. This hour of cnn this morning starts right now. Here is where we begin. In hours, former President Trump will depart his bedminster good job in new jerseon his plane, arraignment in four mo
President at the United States. The only person who could possibly have told jack smith and The Grand Jury about those phone calls is mike pence. The january Six Committee invited mike pence to testify, but he refused. The january Six Committee did not bother to issue a statement to mike pence since they knew he would ignore it, just as some other elected republicans ignored subpoenas from the committee. Mike pence could not ignore jack smiths subpoena. Mike pence went to court in what he knew was a legally hopeless attempt to block jacks mitt subpoena. Mike pence went to court to try to show trumps quarters, whose votes he wants in the president ial campaign to think that he was forced by Judicial Process to testify to jack smiths grand jury. Mike pence did not just testify to jack smiths grand jury. He became the star witness, and he will be the start witness when the case that the United States of america versus Donald J Trump is presented to a trial jersey in washington, d. C. They
the insurrection. quote, co-conspirator two emailed the vice president s counsel advocating that the vice president violate the law and seek further delay of certification. co-conspirator wrote, i implore you to consider one more relative minor von of the eca, electoral count act, and adjourn for ten days. would you concede that your client did that and asked the vice president to break the law? yes. no, no, i don t could be seed that he asked the vooirp to break the law. he asked the vice president to engage in a minority view, very minority view. but there is an interpretation of the law here that is within the bounds of reason. very few would agree, but some people would agree. and you ll notice, by the way, there were no threats made. if there were threats made that that would be a different story. he was trying to persuade
to president trump, this is a protocol that you can follow, it s legal. that eliminates criminal intent. federal prosecutors have a lot to say about eastman. listed as co-conspirator two in the indictment. it appears 30 times throughout the document. the indictment says co-conspirator two, ot devised and attempto implement a strategy to leverage the vice president s ceremonial role overseeing the certification proceeding to obstruct the certification of the presidential election. are later, about a meeting on january 4th, quote, the defendant and co-conspirator then asked t vice president to either unilaterally rejikt the legitimate electors from the seven targeted states or send the question of which slate was legitimate to the targeted slates legislatures. that day the indictment also alleges eastman admitted to a senior advisor to trump that he knew no court would suort his theory. it says,uote, thseor advisor told co-conspirator two, you are going to cause riots in
why persuade the vice president. it s in direct conflict with his october 2020 document in which he wrote about the 12th amendment. quote, nowhere does it suggest that the president of the senate, mike pence at the time, makes the determination on his own. so why was he delg the vice president to do it then? because he had a client, he was making the best argument he could in favor of his client. i have had many cases where i have made legal arguments different from my legal arguments in other cases. he was a lawyer for a client. it is his constitutional obligation to do the best he can for that client s interests. and that s what he was doing. there was absolutely no crime involved. harvey, two more questions people don t understand the role of lawyers. i understand the role of lawyers. i m asking you about the allegations made in the indictment. in paragraph 18 of the