statements m were attributed statements were attributed to me _ statements i were attributed to me moments a-o were attributed to me moments ago by— were attributed to me moments ago by the house impeachment managers. statements relating to the — managers. statements relating to the content of conversations between — to the content of conversations between phone calls involving president trump and senator turmer— president trump and senator tupper bill. they were not made by me. — tupper bill. they were not made by me. not— tupper bill. they were not made by me, not accurate and contrary— by me, not accurate and contrary to fact, they be stricken _ contrary to fact, they be stricken from the record. pursuant to the not provided in that resolution. _ i appeal the ruling of the chair. _

i appeal the ruling of the chair, mr president. mr president, right here, we might— mr president, right here, we might as _ mr president, right here, we might as well— mr president, right here, we might as well hear _ mr president, right here, we might as well hear clearly i mr president, right here, we i might as well hear clearly what the ruling — might as well hear clearly what the ruling of— might as well hear clearly what the ruling of the _ might as well hear clearly what the ruling of the chair- might as well hear clearly what the ruling of the chair was, - might as well hear clearly what the ruling of the chair was, sol the ruling of the chair was, so if you — the ruling of the chair was, so if you would _ the ruling of the chair was, so if you would repeat _ the ruling of the chair was, so if you would repeat that. - the ruling of the chair was, so if you would repeat that. [- if you would repeat that. will, pursuant to senate resolution a7, section four, the previous presentations are not... pursuant to senate resolution a7, section four, presentations are not limited to the record provided for for secular that resolution. the senator from secular that resolution. the senatorfrom utah has appealed. is that correct? senator from utah has appealed. is that correct?—

is that correct? yes, i have. the yays _ is that correct? yes, i have. the yays and _ is that correct? yes, i have. the yays and nays. .. - is that correct? yes, i have. the yays and nays. .. and i is that correct? yes, i have. i the yays and nays. .. and what is the question? _ the yays and nays. .. and what is the question? is _ the yays and nays. .. and what is the question? is it... - the yays and nays. .. and what is the question? is it... what i is the question? is it... what is the question? is it... what is the question? is it... what is the ruling _ is the question? is it... what is the ruling of _ is the question? is it... what is the ruling of the _ is the question? is it... what is the ruling of the chair? - is the question? is it... what is the ruling of the chair? myl is the ruling of the chair? my point — is the ruling of the chair? my point was _ is the ruling of the chair? my point was not about whether it is appropriate to make appropriations —— make characterisations, my point— —— make characterisations, my point was— —— make characterisations, my point was to— —— make characterisations, my point was to strengthen because they are — point was to strengthen because they are false. —— strike them. the _ they are false. —— strike them. the question is whether senate resolution a7, section four, is correct, that these presentations are not limited to the... . , presentations are not limited tothe... . , ., , to the... that is not my motion- _ to the... that is not my motion. you _ to the... that is not my motion. you overruled l to the... that is not my l motion. you overruled on to the... that is not my - motion. you overruled on a motion, _ motion. you overruled on a motion, you overruled on some of that— motion, you overruled on some of that was— motion, you overruled on some of that was not what i moved. wheh — of that was not what i moved. when i — of that was not what i moved. when i asked was, statements were _ when i asked was, statements were attributed to me

repeatedly, as to which i have personal— repeatedly, as to which i have personal knowledge because i have — personal knowledge because i have the source. they are not true — have the source. they are not true i— have the source. they are not true. i never made those statements, i ask that they be strickeh — statements, i ask that they be stricken. this has nothing to do with— stricken. this has nothing to do with whether or not they based — do with whether or not they based on _ do with whether or not they based on depositions, which they— based on depositions, which they are _ based on depositions, which they are not. innocently based on the — they are not. innocently based on the fact that i am the witness, _ on the fact that i am the witness, i am the only witness. those _ witness, i am the only witness. those statement are not true and i_ those statement are not true and i ask— those statement are not true and i ask that you strike them. mr president, mr president... the _ mr president, mr president... the yays— mr president, mr president... the yays and _ mr president, mr president... the yays and nays _ mr president, mr president... the yays and nays are - mr president, mr president... the yays and nays are asked i mr president, mr president... i the yays and nays are asked for on an appeal. mr the yays and nays are asked for on an appeal-— having trouble with the mike, i am sorry. the yays and nays

have been asked for.- am sorry. the yays and nays have been asked for. please let him exuiain. — have been asked for. please let him explain, mr— have been asked for. please let him explain, mr president. - have been asked for. please letl him explain, mr president. what was false — him explain, mr president. what was false about _ him explain, mr president. what was false about it? _ him explain, mr president. what was false about it? it— him explain, mr president. what was false about it? [it is - him explain, mr president. what was false about it?— was false about it? it is not in order— was false about it? it is not in order under— was false about it? it is not in order under senate - in order under senate resolution or the seven, section four. that has been appealed stop the yays and nays have been requested.— have been requested. point of clarification. _ have been requested. point of clarification. what _ have been requested. point of clarification. what is _ have been requested. point of clarification. what is the - clarification. what is the

question? we are not allowed to here, _ question? we are not allowed to here, yes? — question? we are not allowed to here, yes? i suggest the absence _ here, yes? i suggest the absence of a quorum while we work— absence of a quorum while we work this— absence of a quorum while we work this out.— work this out. clerk will call the role- — mr barrasso. mr bennett.

we are going to leave former president donald trump is making he's been trial now, it just seems to be a bit of confusion at the end of what has been eight hours —— trump's impeachment trial now. led by the lead house impeachment managerjamie raskin, you saw at the end there, and more recently by impeachment manager joaquin castro. basically they have been all about setting the case against former president trump and in particular the last hour or so, we have been listening and hearing about the timeline of events of generator six and how the prosecution argues that former president donald trump had influenced over the crowd —— january 6. let us bring in now barbara plett usher, whojoins let us bring in now barbara plett usher, who joins us from capitol hill. you have been

listening to all of it today. what do you make of what we have heard so far?— what do you make of what we have heard so far? well, it was lona have heard so far? well, it was ian: and have heard so far? well, it was long and detailed, _ have heard so far? well, it was long and detailed, and - have heard so far? well, it was long and detailed, and i - have heard so far? well, it was long and detailed, and i can't l long and detailed, and i can't of what the democrats say proves that president trump —— account of what the democrats say proves that donald trump... it goes beyond january 6, starts with the way he discarded the election even before it happened, saying that it would be fraudulent if you lost. they described how he had come up with phrases that were repeated again and again, claims this was premeditated to create a well of support amongst the people who supported them to back his claim, and then after the election, he took that up a notch. they also described in some detail how they believed that he knew that his supporters were violent, that he had praised previous acts of violence, that he had

cultivated it, actually, and that he started to use quite fighting language before the january 6 rally, even though he knew that there were plans afoot to storm the capital. this committee democrats said, is this is because it was probably on social media, the team would have been monitoring, and then they spent quite a lot of time talking about the valley itself and, as you've just heard, about the valley itself and, as you'vejust heard, making about the valley itself and, as you've just heard, making their final point, which is that president trump nothing with the violence had started to stop it, even though it was clear that he could stop it, and one of the organist made by mr castro is, so many people were calling him to stop it, how can you say it was not he who incited it? also the fact that he seemed disinterested in sending reinforcements, how even while the violence is

going on, according to the democrats, he was calling a senator to still try and stop the of the election. making a fulsome case that he could not have been a bystander, he was very much engaged in all of the events, leading up to this rally and then causing the incitement, orthe rally and then causing the incitement, or the fiery words, that led to the violence. in their words. they used fiery imagery is lawful to buy the time you got to generate six common logs of the fire had been set and he not only lit it with a match, he poured kerosene on it, and they did so with the very powerful video imagery of also using a lot of social media as well, and quite a court needed insisting to weigh. it has been but a presentation stop at absolutely. —— in quite a coordinated way. i absolutely. -- in quite a coordinated way.- absolutely. -- in quite a coordinated way. i was going to ask about _ coordinated way. i was going to ask about that, _ coordinated way. i was going to ask about that, the _

coordinated way. i was going to ask about that, the video - ask about that, the video imagery in conjunction with president trump talking on that day. president trump talking on that da . , , . , day. yes, they had said they were going _ day. yes, they had said they were going to _ day. yes, they had said they were going to have, - day. yes, they had said they were going to have, present| day. yes, they had said they i were going to have, present it basically, their argument, were going to have, present it basically, theirargument, in basically, their argument, in living basically, theirargument, in living colour, they had set all along they believe the evidence was out there the public domain, that this whole event was life tweeted and live streamed, that what they did was collect all of this and add some images that we had not seen before from the capitol hill security cameras, which were some of the images, actually, that because the senators, that shocks to be senators, that shocks to be senators even more than others because it really showed how things had played out from the insight and how close the rioters had got to the government officials, before they were evacuated. tying it together with mr trump's tweets, so in a way it was a sort of trial by tweet as well as his recorded statements, so using his words against him, and then packing aged in really

quite easy to understand segments. all the different managers took on different arguments, and illustrated them with these inserts, so he was very different than the previous appeasement trial, which was quite legalistic and dry. this was very fast—paced, very visual, very well packaged, very coordinated. they kept reinforcing what each other had said and making their cases as strongly as they could, and i think the audience was the republican senators who they're trying to convince to vote against mr trump, vote against mrtrump, reminding them what a dreadful day they had come up reminding them of mrtrump day they had come up reminding them of mr trump did not come to their rescue, but also directed at the american people, especially those who voted for president trump, to try to commence them this was all wrong and that they should abandon mrtrump is all wrong and that they should abandon mr trump is lawful to so it is also the court of public opinion that we are looking at here as well with this kind of roach. find looking at here as well with this kind of roach.- looking at here as well with this kind of roach. and talk us throu . h this kind of roach. and talk us through what _ this kind of roach. and talk us through what is _ this kind of roach. and talk us through what is going - this kind of roach. and talk us through what is going to - this kind of roach. and talk us i through what is going to happen next, because we haven't eight hours today, and i believe we will have another eight hours

tomorrow? tote will have another eight hours tomorrow?— will have another eight hours tomorrow? ~ ., , tomorrow? we could, in theory. each side _ tomorrow? we could, in theory. each side gets — tomorrow? we could, in theory. each side gets 16 _ tomorrow? we could, in theory. each side gets 16 hours - tomorrow? we could, in theory. each side gets 16 hours to - each side gets 16 hours to present their case, no more than eight hours a day, so the democrat have another eight hours tomorrow to continue. we do not know if they will need to use all of it up. he feels the state was quite full, but they will resume their case tomorrow, and then on friday, mr trump's tomorrow, and then on friday, mrtrump's team, tomorrow, and then on friday, mr trump's team, the defence lawyers, are going to begin their segment. they are friday and saturday to argue their case, and they, after that, senators will have a chance to cement written questions to them, four hours of written questions. then they can decide whether to call witnesses. have not had any witnesses yet and, at this point, it seems unlikely they will. there's not much an appetite for its from the democrat side, they don't want to drag out the trail full topic they reserving that option in case they feel there is something in the trump case that they really need a witness to rebut, but if they do not

call witnesses, the vote could happen quite quickly so you might see this trail ending by the end of the weekend. and might see this trail ending by the end of the weekend. and he talked about _ the end of the weekend. and he talked about having _ the end of the weekend. and he talked about having to - the end of the weekend. and he talked about having to convince| talked about having to convince her public and. what is the view of the american public now, seeing the second impeachment trial of former president trump?— impeachment trial of former president trump? there are some olls that president trump? there are some polls that show — president trump? there are some polls that show a _ president trump? there are some polls that show a majority - president trump? there are some polls that show a majority of - polls that show a majority of americans, 56% i think was the latest, do believe mr trump behaved wrongly and should be impeached and that the trial should be held, but the vast majority of republicans, republican voters, do not, which is a real indication of the strength of mr trump still holds with the party and one of the main expeditions why some or many other republican senators are reluctant to vote to hold him to account with impeachment, because there was already a backlash from the house republicans who voted to put the charges out there, who

voted to impeach clemenceau i think many senators are reluctant for their own electoral reasons to do the simple stub there are some republican senators who do believe this is a political partisan exercise, that the impeachment has been weapon eyes to finally get rid of mr trump in a way that he can never come back, like the democrats have wanted to do this all along, and that is something of what we are also good to be seen mr trump's lawyers argue. but i think the big factor, mr trump has shown since he lost the election, he still has a lot of power within the party and the story that he has woven about losing the election has really taken hold amongst many republicans, not just the people that you saw coming out that day on generally six but more than that as well. —— onjanuary 6. they believe what has gone on here is something that should not be happening. the majority of americans seem to support it, but i also think that they

have other things on their minds, like the coronavirus pandemic and thejobs minds, like the coronavirus pandemic and the jobs crisis. 0k, barbara plett usher, thank you very much. here is our north american editorjon sopel with a round up of the proceedings. day two of the trump impeachment trial, and harrowing new pictures and sounds of what unfolded on the 6th of january. the disbelief of the police. they are throwing metal balls at us. the prosecution argument — this was a direct consequence of donald trump's words and actions that day and in the weeks leading up to it. donald trump surrendered his role as commander—in—chief and became the inciter—in—chief. and he told this story of an african—american policeman who had fought

the protesters for hours and was subjected to racial slurs. the trump legal team were given a kicking for their poor performance yesterday. donald trump was reportedly furious, and this republican senator changed his vote, he was so appalled. the issue in hand is, is it constitutional to impeach a president who has left office? and the house managers made a compelling, cogent case, and the president's team did not. but it looks like the former president has the votes to avoid being convicted and banned from ever holding public office again. but even if donald trump's impeachment problems go away, his legal difficulties don't — they're piling up. and in georgia, it's been confirmed that a criminal investigation has been launched after the president tried to persuade that state's secretary of state to find him extra votes so that he would win, and notjoe biden. what makes this deeply problematic for donald trump, who was campaigning in georgia after the election, is that him

asking for those votes is not a question of rival accounts, it's on tape. i just want to find 11,780 votes, which is election interference, one of the charges being looked at, is a felony offence. in other words, a crime that carries a prison sentence of more than a year. the mayhem at the capitol grew out of donald trump's repeated claims that the presidency had been stolen from him. it would indeed be ironic if he were the one man charged with interfering in the 2020 election. jon sopel, bbc news, washington. let's speak to our senior north america reporter anthony zurcher. anthony, what did you make of today's proceedings? what were the highlights for you? i what were the highlights for ou? ~' , , ,y , , you? i think step-by-step, the progression — you? i think step-by-step, the progression through _ you? i think step-by-step, the progression through the - you? i think step-by-step, the progression through the video |

progression through the video of the attack on the capital. i think that was a powerful, i think that was a powerful, i think it drove home how close many of the people sitting in that very room came to confronting the angry mob face—to—face. mitt romney seen running down the hallway at the direction of a police officer, you saw mike pence being escorted by his security out of his hiding place, just off the senate chamber. and on that map of the capital scene, as eric swalwell in the one of the impeachment managers said some of the mobilejust impeachment managers said some of the mobile just 50 excepts from the senators as they walked down the hallway out of the building, sol walked down the hallway out of the building, so i think i'll close this came to a truly tragic day, i think that was made very clear by the impeachment managers. i think one of the other interesting things is how heavily the impeachment managers relied on donald trump's tweets. it was trial bite to eat from

everything he had done the last six months up to election day and after. i thought that was interesting. they're using donald trump's own words against him, culminating in that tweet he sent all the unrest was taking place on capitol hill, that he was saying this is what happens when patriots are denied a rightful election as they will never that day not as tragedy, which is whatjamie raskin said, but as a celebration in donald trump's view, so think it made a very coherent cogent well packaged prosecution of donald trump. now is up to the defence to pick that apart in the days ahead. it defence to pick that apart in the days ahead.— defence to pick that apart in the days ahead. it was instant when joaquin _ the days ahead. it was instant when joaquin castro _ the days ahead. it was instant when joaquin castro talked i whenjoaquin castro talked about president trump tweeting and talking consul he on twitter running up to the six ofjanuary, the twitter running up to the six of january, the 6th of january, staying relatively quiet compared to how used to be on twitter. . ~ compared to how used to be on twitter. . ,, , ., twitter. yeah, i think you can make an _ twitter. yeah, i think you can make an argument _ twitter. yeah, i think you can make an argument one - twitter. yeah, i think you can make an argument one way i twitter. yeah, i think you can | make an argument one way or twitter. yeah, i think you can - make an argument one way or the other about whether donald trump incited the insurrection, whether his words led directly to the attack on the capital,

whether he believed that he was sending the crowd gathered in front of him at the white house that day to the capital to start the capital and violently stop that process, but etiquette is very clear, in the case of the if that after that happened, donald trump did not do his duty to try to stop it, that he did not take the actions one would expect from a united states president when one of the branches of government was under physical attack, to try to and it as quickly as possible. whether that convinces any of the republicans in the room to switch sides from the boat we saw last night, i think that is an open question, and given the fact they already believe, aa of them, that this entire trial is invalid, groundless and unconstitutional, should not be happening. unconstitutional, should not be happening-— happening. what do you think president trump's _ happening. what do you think president trump's lawyers - president trump's lawyers argument are going be based on

kwesjuly thing they're going to be based element based on what democrats have said in element based on what democrats have said . , . ., have said in their rallies come over they _ have said in their rallies come over they have _ have said in their rallies come over they have called - have said in their rallies come over they have called their - over they have called their supporters to fight or what they believe in for some they're going to say words like donald trump's maybin ill—advised, but they did not rise to an impeachable offence, convicted standard. 50 i think they're going to try and save they're going to try and save the entire process was rushed, they have not prove the case, but we have to also remember the democratic impeachment manager i've done yet. joe neguse broke down the steps they're going to be —— are not done yet. they have not got into the harm of all this yet, they will probably do that tomorrow.— they will probably do that tomorrow. . ., , . tomorrow. 0k, anthony zurcher, thank you _ tomorrow. 0k, anthony zurcher, thank you very — tomorrow. 0k, anthony zurcher, thank you very much, _ tomorrow. 0k, anthony zurcher, thank you very much, as - tomorrow. 0k, anthony zurcher, thank you very much, as always, j thank you very much, as always, for your brilliant analysis. there is plenty more on that impeachment trial on our website, as always. and we

would picking up the sword once again tomorrow here on bbc world news, so do stay with us and what all the events from washington, life as they happen on bbc news. time now for some other news now. the travel industry has to size the government in the uk for warning people not to book summer holidays yet, because the coronavirus stop the pilot's union said airlines were drowning couple the travel industry body apda. .. were drowning couple the travel industry body apda... laura kuenssberg has more. the excitement of a plane ride when your feet don't touch the floor. hello. hi, guys. we are the fellowes family. harry and chester, eight and six, might be waiting a long time before splashing into the pool in france

at the campsite. after months of home—schooling and home—working, the furthest the fellows family are going at the moment is the loft. consistently, the government has given us a very mixed message. it's a bit of a blow. i'm sure like millions of other families, equally we'd be happy to go to birmingham, manchester, anywhere to get out of the house. this morning, the man who is in charge of how we get around said we shouldn't book a holiday at home or away. please don't go ahead and book holidays for something which, at this stage, is illegal to actually go and do, whether it's here or abroad. and then, you know, further down the line, i simply don't know the answer to the question of where we'll be up to this summer. but some of his colleagues have put holiday plans in their diary. i'm going to cornwall and i... yeah, i've said before, i think we're going to have a great british summer. should you plan for that? going on holiday abroad is banned right now, and under lockdown you are only allowed away from home for limited reasons. you can, though, book for months to come. whether anyone wants a repeat of crowded beaches in britain last summer

is a different question. the hope at least is clear — that by the summer, with the spread of the vaccine and the squeeze on the disease, the tourist spots could, in theory, be buzzing once again. and there is rising frustration among some of the government's own mps that ministers somehow seem to keep postponing the future. but inside government, there is a real reluctance. ministers just don't want to make promises they may later have to break, and despite progress, the effects of the pandemic won't disappear fast. travel�*s already been hammered by recession and restrictions at the border. the last thing the industry wants to hear is ministers urging us not to book. should members of the public be booking summer holidays or not, whether at home or abroad? because the transport secretary this morning warned people against booking anything at all. as everybody knows, it's currently illegal

to go on holiday. that's the state of play at the moment. we are looking at the data every day, but i'm afraid it is just too early for people to be certain about what we'll be able to do this summer. so he didn't repeat his minister's warning. what the government could do for families is to stop putting out mixed messages, so the prime minister one week was saying he's optimistic about holidays, then you've got the transport secretary saying don't book a holiday. that isn't helping businesses, it's not helping families. of course it's difficult, nobody quite knows where we're going to be by the summer. for the fellowes family and millions of us, it'sjust not clear when a holiday will be a reason to say goodbye. laura kuenssberg, bbc news, westminster. say "bye," boys. bye! hello. it is bitterly cold out there at the moment, not only the coldest night of the winter so far but the coldest night in the uk in over a decade. so, needless to say, thursday morning starts with a very hard frost

wherever you are and some icy stretches as well. temperatures first thing widely well below freezing, about —3 to —8 degrees for many of us, but in the coldest spots, we are likely to see temperatures even across the southeast of england and east anglia down to around —10, possibly —20 across the highlands of scotland. so, very cold start, icy stretches around, some dangerous travelling conditions where you have got that ice, particularly in the east. through the day, we'll see more cloud working in from the southwest of england, wales and northern ireland. a few flurries of snow across the higher ground of the southwest of england. it's going to turn windy here, too, with gusts up to about a5 mph. elsewhere, the winds not as strong, a lot of dry weather, a lot of sunshine around on thursday, but not lifting those temperatures in a hurry, up to about a degrees in the warmest spots. and as we move through thursday night and on into friday, we've got a bit more cloud across western parts of the uk, a few snow flurries around here as well, temperatures not

falling quite as low, but again, bitterly cold where you've got those clear skies. for much of england and wales, temperatures well below freezing once again. we've got this really cold air mass with us, and into friday, we're going to see the winds coming in for more of a southeasterly direction, so certainly fewer showers than we have seen recently. still some snow showers holding on across eastern parts of scotland on friday. much of england, wales and northern ireland looking dry. just the odd shower in the far southwest. once again, temperatures between about freezing and four celsius. now, moving through into the weekend, and you'll start to notice the yellow colours pushing in from the west, so that means, gradually, it looks like that milder air is going to move in through the course of the weekend. but saturday once again, bitterly cold start to the day. then as that milder air moves in, we could see some significant snow for parts of northern ireland, scotland, parts of northwest england, wales as well. further east, you're more likely to stay dry through the day on saturday and, again, bitterly cold, with temperatures really struggling to get above freezing once again. but then that milder air looks to be sweeping across the uk, so all of us not quite as cold.

some rain in the north and west by the time we get to sunday. bye— bye.

a warm welcome to bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. terrifying moments ofjanuary the world. terrifying moments of january six at the capitol building with video never seen before. mrtrump building with video never seen before. mr trump described as the insight into chief. the insurrection _ the insight into chief. the insurrection is _ the insight into chief. the insurrection is a - the insight into chief. the insurrection is a mob - insurrection is a mob overwhelmed capital security and made it inside the halls of congress. because the truth is, this attack never would have happened but for donald trump. fred after more than a thousand days behind bars, the activist

campaigning to improve civil rights