i earn 3% cash back at drugstores with chase freedom unlimited. so i got cards for birthdays, holidays, graduations, i'm covered for everything. which reminds me, thank you for driving me to the drugstore. earn big time with chase freedom unlimited with no annual fee. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. ♪ ♪ how's he still playin'? aspercreme arthritis. full prescription-strength. reduces inflammation. don't touch my piano. kick pain in the aspercreme.

this is don lemon tonight. a firsthand account from the witness who gave dramatic closed-door testimony to the january 6th committee, today. >> this is the sitting president of the united states, saying this in the white house, that was actually very scary. >> you have used the words frightening, and scary. you were frightened? those are strong words. >> of course they were pickups the. >> in the capitol, revelations on the plot to overturn the election. what the president told the doj. >> what i am asking you to do is say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the republican congress meant. >> a not a conspiracy theory about italian satellites had reached the highest levels of the government. >> the completely baseless conspiracy theory that an

italian defense contractor for flitted software to a satellite which switch to votes from trump to biden. >> members of congress angling for pardons. >> the only reason i know to ask for a pardon, is because you think you have committed a crime. >> brand-new tonight, my interview with alex holder, the document refill maker who testified to the committee behind closed doors and turned over hours of his footage. telling me the committee was interested in inconsistencies between what ivanka trump told them and what she told him minutes before airtime, we received this raw footage, and outtake from the documentary, now seen for the first time on cnn. i want you to listen closely, because this is the footage and the content that alex holder tells me, the committee questioned him about. >> i think that, as the

president has said, every single vote needs to be counted and needs to be heard, and he campaigned for the voiceless, and i think a lot of americans feel very disenfranchised right now, and really questioned the sanctity of our elections, and that is not right. it's not acceptable, and he has to take on this fight. look. you fight for what you love the most, and he loves this country and this country's people, and he wants to make sure that their voice is heard, and not muted, and will continue to fight, until every legal remedy is exhausted and that is what he should do. >> the document or is airing on discovery plus, cnn's sister company. discovery provided the clips to cnn. now, here is my interview with

alex holder. >> hello. >> alex, how are you? >> i'm good. >> excited to see you. thanks for doing this. i really appreciate it. you spent your whole day being interviewed, most of the day earlier being interviewed by the january 6th committee. how do you feel? >> it has been an interesting day. not a standard day in the office. >> you spent the whole day with them. i want to know, what their questions were focused on? what was the focus of the question? >> i don't really want to go into too much detail about the committee, because i think it might interfere with what they are doing and i wouldn't want to be seen as demising their interest editions. >> without going into specifics, about questions we do this all the time, what is the focus of the question? >> i think the focus was on the material from january 6th, and also some of the interviews as well, some of the interviews that i had with the trump family. >> what were they most

interested in today? you spent hours and hours with the trump family, trump associates, with the former president, with the former vice president, so, what were they most interested in about the time he spent? >> talking about the election, and whether the election had any irregularities, on january 6. >> i am sure there is a lot that was left on the editing room floor, because you only have a certain amount of time to put a documentary together. was there anything they were interested in that does not appear in the documentary? >> yes. so, the main one being, there is the first part of ivanka trump's reaction to her father's position on the election is in the documentary, but there is another part of it that did not make it into the

documentary, and they were interested in her entire, sort of piece on that particular point. >> inconsistencies, perhaps? she says one thing to her father, she says another thing to the committee, and perhaps something different in your documentary, where they focus on possible inconsistencies from ivanka trump? >> i think so, yes. >> how so? >> they wanted to understand exactly when that took place, and how it came about, and, i think quite a few people think there is some sort of inconsistency between what she said to the committee and what she said to me. >> are there other inconsistencies with either ivanka trump, or other people, that they were interested in? >> not during that meeting today, no. >> not today. just ivanka trump? >> specifically on that point, yes. >> let's talk about ivanka trump, one of the clips in the document we, at one point you're interviewing the

presidents daughter, and the president himself, after they lost the election that they were contesting the results. watch this. >> they thought, because people showed up to their rallies, that meant they were popular. the idea that other people might be sitting at home, feeling differently about it seems not to have occurred. they genuinely thought that must be true. >> we won georgia, we won michigan, we won pennsylvania but we won them all. >> as the president has said, every single vote needs to be counted, and needs to be heard. he campaigned for the voiceless . >> it is interesting to see ivanka trump say that her father wanted every votes to be counted, because of transmission, in the days after the election, was to stop the counting of votes. >> the reality is that people in this country were getting multiple ballots in the mail. there are thousands of people who are voting in multiple states. >> there is no evidence, whatsoever, that the voter

fraud they are claiming. >> after weeks of trying to overturn the results of the election, his legal team has come up with nothing. >> so for the have lost 30 cases. >> i would love to release all the information i have. i would love to give it to you all. accept, most of you wouldn't cover it. >> all the legal documents and everything else, you still need a judge that has courage. so far we have not found that judge. >> i want to make sure that i get what ivanka trump said it correctly because she has changed her story a couple of times but the interview took place in december. cnn is reporting that ivanka trump also told her father that he should, quote, fight until every legal remedy is exhausted, but she told the committee under oath, that she believed the former attorney general, bill barr, what he said on december 1st when he said there was no evidence of fraud in the 2020 general election. did she say one thing to the committee in testimony, and one thing to her father when she knew her father was going to

see this, and wanting to the document tree when she heard about who was going to see it? >> i know what she said to me, and clearly there is a difference between what she said to me in the position she gave to the committee. >> what did they ask you about that, today? >> i don't want to go into detail about that. >> can you give us context? or, at least go into it, without specifically? >> they asked similar questions to what you asked. when did it take place, some background as to how it took place, where it took place, when it took place. and, whether i felt there was a difference in the position and i made it clear that obviously i can see a difference as to what that means, outside of tha the position she gave to the committee. >> do you think she was too close to thi judge that themselves. >> in your clip, donald trump

is looking for a lawyer to agree with them on this. what was happening, in your estimation, when you're behind the scenes in this moment. he is looking for a judge. i should say. a judge in that clip, to agree with him. what was happening in the moment? >> for me, it was a moment of -- i was actually quite frightened when i heard him say that, because the idea that we need to find a judge who is brave who will agree with my position, does not sound like a democratic system, right? judges are meant to be independent, and at that point, there have been plenty of judges that had looked at the trump campaign claims with respect to the election, and judges that are on the democrat side and a look inside and even judges appointed by trump et al. concluded that none of these cases had any merit. so, he was now trying to find one judge that agreed with his position, and this is the sitting president of the united states, saying this, in the

white house, and that was actually very scary. >> you have used the words frightening, and scary. you were frightened? those were strong words. >> of course they are. >> because america is a democratic country. the idea that the president of the united states is trying to break part of your democratic system is not something that you should brush off. this is a very serious thing to say. >> and, this one is where trump is talking about the people who went to the capitol , the insurrectionist. >> can we talk about general six? >> yeah. well, it was a sad day, but it was a day where there was great anger in our country. people went to washington primarily because they were angry with an election, they think was rigged. a very small

portion, as you know, went down to the capitol, and then a very small portion of them went in. but, i will tell you that, they were angry, from the standpoint of what happened in the election , because they are smart, and they see, and they saw what happened. i believe, that was a big part of what happened on january 6th. >> that interview took place in march, right after the march after the insurrection he is talking about people who broke into the capitol, right, or tried to overthrow the government, threatened lawmakers, and he is saying that they are very smart people. did the president say anything else in his interview about january 6th? about the insurrectionist? >> know. >> he didn't talk about it at all? >> that was his peace on general six. >> that he not want to answer questions? >> my position was that, it was a staggering answer to that question. and so, the idea of trying to see whether or not he may

potentially dilute his position, or change it was not for me today. i asked him a question, he gave me an answer. i'm not going to persuade him. do i think he is wrong? of course. i think it was a tragic event, and the fact that he called them smart, also i thought was very interesting, the fact that he used the word, that, these people think the election was stolen but that was also quite interesting as well. because, why do they think that? for me, i feel that he has essentially admitted that the reason why they were there, was because of the fact that they believed in his position on the election. >> did he come at any point, acknowledged that he lost? >> no. and i will tell you something, when i interviewed him for the first time, in the white house, about a month after the election, i had this debate with our director of photography, michael, about whether or not the president actually believed that the election was rigged, and i was

of the opinion that of course he doesn't really believe the election is rigged, this is just donald trump rhetoric. but, after that interview, when he left, and i was now thinking about what had just happened, my entire position changed. he absolutely, genuinely believes that he won, and that the election was stolen. >> in that moment, you changed your mind. >> absolutely. i changed my mind on the point that he did not really believe it. my conclusion was that donald trump genuinely believes that he won the 2020 residential election, and that is terrifying. >> lots more to come from that interview. when we come back, what the folks in trump world are saying about alex holder's documentary, and why he says they are wrong. ♪ my name is austin james. as a musician living with diabetes,

fingersticks can be a real challenge. that's why i use the freestyle libre 2 system. with a painless, one-second scan i know my glucose numbers without fingersticks. now i'm managing my diabetes better and i've lowered my a1c from 8.2 to 6.7. take the mystery out of managing your diabetes and lower your a1c. now you know. try it for free at freestylelibre.us here we go... remember, mom's a kayak denier, so please don't bring it up. bring what up, kayak? excuse me? do the research, todd. listen to me, kayak searches hundreds of travel sites to find you great deals on flights, cars and hotels. they're lying to you! who's they? kayak? arr! open your eyes! compare hundreds of travel sites at once. kayak. search one and done.

we are back with more from my interview with alex holder, the document refill maker who got behind the scenes access to trump and is now a key witness for the january 6th hearing. >> so, in those interviews, we also have been told that they

had been told that this was a puff, puff, puff piece, they had nothing to worry about and they had complete editorial control over what went out. you have denied that, right? did they have editorial control? any or editorial control? >> no. they have not even seen a single frame of footage. >> where do you think that is coming from? >> i have no idea. >> did you sell this to them as a puff up piece? >> absolutely not. >> do you wish you had pushed them more about general six? >> know. i think their silence speaks volumes. >> were you surprised they had agreed to do this considering what was going on at the time? >> i think at the end of the day, when we started this process, here is a guy from britain being introduced to them, he does not have any sort of political skin in the game, and they were absolutely convinced they would win the election, this is a roundabout september 2020, so why not have someone following them around on the campaign trail documenting them winning the election. and so, they essentially made that choice to allow us in. what is interesting, i think as well, why that continued after

the election, as well. why we still sort of maintained that relationship with them, and i think it was partly my attitude, which is that in longform documentary, you do not need to be combative or argue or change the other person's position. also, i don't need to be in the film. is not my film. this is everyone's. i am here to document history, to document what happened, and hopefully, teach people something, show people something. so, the idea that i would try and pin them down on something myself, would have stopped that relationship going. i wanted to keep the relationship going and allow them to continue to give me the answers. what i think they fully understood is that all documentaries, at least the ones i want to make, require context. and therefore, that context does not have to be provided by me arguing and debating with them and trying to change their minds about things, that can be

provided by archives, it can be provided by text, it can be provided by interviews with other journalists, which is what we did. so, we were able to create a, i believe, a very fair portrayal of the events which took place in 2020. >> to play another lip, this is the one that i think out of all the clips that have been released, which may be the most disturbing. >> welcome, welcome. >> can you tell me when the president first called you up and asked me asked you to be on his ticket? >> i got a call from a mutual friend. i was busy running for re- election as governor of indiana. i had met donald trump on two passing occasions, before, but did not know him or his family. i said i wanted to know the job description, and shortly after that, that same mutual friend called back and said, the candidate really liked your answer. and they would like to invite

you to come, bring your family, we would like to spend the whole weekend getting acquainted. i did play golf, not the way he does. >> mike pence is going to have to come through for us, and if he doesn't, it will be a sad day for our country. >> protesters inside statuary hall. >> hang mike pence, hang mike pence. >> this is treason. >> down to a bunker. >> president trump could stop this but instead he is on twitter attacking vice president pence. >> treat people well unless they don't treat me well, in which case you go to war. >> what did you think of his comment, going to war? >> it was obviously, in some ways at this point, now, having met trump a couple times, it wasn't sort of so surprising, but it is an unusual thing to say, right? if somebody is bad to me, i will go to war, that is

obviously not something you want to hear, and i think, it shows a side to him, or this particular side is something which i think is not that surprising to people. in the context of what has happened, since he has left office, the idea that he would still maintain these positions is present. >> what did you see that day because you were there on general six? >> so the night before, general six, i said to michael, our dp, i said you know he will get them to march on the capitol, tomorrow. and i felt that was -- the reason i felt that was because the events that took place for the inevitable conclusion to what happened prior. january 6th did not happen in isolation. it needed all of the things that happened prior, for generally six to take place. the idea that the election was rigged, that mike pence can change the outcome, all of this

was needed to get us, to get america essentially to this place, where you had people essentially being killed, and dying, and trying to essentially overthrow the government. that is remarkable. so, that is what i thought the night before, but i wasn't sure. mike and i made a plan to work out what we should do come in the event that people start marching to the capitol. the idea was that michael would take jesse's camera and i would move the equipment because we were filming the rally itself, on the day. and i would move the agreement to my car then try to move my car as close as i could to the capitol, and then extricate michael, if i needed to. the plan didn't really work so well because by the time i got the car to where i needed to get, michael was already in the midst of all the events that took place. the footage that he captured his extraordinary. it is footage that no one has seen before, it is footage of people saying the most horrendous things about the

then president-elect, now president biden. the most outrageous things against mike pence, conspiracy theories, and essentially, absolutely believing the reason they were there was because there election was stolen. >> were you afraid? >> i was afraid for michael, because he was in the midst of it. and i was afraid for the people there, as well. there was a moment, where i was, where there was a lot of people surrounding where i was around the corner from the capitol, but i was very afraid for michael and those there at the time. >> it sounds like you said, you are saying, from the planning that you did and what you witnessed, that you believe that donald trump is responsible, or at least in part responsible for what happened on that day. >> yes. >> why? >> he told 75 million people that their vote didn't count over the course of many weeks.

>> did the committee ask you that? >> the committee did ask me various questions along those lines. >> what has this been like for you, what has today been like for you? were you nervous today, at all? >> on monday, no one knew who i was. and today, i think every single news channel in america is saying my name and playing the film in the series i have just made. it is a whirlwind, and it is incredible. i am quite apprehensive about what will happen next, but, we will see. >> what deeming apprehensive? >> well, i think there are people who don't think i have made a fair portrayal of donald trump and they will not be particularly happy with me, and i think that will have to make me wary, but i think at the end of the day what i have done is a very fair and true approach.

my approach is to be fair and true throughout the entire project, i haven't been disingenuous, i've been straightforward, and they have been given the time to answer the questions as they wish and we put them in. >> are you concerned about your safety? >> two days ago, no one knows who i was and now i have two armed security guards outside. so, there you go. >> do you think you will be asked to testify publicly or anytime in the future, again? >> i am not sure. >> you don't know? >> i don't know. >> did they tell you to leave your calendar open to possibly have to come back and speak to the committee? >> my options are open and i am more than happy to comply. >> of ascii publicly you will do it? >> of course. >> thank you. i really appreciate it. >> again, my thanks to alex holder. up next, the never before seen outtake of ivanka trump from holder's documentary, and what it means to the committee. i have the experts here to talk about that, and today's stunning testimony about what may be the most frightening

part of a plot to overturn our election. only from discover.

i recommend nature made vitamins

because i trust their quality. they were the first to be verified by usp... ...an independent organization that sets strict quality and purity standards. nature made. the number one pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. ♪ ♪ ♪ (sha bop sha bop) ♪ ♪ are the stars out tonight? (sha bop sha bop) ♪ ♪ ♪ alexa, play our favorite song again. ok. ♪ i only have eyes for you ♪

filmmaker alex holder testifying to the january 6th committee, turning over hours of interviews and footage of him with president trump and his family. you just heard my interview with holder, joining me now, national political reporter stead hamden along with senior legal analyst ellie home the, and s.e. cupp and alex stewart. welcome, everyone, good to have you with us. >> good job. >> thank you, i thought he was very honest with everything and willing to share. let's start with you, because there are these inconsistencies

with ivanka trump's testimony, and what she told holder, we now have the cutting room floor clip of her saying that trump should continue to fight until every legal remedy is exhausted. let's watch. >> i think that, as the president has said, every single vote needs to be counted, and needs to be heard, and he campaigned for the voiceless. i think a lot of americans feel very disenfranchised right now, and really question the sanctity of our elections. and, that is not right. it is not acceptable, and she has to take on this fight. look, you fight for what you love the most, and he loves this country and he loves this country's people. he wanted to make sure that their voices heard, and not muted and will continue to fight

until every legal remedy is exhausted, and that is what he should do. >> what happens if the committee finds more inconsistencies with trump's children, and others who testified? >> with any witness there is a misperception that perjury and false statements crimes only happen in a trial when you put your hand on the bible. any false statement made to any federal government or agency, whether you swear an oath on the bible or not, whether you are in front of the cameras, whether you are in a courtroom, or in a deposition, can be chargeable, as perjury and false statements, that said, their difficult charges. you need a specific inconsistencies, and ivanka trump chose her words very carefully, there, right? i jotted this down as we were watching the first time, she said every single vote counts, americans feel disenfranchised, americans are questioning the sanctity of the election, you have to fight for what you love. i don't know that any of that

is what she seems to be getting at which is, i think there was fraud, but she doesn't quite say that. >> but, under oath, she said, right, she said i believed what bill barr told me. >> right. so that is a good starting point but that part is clear. i believe there was no voter fraud, i believed bill barr when he said that but the other part that we just saw is very carefully hedged. it is really a bunch of generalities, and clichcs. we see where she is driving but the prosecutor cannot point to a specific line ivanka trump just said and say, right there, inconsistent. >> if you are the committee or the doj aren't you pleased with the answers she gave under oath, instead of this one, where she was under no obligation to tell the truth, where they are concerned, right? >> i think where they will land is that they probably liked the answer about bill barr, but her credibility is zero, they will not bank on her for anything. >> i think the doj would be most satisfied with the

truthful answer and right now there are so many who don't know what it is. another one that jumped out at me, that she said, in this document we was, we will continue to fight until every legal remedy is exhausted. rudy giuliani and that crew had more than 60 opportunities to produce the crack in in a court of law and all of them came up short. every legal remedy has been exhausted. they have done everything they possibly can to try and overturn the election, or find widespread voter fraud. it has not happened because it is not there. yet, they continue to push this narrative that the election was stolen pics but i would like to move on to speak about the other testimony. >> go ahead. >> [ laughter ] >> no, no, wait. [ laughter ] >> let's talk about the other testimony, because that was compelling. the former acting deputy -- >> oh boy. >> the former acting deputy attorney general richard donoghue brought written notes which clearly show donald trump's attempted weaponization

of the doj. listen to this. >> let's take a look at another one of your notes. you also noted that mr. rosen said to mr. trump, quote, doj can't and won't snap its fingers and change the outcome of the election. how did the president respond to that, sir? >> he responded very quickly, and said, essentially, that is not what i am asking you to do. what i am asking you to do is, say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the republican congressman. >> it is astounding that he is saying this to a top doj official. is this criminal behavior? >> to me, that line, just say there was fraud, that is the crux of what you would be looking at if you're thinking of charging obstruction of justice or conspiracy to defraud the united states. by the way, there is no real question in my mind that he said it, richard donoghue is a credible witness who took contemporaneous notes while he is on that phone call. you see his handwritten notes. i didn't have any question that donald trump said that, and that is the whole point.

just say it. >> we will do the rest. >> witness after witness testified about trump's ham- fisted approach, attempted to change the results of the 2020 election. this is the former acting attorney general jeffrey rosen discussing a january 3rd meeting, where trump pushes for the doj lawyer and trump loyalist jeffrey clark to take over the department. watch. >> i want to underscore the one thing we know is, you're not going to do anything, you don't even agree with the concerns being presented are valid. you are someone who has a different view. so, why shouldn't i do that? that is how the discussion went. proceeded. >> doj officials repeatedly debunked every bogus claim he gave them. this was all about putting someone in place to carry out his bidding. >> exactly. that is the president's own words but he does not care

about the impact, obviously ethically or democratically, he is telling everyone around him to go act on his own wishes, and these are wishes which were informed, we should say, specifically by vast amounts of misinformation. this is a president who had access to hard info, and that every single turn was looking to pundits, and the claims we heard today was preposterous. i think we have a scope of evidence today which really lays out on a factual basis just how far this president was from reality. i think the inconsistencies you're pointing out with ivanka trump were speaking to people around him, we have in case after case, it has become clear, that in instances on which they thought trump would see, they were telling him what he wants to hear, but in instances that had legal ramifications or instances they were forced to produce fact, that couldn't happen. it seems as if ivanka trump is saying, i believed attorney general barr, but when she is talking to her father, where

her father might seek him all that fact goes out the window because from the entirety of that administrator, everyone around him was planning to defraud. >> i think the line we are talking about, where trump looks at, what i call team normal of attorneys, where we are talking about rosen and donoghue and cipollini, as well. lawyers were giving him credible advice, he goes to them and said just say it is corrupt and i will take care of the rest with the other republicans, which, then he would have the lawyers with credibility, and stature going out and saying there is corruption, and then he would use, what i call in his team, whiskey tango foxtrot, rudy giuliani knee, and jeffrey clark, to go out and do the dirty work to try to uncover something. that is where the first incident, i feel like, we have seen of him actually acknowledging that there is no there, there. >> i am interested to hear what will has to say about it.

you are so anxious, i thought it was meaningful. let me play a soundbite and then let's get your response. donoghue testified to what he told trump about clark at that a january 3rd meeting. let's listen. >> i made the point that jeff clark is not competent to serve as the attorney general but he had never been an attorney, he has never conducted a criminal in litigation in his life. he has never been a trial judge attorney, so he reported by saying, i have done very collocated appeals and civil litigation and environmental litigation, and things like that. and i said that's right, you are an environmental lawyer. how about you go back to your office and we will call you when there is an oil spill. >> he refers to this team, whiskey tango foxtrot, trump was willing to scrape the bottom of the barrel to overturn democracy and doj officials threatened to resign en masse if he did so. we were this close to a

catastrophe. >> he had to. no one of credibility would do the dirty work he wanted to do, so, scott perry pick this guy up out of relative obscurity and hands him over to the white house, and essentially, he asks, will you do this thing if we put you in position of power to do it and he says sure. i just want to know, who will play jeffrey clark in the movie, because this guy, what the committee set out to do today was to make jeffrey clark a household name. i don't think they quite accompanist that. however, they did paint a pretty villainous picture of jeffrey clark, and what an absolute betrayal of his oath to uphold the law, of his country, when he allegedly goes in and says, yeah, i'll do this. i'll do this for you. i just think it is incredible. that they convinced this guy to do it. >> let me get a legal response. today was lawyer day. lots of lawyers, doj memos and

policies and that kind of thing. but, it is hard for me to even articulate just how shocking it was to see this happening inside the united states department of justice, where i once had the privilege of working. what we heard about today, is not, sort of like what happened, it is different in kind, it is foreign, contrary to everything the united states justice department stands for, and what they were trying to do was take the biggest and most powerful, most credible agency out there, if they could have gotten doj to say there is fraud like jeffrey clark wrote, that could've changed every thing. >> it seems clear that the only thing stopping this intent to overturn democracy from being successful was not only the bravery of the folks we saw earlier this week who stood up to him but the incompetence of the folks involved from actually executing on it. i think that we have a scope of evidence here, i would say in addition to being lawyer day, it was journalist day, to. you have hard documents of folks with the subject line of pardons in the email. you have gop folks coming forward in a level of explicit

nature, to your point, which we have not seen. >> even trump allies today are saying, today was corrections at the speaking of what you're talking about, the inconsistencies and the kind of people around him, i want you to respond to this because trump and his allies had top officials chasing all of these bogus lies, including a conspiracy theory that an italian satellite switched votes from trump to biden, the defense department looked into it, it is insane and trumps enablers share a huge part of the blame. >> it is insane, without a doubt. the fact that this information got anywhere near someone that could actually pass this on to the president is astounding. but, i look at it, also, lawyer day, journalist day, also people who have served in public office, in a constitutional office. service, i look at this from a standpoint of, thank god we have people that set up the guardrails and put their foot down and say absolutely not.

the reason this did not happen is because we have lawyers who knew what the constitutional obligation was, and what they could do, and the only reason it stopped was because they went to the former president and said, look, if you put this guy in charge, we are all going to walk out en masse, people will leave, and he will be executing your plan in a graveyard. there will be no lawyers, there will be no members of the doj, and they said, to the former president, this will make you look bad. when he took it to the former president, in the context of, this would reflect poorly on the former president, that is when they stopped this, and didn't go forward with this plan but that is the only way that it got stopped. but, this is, more than anything, it sounded so crazy, today, i just could not believe this was happening. but, at the end, i was thankful that we do have checks and balances. >> just quickly, was this the most impactful day? yesterday was sort of, real people, public service, people

who were threatened by this, was today the most impactful you think? the most meaningful? >> today was the how. we saw some of that as we look at ways that trump tried to pressure brad roethlisberger, for example and other folks in arizona, but this was also the how. the emotional toll this is all taking on people is important, too, that is what happened after, but, how he tried to do it, i think was explicitly laid out, today. >> people saying they will resign en masse, and yet he still believes, and he still is trying to convince people of a lie. everyone, stick around. a lot more on today's hearing, on trump ally, jeffrey clark's role in trying to apennines the doj. >> when he finished discussing what he planned on doing, i said -- [ beep ] , a-hole, you just

violated a-6 c.

♪ lisa here, has had many jobs. she's worked in retail during the holidays. as a barista during rush hour. and a nanny to a couple of rambunctious kids. now, all that experience has led her to a job that feels like home. with home instead, you too can become

a caregiver to older adults, with a career that makes a difference. ♪ apply today. ♪

today we learned about the relentless complaint campaign by then president of the united states to apennines the justice department, the people who are supposed to hold up our laws. back with me now, ellie, essie, and alice. let's talk about the pardons they are throwing out, blanket pardons, the committee also saying a number of republican congressman reached out to the white house for pardons. you don't ask for a pardon, unless you think you may have been a part of some sort of illegal activity. >> of course. it is not a crime to ask for a pardon but it sure as heck is an indicator of culpability. what is interesting to me was that there was a factual dispute. the committee was alleging that

certain people and members of congress have asked for pardons , scott perry most notably furiously denied that. how will this play out? that testimony came from cassidy hutchinson, a mid to low level white house staffer who has proven to be very credible, and the other thing that makes me believe cassidy hutchinson is that she was careful. she did not paint with a broad brush. when they asked her about jim jordan asking she said no, not especially. he asked more about pardons for congressman in general but scott perry asked specifically. >> i believe he is. >> what she's careful. right? she was very specific about what each person said. >> this is a six gop members of congress requested pardons. the involvement of these trump allies, looks to be a lot deeper than we initially thought. >> well, it is the expected folks, right? it is marge, it is matt, very

close allies of trump, who have proven the lie, they will spread conspiracy theories, they want to challenge the president, i am worried about the things they might have said or done around january 6th, leading up to january 6th. and if that was going to be found criminal in any part, you know, are they culpable? are they going to be wrangled into it? maybe they will be. we will have to see. >> we seem to talk about this knightley, allison, members of the gop, the congress completely bury their head in the sand about january 6th, and what happened. do you think any of this will change as we see how big the role some of these republicans had, their roles in influencing the doj? >> i don't see any republicans that have been on record, as to standing by the president, and standing by. >> the reason i ask is because

there are trump allies today admitting that this is pretty damning. >> for some it is eroding a little bit. but the hard-core people that are trump supporters in the house, and in the senate, what i am hearing when i'm talking to them, they are hearing things that are incriminating but they also default back to the bigger narrative that they are frustrated with the fact, that there is not an ally on the select committee, there is not someone supportive of the president who would put, as they say, put this information into context. i happen to think it speaks for itself, but they have put out there, but they would feel more comfortable with this process if there was a trump ally. they don't clearly see liz cheney and adam kinzinger as a trump ally, although they are republicans. that is why some claim they are not watching this. we know that several have said they are not even keeping an eye on it. they may read the headlines but they are not watching because they do not approve of the process, but those that are paying attention and watching,

what he did to the officials in georgia was probably some of the most damning because that was out and out unconstitutional, but it was also damning to innocent people. those are the kinds of things chipping away. >> we heard a lot about congressman scott perry today, one of the ones pushing for clark to take over, the committee presented a text between him and then chief of staff mark meadows, urging for clark to be elevated within the department. this is one of multiple members of congress who attempted to help the then president overturn the 2020 election. he still has his seat, which means the threat to democracy is still alive and well, unfortunately. >> he still has his seat in the number of those folks who contested election results after the january 6th attacks happened, a lot of those folks are still in congress. we see the committee trying to make that point that they are not only presenting evidence

about threats that would happen previously, but they are trying to alarm the country about democracy threats for the future. if we are again going to judge this committee on the merits of how this seeps into the public, i think we can try to find places in which maybe democratic candidates would be talking about these a january 6 hearings. i've been trying to look to see if congressional candidates are incorporating this into their messaging, different from folks in washington. people were running in races that we are not really seeing that yet. we are still seeing them try to focus more on what we will call kitchen table campaign issues. we know that is not a judgment of how -- what the committee is laying out but i think that is a telltale sign at least to this point it is not as a democratic candidate yet who think this is a motivating piece for their races. that could change, particularly as more evidence comes out. but, right now, we aren't seeing this be a legal

question, the dc question, a factual question, but we are not seeing it play into the political motivation, at least from the candidates perspective, from what they are putting out. >> when i got this new today i kept rereading it, saying am i actually reading what was going on? we got news about a georgia state investigation into trump's effort to overturn the 2020 election. governor kemp will deliver a sworn recorded statement to the special grand jury next month. what could that mean for this case? is this big news? >> the reporting has been that donald trump consistent with what we have heard today tried to lean on governor kemp to's call a special session of georgia legislature so that they could overturn the election. not a good day for donald trump and his people in georgia. but also let's not forget. jeffrey clark got crushed today in congress. i will tell you what is worse is having fbi agents show up to your house at 6:00 a.m. jeffrey clark and federal indicators raided the home of jeffrey clark, part of the doj's investigation efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

does that say anything about where the doj is headed? >> is a big step. no question. there's a lot we don't know but there are some things we do know. in order to get a search warrant as a prosecutor, you have to swear out and affidavit dictating you have probable cause to believe a client crime was committed but you have to take that to a judge and judges scrutinize these. i've sat in judges waiting rooms while they go through it to decide whether they agree. we note doj believes that clark has probable cause, not beyond a reasonable doubt. we know a judge agreed with it. we don't know exactly what they took. knowing this case i would assume phones, computers, laptops, they would dump all that info, and it is a bad omen for jeffrey clark. not everyone who gets searched gets charged. rudy giuliani has not been charged yet but it is a big step for doj. >> we are hearing, this piece over here and this piece over there. >> so much. jeffrey clark is so fascinating. i am already writing the movie, because he is such a character. it is not like he came up as this trump he figure inside dc

legal circles, he was really kind of obscure, and i came across this awesome quote, that as a friend and colleague said this story shocked me because this is not the jeff i knew, i knew him as a guy who cared about the rule of law. just a thoughtful lawyer who is an intellectual, not a machiavellian backstab or. i mean, this was a surprise for his colleagues to learn he had gotten corrupted into this scheme. i found that so fascinating. is but it sounds like a screenplay. >> it really does. >> there are a lot of people who have fallen into that category, people of good character and reputation who have phone that way. i want to address the brian kemp questioning. the governor of the great state of georgia, a republican like many have heard from, supported donald trump, and now he is providing what could, for all intents and purposes could be incriminating information the same with rusty bowers out in arizona, the more we have

republicans that supported donald trump coming forward with information that is >> bill barr, republicans are giving damaging. >> it is not a partisan witch- hunt? >> i know t it is hard to believe. >> thank you. damning testimony today to talk about coming from the hearings that happened up on the hearing today. a lot to discus. we want to get straight to evan perez, senior justice correspondent. the big headline out of today's hearings, trump's allies, helping the former president overturn the election. tell us more about this and how our lawmakers are responding. >> what we are hearing, a blockbuster already before we got to