who lets their 10-year-old, a golf cart, lambourghini, start with the golf cart. >> and the poor kid broke down and was sobbing, and ben was consoling him, don't hand your child the responsibility of something of course he's going to crash. stay right here on fox news for sandra smith and john roberts next. >> john: emily, thank you. welcome to fox news special coverage of the january 6th committee hearings. we are just moments away from the start of the sixth public hearing. it will be focused on the events of that day, 18 months ago. i'm john roberts in washington. hi again, sandra. >> sandra: sandra smith in new york. the hearing was unexpectedly announced yesterday, the committee recently obtained new evidence. today's hearing, just one witness. cassidy hutchinson, a former aid to mark meadows, former chief of staff for trump.

>> john: insider perspective, hutchinson has already testified in front of the committee several times but that was behind closed doors. today will be her first public testimony. >> sandra: in recorded testimony played last week, she claim add group of republican lawmakers were looking for pardons following the riot on january 6th. so john, underway any moment from now. hutchinson was meadows' most trusted aide, a crucial witness, someone you are familiar with. >> john: she had been an intern for steve scalise, took a job in the chief of staff office. she was not the chief of staff but a trusted aide of mark meadows and would have been in on a lot of the meetings and strategy sessions leading up to january 6th as she takes her seat there.

>> sandra: she is offering obviously a very inside look of an account in the west wing in the days leading up to, on and in the aftermath of the january 6th capitol attack. the one and only witness, looks like it is underway. and it will begin now, to washington. >> select committee to investigate the january 6th attack on a united states capitol will be in order. without objection, the chair is authorized to declare the committee in recess at any point pursuant to house deposition authority regulation 10, the chair announces the committee's approval to release the deposition material presented during this hearing. good afternoon. in our hearings over the previous weeks the select committee has laid out the details of a multi-part pressure

campaign driven by the former president aimed at overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election and blocking the transfer of power. we have shown that this effort was based on a lie. a lie that the election was stolen, tainted by widespread fraud, donald trump's big lie. in the weeks ahead the committee will hold additional hearings about how donald trump summoned a mob of his supporters to washington, spurred them to march on the capitol, and failed to take meaningful action to quell the violence as it was unfolding on january 6th. however, in recent days the select committee has obtained new information dealing with what was going on in the white house on january 6th and in the days prior. specific detailed information about what the former president and his top aides were doing and

saying in those critical hours. firsthand details of what transpired in the office of the white house chief of staff just steps from the oval office as the threats of violence became clear and indeed violence ultimately descended on the capitol in the attack on american democracy. it's important that the american people hear that information immediately. that's why in consultation with the vice chair i have recalled the committee for today's hearing. as you've seen and heard in our earlier hearings, the select committee has developed a massive body of evidence thanks to the many hundreds of witnesses who voluntarily provided information relevant to our investigation. it has not always been easy to get that information because the same people who drove the former president's pressure campaign to overturn the election are now

trying to cover up the truth about january 6th. but thanks to the courage of certain individuals, the truth won't be buried. american people won't be left in the dark. our witness is cassidy hutchinson has embodied that courage. i won't get into a lot of detail about miss hutchinson's testimony, i'll allow her words to speak for themselves and i hope everyone at home will listen very closely. first i recognize our distinguished vice chair, miss cheney of wyoming for opening statements she would care to offer. >> thanks very much, mr. chairman. the first five hearings, the committee has heard from republicans, including former trump administration justice officials, trump campaign officials, several members of president trump's white house staff, prominent conservative judge and several others.

today's witness, miss cassidy hutchinson, another republican and another former member of president trump's white house staff. certain of us recall miss hutchinson once worked for republican whip steve scalise, she held a prominent role in the white house legislative affairs office and later was the principal aid to president trump's chief of staff, mark meadows. miss hutchinson has spent considerable time up here on capitol hill representing the trump administration and we welcome her back. up until now our hearings have each been organized to address specific elements of president trump's plan to overturn the 2020 election. today we are departing somewhat from that model because miss hutchinson's testimony touches on several important and cross cutting topics. topics that are relevant to each of our future hearings.

in her role working for the white house chief of staff she handled a vast number of sensitive issues. worked in the west wing several steps down the hall from the oval office. hutchinson spoke daily with senior white house staff, including mr. meadows, and mr. tony ornato. and worked on a daily basis with members of the secret service posted in the white house. in short, miss hutchinson was in position to know a great deal with the happenings in the trump white house. she has sat for more videos and we thank you for her cooperation and courage. we will cover certain but not all relevant topics in ms. hutchinson's knowledge today.

again, our future hearings will supply greater detail, putting the testimony today in a broader and more complete context. certain firsthand observations of president trump's conduct on january 6th. also hear new information regarding the actions and statements of mr. trump senior advisers that day, including mark meadows and his white house counsel. and we will begin to examine evidence bearing on what president trump and members of the white house staff knew about the prospect for violence on january 6th, even before that violence began. we will follow the practice of our recent hearings, playing video tape testimony from miss hutchinson and others and also miss hutchinson live. i yield back, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. our witness today is miss

hutchinson, served in the trump administration, white house office of legislative affairs on 2019 to 2020 and as a special assistant to the president in the white house staff of staff's office from march 2020 to january 2021. i will now swear in our witness. the witness will please stand and raise her right hand. do you swear or affirm on the penalty of perjury the testimony you are about to give is the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god, thank you. you may be seated. let the record reflect the witness answered in the affirmative. i now recognize myself for questioning. miss hutchinson, i would like to start with a few questions about your background. these are some photographs we have obtained highlighting your career.

these show you with members of congress, including steve scalise, as well as the white house with leader kevin mccarthy and jim jordan. others show you with the president and members of congress aboard air force one. before you worked in the white house you worked on capitol hill for representative steve scalise, republican whip, and senator ted cruz. and then in 2019 you moved to the white house and served there until the end of the trump administration in 2020. when you started at the white house you served in the office of legislative affairs. we understand that you were initially hired as a staff assistant but were soon promoted to position of greater responsibility. can you explain your role for the committee? >> when i moved over to the

white house chief of staff office with mr. meadows he became the fourth chief of staff, it's difficult to describe a typical day. i was a special assistant to the president and adviser to the chief of staff. the days depended on what the president was doing that day and that's kind of how my portfolio was reflected. a lot of outreach with members of congress, senior cabinet officials, policy issues with relevant internal components and members on the hill, as well as security protocol at the white house complex for mr. meadows and the president. >> and then you received another promotion in march 2020. at that time you became the principal aide to the new white house chief of staff mark meadows, is that right? >> that's correct, sir. >> what did a typical day look like for you in your work with mr. meadows? >> it varied with what was going

on. we spent a lot of time on the hill, and i was his liason for capitol hill. travelling engagements, mostly i was there to serve what the chief of staff needed and lot of times what the chief of staff needed was reflection what the president was scheduled and detailed to do that day. >> so fair to say that you spoke regularly in your position both with members of congress and with senior members of the trump administration? >> that's correct, that's a fair assessment, sir. >> and would you say that in your work with mr. meadows you were typically in contact with him and others in the white house throughout the day? >> that's correct, sir. mr. meadows and i were in contact almost pretty much throughout every day consistently. >> so much of grave importance happens in the west wing of the

white house, it's quite a small building. above me on the screen you can see a map of the first floor of the west wing of the white house. on the right you can see the president's oval office. on the left the chief of staff's office suite. within the chief of staff's office suite is the heart of the west wing was your desk, which was between the vice president's office, and the oval office. miss hutchinson, is this an accurate depiction of where you were located? >> it's accurate. it's a lot smaller than it looks. >> absolutely. miss hutchinson, this is a photo that shows the short distance between your office and the president's oval office. and it only takes 5 to 10

seconds or so to walk down the hall from your office to the oval office, is that right? >> that's correct. >> thank you. pursuant to the section 5c8 of house resolution 503, the chair recognizes the chair woman from wyoming, miss cheney, for questions. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, we will begin today with an exchange that first provided miss hutchinson a tangible sense of the ongoing planning for the events of january 6th. on january 2, 4 days before the attack on our capitol, president trump's lead lawyer, rudy giuliani, was immediating with mark meadows and others. do you remember mr. giuliani meeting with mr. meadows on january 2, 2021? >> i do. he met with mr. meadows the evening of january 2, 2021. >> and we understand you walked mr. giuliani out of the white

house that night and he talks to you about january 6th. what do you remember him saying? >> as mr. giuliani and i were walking to his vehicle he said something to the effect of cass, are you excited for the 6th, it's going to be a great day, and rudy, what happened on the 6th? he responded we are going to the capitol, it's going to be great, the president is going to be there, he's going to look powerful, talk to the chief about it, talk to the chief about it. >> did you go back to the west wing and tell mr. meadows about your conversation with mr. giuliani? >> i did. after he left the campus, i went back up to our office and found mr. meadows in his office on the couch he was scrolling through his phone, i remember leaning against the doorway and saying i

had an interesting conversation with rudy, mark. sounds like we are going to go to the capitol. he didn't look up from his phone and said something to the effect of there's a lot going on, cass, but i don't know, things might get real, real bad on january 6th. >> miss hutchinson, mr. meadows is engaged in litigation with the committee to avoid testifying here. what was your reaction when he said things might get real, real bad. >> in the days before the 2nd, i was apprehensive, i heard talk of a rally, and movement to the capitol, but when hearing rudy's take on january 6th and mark's response, that was the first, that evening was the first moment that i remember feeling scared, and nervous for what could happen on january 6th, and

i had a deeper concern for what was happening with the planning aspects of it. >> thank you. today we are going to focus primarily on the events of january 5th and six at the white house, to begin and frame the discussion i want to talk about a conversation that you had with mr. john ratcliff, the director of national intelligence and you had the conversation in december of 2020. mr. ratcliff was nominated by president trump to oversee u.s. intelligence community and before his appointment mr. ratcliff was a republican member of congress. as you will see on this clip director ratcliff's comments in december of 2020 were pressient. >> my understanding was director ratcliff did not want much to do

with the post election period. director ratcliff felt that it wasn't something that the white house should be pursuing. it felt like it was dangerous for the president's legacy. he had expressed to me that he was concerned it could spiral out of control and potentially be dangerous, either for our democracy or the way that things were going to the 6th. >> when you say it was not something -- [inaudible] >> trying to fight the results of the election. find missing ballots, pressuring -- filing lawsuits in

certain states where there didn't seem to be significant evidence and reaching out to the state legislatures about, so pretty much the way the white house was handling the post election period he felt there could be dangerous repercussions in terms of precedent set for elections, for our democracy, for the 6th, hoping that we would concede. >> so miss hutchinson, now we are going to turn to certain information that was available before january 4th, and what the trump administration and the president knew about the potential for violence before january 6th. on the screen you will see an email received by acting attorney deputy general donahue. he testified last week. apparent planning for those

coming to washington on january 6th to "occupy federal buildings and discussions of invading the capitol building." what he said to us. >> and we knew that if you have tens of thousands of very obsessive people showing up in washington, d.c. there was potential for violence. >> u.s. secret service was looking at similar information and watching the planned demonstrations. in fact, their intelligence division sent several emails to white house personnel like deputy chief of staff tony ornato and robert engel, listing events like those on the screen. the white house continued to receive updates about planned demonstrations, including information regarding the proud boys organizing and planning to attend events on january 6th. although miss hutchinson has no detailed knowledge of any planning involving the proud

boys for january 6th, she did note this. >> i recall hearing the word oath keeper and hearing the word proud boys closer to the planning of the january 6th rally when mr. giuliani would be around. >> on january 3rd, the capitol police issued a special event assessment. in that document, they noted the proud boys and other groups planned to be in washington, d.c. on january 6th. and indicated that "unlike previous post election protests, the targets of the pro trump supporters are not necessarily the counter protestors as they were previously, but rather congress itself is the targets on the 6th." of course we all know now that

the proud boys showed up on january 6th, marched from the washington monument to the capitol that day, and led the riotous mob to invade and occupy our capitol. miss hutchinson, i want to play you a clip of one of our meetings when you described the call on january 4th that you received from national security advisor robert o'brien, the same topic, potential violence on january 6th. >> i received a call from robert brian, he had asked if he could speak with mr. meadows about potential violence, words of violence he was hearing that were potentially going to happen on the hill on january 6th. i had asked if he had connected with tony ornato, because he had a conversation with mark about that topic. robert said i'll talk to tony and i don't know if robert ever

connected with mark about the issue. >> miss hutchinson, can you describe chief of staff? >> deputy chief of staff at the white house for operations is arguably one of the most important positions somebody can hold. they're in charge of all security protocol for the campus and all presidential protectees, president and first family, and presidential protection, so the chief of staff, or the national security adviser, as well as the vice president's team, too. tony would oversee all of that and he was the conduit for security protocol between white house staff and the united states secret service. >> thank you. and you also described a brief meeting between mr. ornato and mr. meadows on the potential for violence. meeting on january 4th, talking about the potential for violence

on january 6th. let's listen to a clip of that testimony. >> mr. orn ato said there could be violence on the 6th. >> you also told us about reports of violence and weapons the secret service were receiving on the night of january 5th and throughout the day on january 6th, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> there are reports police in washington, d.c. had arrested police with firearms or ammunition following a pro trump rally the evening of january 5th. are those some reports you recall hearing about? >> they are. >> of course the world now knows the people who attacked the capitol on january 6th had many different types of weapons. when a president speaks, the secret service typically requires those attending to pass

through metal detectors known as mags for short. the select committee has learned people who willingly entered the enclosed area for president trump's speech were screened so they could attend the rally. they had weapons and other items confiscated. pepper spray, knives, brass knuckles, tassers, body armor, gas masks, batons, blunt weapons. those were just from the people who chose to go through the security for the president's event on the elipse, not the several thousand members who refused to go through the mags and watched from the washington monument. select committee has learned from reports from outside the magnotomerteres, and police radio transmission identifying people with firearms, including ar-15s on the morning of january 6th. let's listen.

>> individuals in a tree, white male about six feet tall, thin build, brown cowboy boots. blue jeans and blue jean jacket. underneath the jacket, ar-15, with a group of individuals about 5 to 8 other individuals, two of the individuals in that group at the base of the tree near the portapotties, 5'8", brown cowboy boots, glock style pistols in their waistband. >> 8736, subject weapon on his right hip. after that, he's in the tree. >> number one, make sure p.p.d. knows they have an elevated threat in the trees south side of constitution avenue.

adult flag, american flag face mask, cowboy boots, weapon on the right side hip. >> three men walking down the street in fatigues, carrying ar-15, copy, independence. >> ar-15s at 14th and independence. as you saw in the emails, first report was 8:00 hour january 6th. talks about people in the crowd wearing ballistic helmets and body armor, military-grade backpacks. the second report by the secret service in the 11:00 hour, and reports of a man with a rifle. miss hutchinson in prior testimony you described for us the meeting in the white house around 10:00 a.m. in the morning of january 6th, involving chief of staff meadows, and tony ornato. were you in that meeting?

>> i was. >> let's listen to your testimony about that meeting and then we'll have some questions. >> the last time we talked you mentioned weapons people had, flag poles, oversized sticks or flag poles, bear spray. anything else you recall hearing about people who would gather? >> i recall tony and i having a conversation with mark probably around 10:00 a.m., 10:15 a.m., where i remember tony mentioning knives, guns, in the form of pistols and rifles, bear spray, body armor, spears and flag poles, spears were one item, flag poles one item, and then tony, something to the effect of these f-ing people are fastening

spears on the flag poles. >> miss hutchinson, a clip of your testimony regarding mr. meadows' response learning the attendees were armed that day. >> what was mr. meadows' reaction. >> when tony and i went in to talk to mark that morning, mark was sitting on the phone antoine got into it, let you know and informed him this is how many people we have outside the mags due to the weapons, he listed more weapons off i don't recall. and gave him a brief but concise explanation, but fairly thorough, and i remember distinctly mark not looking up from his phone. i remember tony finishing

explanation and taking a few seconds for mark, and i said mark, did you hear him? and then mark chimed in like all right, anything else? still looking down at his phone. and tony looked at me and i looked at tony, do you have any questions? like what are you hearing? and i looked at tony and like he just told you about what was happening out at the rally, i know, and then he looked up and said have you talked to the president? and tony said yes, sir, he's aware, all right, good. >> he asked tony if he had informed the president and he said yes he had. >> is it your understanding mr. ornato told the president about the weapons on the morning of january 6th? >> he is what he relayed to me.

>> and mr. meadows' general response when people raised concerns what could happen on january 6th. >> so at the time and the day leading up to the 6th, lots of public reports how things might go bad on the 6th. potential for violence. i'm hearing correctly, mr. meadows did not share those concerns, or at least did not act on those concerns? >> did not act on those concerns would be accurate. >> but other people raised them to him, like in this exchange you mentioned -- >> that's correct. >> we are going to show you an exchange of texts between you and deputy chief of staff ornato, and exchanged while you were at the ellipse. you write the crowd looks good from the vantage point, he was

f-ing furious, and mr. trump talked about the o.t.r., off the record movement. could you tell us who was furious? >> the he i was referring to was the president. he was furious because he wanted the arena that we had to be maxed out at capacity for all attendees. the advance team had relayed to him that the mags were free flowing, everybody who wanted to come in had already come in but he still was angry about the extra space and wanted more people to come in. >> and did you go to the rally in the presidential motorcade? >> i was there, yes. the motorcade. >> and were you back stage with the president and other members of his staff and family? >> i was. >> and you told us about

particular comments that you heard while you were in the tent area. >> when we were in the off stage a tent behind the stage, he was very concerned about the shot, meaning the photograph that we would get because the rally space was not full. one of the reasons, which i previously stated, was because he wanted it to be full and for people to not feel excluded because they had come far to watch him at the rally and he felt the mags were at fault, but another reason, primary reason because he wanted it full and he was angry we were not letting people through the mags with weapons, looking at as weapons or weapons. but off stage tent i was part of a conversation, i was in the

vicinity of a conversation i overheard the president say something to the effect of i don't f-ing care they have weapons, they are not here to hurt me, take the f-ing mags away, they can march the capitol from here, take the mags away. >> just to be clear, miss hutchinson, is it your understanding the president wanted to take the mags away and said the armed individuals were not there to hurt him. >> that's a fair assessment. >> the issue wasn't with the amount of space available in the official rally area only, but instead that people did not want to have to go through the mags. let's listen to a portion of what you told us about that. >> in this particular instance it was not the capacity of our space, it was the mags and the people that did not want to come through and that's what tony had been trying to relay to him that morning. it was not the issue we encountered on the campaign, we have enough space, they don't

want to come in right now. they have weapons, they don't want confiscated by the secret service, and they are fine on the mall, they can see you on the mall and they want to march straight to the capitol from the mall. >> the president apparently wanted all attendees inside the official rally space and repeatedly said "they are not here to hurt me." >> and just to be clear, so he was told again in that conversation, or was he told again in that conversation that people could not come through the mags because they had weapons. >> correct. >> and that people, and his response was to say they can march to the capitol from the ellipse. >> something to the effect, take the f-ing mags away, they are not here to hurt me, they can march to the capitol after the rally is over, they can march, take the f-ing mags away, then

they can march to the capitol. >> miss hutchinson, what we saw when the clips were playing were photos from the national archive showing the president in the off stage tent, you were in some photos as well. and that's when you heard the president say the people with weapons were not there to hurt him and he wanted the secret service to remove the mags. >> that's correct. the photos you displayed, we were standing towards the front of the tent with the tvs close to where he would walk out to go on to the stage. these conversations happened 2 to 3 minutes before he took the stage that morning. >> let's reflect on that for a moment. president trump was aware that a number of the individuals in the crowd had weapons and were wearing body armor and here is what project instructed the crowd to do. >> we are going to walk down, i'll be there with you, we are

going to walk down, we are going to walk down anyone you want, but i think right here, we are going to walk down to the capitol. >> and the crowd as we know did proceed to the capitol. it soon became apparent to the secret service, including the secret service teams in the crowd, along with white house staff security at the capitol would not be sufficient. >> i had 2 or 3 phone conversations with mr. ornato, and then four -- [inaudible] those individuals and then a few others, secret service, communications through their radios and mr. ornato called me and said make sure chief knows

they are getting close to the capitol, stacking bodies. >> miss hutchinson, when you said they were having trouble stacking bodies, did you mean law enforcement at the capitol needed more people to defend the capitol from the rioters? >> it was becoming clear to us and the secret service that capitol police officers were overrun at the security barricades outside the capitol building and they were having short -- they were short people to defend the building against the rioters. >> and you mentioned that mr. ornato was conveying this to you because he wanted you to tell mr. meadows. did you tell mr. meadows that people were getting closer to the capitol, and the capitol police were having difficulty? >> after i had the conversation with mr. meadows, mr. -- after i had the conversation with mr. ornato i went to have the discussion with mr. meadows, he was making a call, and i went to

open the door to tell him, he immediately shut it. i don't know who he was speaking with. it wasn't something he regularly did, especially when i would go over to give him information. so i was a bit taken aback but i did not think much of it and thinking that i would be able to have the conversation with him a few moments later. >> and were you able to have that conversation a few moments later? >> probably about 20 to 25 minutes later. there was another period where he shut the door again and when he finally got out of the vehicle we had the conversation. at that point there was a backlog of information he should have been made aware of. >> so you opened the door to the control car and mr. meadows pulled it shut. >> that's correct. >> he did that two times? >> that's correct. >> and when you finally were able to give mr. meadows the information about the violence at the capitol, what was his reaction? >> he almost had a lack of

reaction. i remember him saying all right, something to the effect of how much longer does the president have left in his speech. >> again, much of this information about the potential for violence was known or learned before the onset of the violence, early enough for president trump to take steps to prevent it. he could, for example, have urged the crowd not to march to the capitol. he could have condemned the violence immediately once it began, or he could have taken multiple other steps. but as we will see today and in later hearings, president trump had something else in mind. one other question at this point, miss hutchinson, were you aware of concerns that white house counsel had about the language president trump used in his speech?

>> there are many discussions of the rhetoric of the speech. mr. herschmann said we would be foolish to include language at the president's request, headlines along to the effect of fight for trump, we are gonna march to the capitol, i'll be there with you, fight for me, fight for what we are doing, fight for the movement, things about the vice president at the time, too. both mr. herschmann and the white house counsel's office were urging the speech writers to not include that language for legal concerns and the optics what it could portray the president wanting to do that day. >> and we heard the president would be with his supporters as they of marched to the capitol,

even though he did not end up going, he certainly wanted to. some have questioned whether genuinely planned to come here to the capitol on january 6th. book, mark meadows falsely wrote after president trump gave his speech on january 6th he told mr. meadows he was "speaking metaphorically" about the walk to the capitol. you will see donald trump was not speaking -- and mr. trump planned to travel to the capitol on january 6th. pause for just a moment to ask you, miss hutchinson, to explain some of the terminology. you used two different terms to describe plans for the president's movement to the capitol or anywhere else. one is a scheduled movement and another one is o.t.r. could you describe for us what each of those mean?

>> scheduled presidential movement is on his official schedule. notified to the press and to a wide range of staff that will be travelling with him. known to the public, known to the secret service and able to coordinate the movement days in advance. off the record movement is confined to the knowledge of a very, very small group of advisers and staff, typically a very small group of staff would travel with him. mostly that are just included in the national security package. you can pull an off the record movement together in less than an hour. it's a way to kind of circumvent having to release it to the press, if that's the goal of it, or to not have to have as many security parameters put in place ahead of time to make the movement happen. >> thank you. let's turn back now to the president's plans to travel to the capitol on january 6th. we know white house counsel was

concerned about the legal implications of such a trip. and he agreed with the secret service that it shouldn't happen. miss hutchinson, did you have any conversations with pat about his concerns about the president going to the capitol on january 6th? >> on january 3rd, pat had approached me knowing that mark had raised the prospect of going to the capitol on january 6th. we had a brief private conversation where he said to me make sure it does not happen, legally a terrible idea, we have serious legal concerns if we go to the capitol that day and he urged me to continue to relay that to mr. meadows. it's my understanding that mr. cipollone thought mr. meadows was pushing this along with the

president. >> and we understand you also spoke to mr. cipollone on the morning of the 6th as you were about to go to the rally on the ellipse, and said something like make sure the movement to the capitol does not happen, is that correct? >> that's correct. i saw mr. cipollone right before i walked out that morning and mr. cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the capitol, cassidy. keep in touch with me. we are going to get charged with every crime imaginable if they make that movement happen. >> and do you remember which crimes mr. cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> let's hear about some of those concerns that you mentioned earlier in one of your

interviews with us. >> having a private conversation with pat late in the afternoon the 3rd or 4th. that pat was concerned it would look like we were obstructing justice or obstructing the electoral college count and i apologize for probably not being very -- my legal terms here, but that it would look like we are obstructing what was happening on capitol hill and he was also worried it would look like we were inciting a riot or encouraging a riot on the capitol. >> in fact, in the days before january 6th, and on january 6th itself, president trump expressed to multiple white house aides he wanted to go to the capitol after his speech. what various white house aides

have told the committee about his desire to go to the capitol. >> did the president tell you that, that he wanted to speak at the capitol? >> correct, yes. >> during the meeting in the dining room, did the idea of the president proceeding or walking to the capitol on the 6th after his speech come up? >> walking to the capitol, no. >> driving to the capitol? >> it came up. >> how did it come up and what was discussed? >> he brought it up, he want i want to go to the capitol. >> what about him marching to the capitol on the 6th? >> yes. >> tell us about that. >> so kind of a general thing, get into the specifics of it -- i was aware of a desire of the president to potentially march to, or accompany the rally attendees to the capitol. >> when did you first hear about

the idea of the president accompanying rally attendees to the capitol on the 6th. >> this was the 6th, during the, after he finished his remarks. >> when the president said he would be going to the capitol during his speech on the ellipse, the secret service scrambled to find a way to go. we know from witnesses and the secret service, also from messages of the national security council. they were monitoring in realtime and see how the situation evolved in the following chat log the committee has obtained. as you can see, n.s.c. staff believed mogul, the president, was "going to the capitol," and "they are finding the best route now." from these chats we also know the staff learned of the attack on the capitol in realtime.

when president trump left the stage at 1:ten, the staff knew that rioters had invaded the inaugural stage and capitol police were calling for all available officers to respond. when republican leader kevin mccarthy heard the president say he was going to the capitol, he called you, miss hutchinson, isn't is that right? >> that's correct. >> and in this text message you told tony ornato, mccarthy called me, too, and do you think you are coming to my office. tell us about that call during the speech. >> i was still in the tent behind the stage and when you are behind the stage, you can't really hear what's going on in front of you. so mr. mccarthy called me with this information. i answered the call and he

sounded rushed but also frustrated and angry at me and i was confused because i did not know what the president had just said. he then explained the president just said he's marching to the capitol. you told me this whole week you are not coming up here, why would you lie to me. i said i'm not lying, i wasn't lying to you, sir. we are not going to the capitol and he said well, he just said it on stage, cassidy, figure it out, don't come up here. i said i'll run the traps on this and shoot you a text. i can assure you we are not coming up to the capitol. we have already made that decision. he pressed a little bit more believing me but i think frustrated that the president had said that and we ended the phone conversation after that. i called mr. ornato to reconfirm we were not going to the capitol, which is also in our text messages. i sent mr. mccarthy another

text, telling him the affirmative that we were not going up to the capitol and he did not respond after that. >> we understand, miss hutchinson, that the plans for the president to come up to the capitol had included discussions at some point about what the president would do when he came up to the capitol on january 6th. let's look at a clip of one of your interviews discussing that issue with the committee. >> when you were talking about a scheduled movement, did anyone say what the president wanted to do when he got here? >> no. not that i can specifically remember. i remember -- i remember hearing a few different ideas discussed between mark and scott perry, and mark and rudy giuliani. i don't know which conversations

were elevated to the president, i don't know what he personally wanted to do when he went up to the capitol that day. i know that there were discussions about him having another speech outside of the capitol before going in. i know that there is a conversation about him going into the house chamber at one point. >> as we have all just heard in the days leading up to january 6th, on the day of the speech, both before and during and after the rally speech, president trump was pushing his staff to arrange for him to come up here to the capitol during the electoral vote count. let's turn now to what happened in the president's vehicle when the secret service told him he would not be going to the capitol after his speech. first, here is the president's motorcade leaving the ellipse after the speech on january 6th.

miss hutchinson, when you returned to the white house in the motorcade after the president's speech, where did you go? >> when i returned to the white house i walked up the stairs towards the chief of staff's office and i noticed mr. ornato lingering outside the office. once we made eye contact, he waved me to go into his office across the hall mine. he shut the door, and i noticed bobby engel in the chair and looking a little lost. i looked at tony and he had said did you f-ing hear what happened in the beast? said no, tony, i just got back. what happened?

tony proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the beast, he was under the impression from mr. meadows that the off the record movement to the capitol was still possible and likely to happen, but that bobby had more information. so once the president had gotten into the vehicle with bobby he thought that they were going up to the capitol and what bobby had relayed to him, we are not, we don't have the assets to do it, it's not secure, we are going back to the west wing. the president had very strong, very angry response to that. tony described him as being irate. the president said something to the effect of i'm the f-ing president, take me up to the capitol now. to which bobby responded sir, we have to go back to the west wing. the president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab

at the steering wheel. mr. engel grabbed his arm, said sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel. we are going back to the west wing, we are not going to the capitol. mr. trump then used his free hand to lung towards bobby engel and when mr. ornato recounted the story, he motioned toward his clavicle. >> and was mr. engel in the room as mr. ornato told you this story? >> he was. >> did mr. engel correct or disagree with any part of the story from mr. ornato? >> mr. engel did not correct or disagree with any part of the story. >> did mr. engel or mr. ornato after that tell you what he said was untrue? >> neither told me ever that it was untrue. >> and despite this altercation,

this physical altercation during the ride back to the white house, president trump still demanded to go to the capitol. here is what kayleigh mcenany, the press secretary at the time, wrote in her personal notes and told the committee about president's desire to go to the capitol after returning to the white house. >> when you wrote he wanted to walk to the capitol, was that based solely on what the president said during his speech or anything that he or anybody else said afterwards? >> so to the best of my recollection, i believe when we got back to the white house he said he wanted to physically walk with the marchers and according to my notes he then said he would be fine with just riding the beast. that's my recollection, he wanted to be a part of the march. >> and just for the record, the beast refers to the presidential

limousine? >> yes. >> president trump did not go to the capitol that day. we understand that he blamed mark meadows for that. >> so prior to leaving the rally site when he got off the stage and everybody was making moves to the motorcade, i overheard mr. meadows state prior to mr. trump taking the stage that morning that he was still working on getting an off the record movement to the capitol. so mr. trump took the stage, he was under the impression by mr. meadows that it was still possible, so when he got off the stage i had relayed to mr. meadows i had a conversation with tony, the movement was still not possible, mr. meadows said ok, and then proceeded doing to the motorcade, and mr. meadows had reiterated we are going to work on it, sir, talk to bobby. bobby has more information. mark got into his vehicle, to my

understanding, trump got into the beast, and after we all arrived back at the white house later in the day it had been relayed to me by mark that the president wasn't happy, that bobby did not pull it off for him and mark did not work hard enough to get the movement on the books. >> the physical altercation that miss hutchinson described in the presidential vehicle was not the first time the president had become very angry about issues relating to the election. on december 1, 2020, attorney general barr said in an interview that the department of justice had not found evidence of widespread election fraud sufficient to change the outcome of the election. miss hutchinson, how did the president react to hearing that news? >> around the time that i understand the a.p. article went

live, i remember hearing noise coming from down the hallway, so i poked my head out of the office and i saw the valet walking towards our office, he said get the chief down to the dining room, the president wants him. mark went down to the dining room, came back to the office a few minutes later. after mark had returned, i left the office and went down to the dining room and i noticed the door was propped open and the valet was inside the dining room changing the table cloth off the dining room table. motioned for me to come in and pointed towards the front of the room near the fireplace mantle and tv, i noticed there was ketchup dripping down the wall and a shattered porcelain plate on the floor. the valet had articulated the president was extremely angry at the attorney general's a.p. interview and had thrown his

lunch against the wall, which was causing them to have to clean up. so i grabbed a towel and started wiping the ketchup off the wall to help the valet out, and he said something to the effect of he's really ticked off about this. i would stay clear of him for right now. he's really, really ticked off about this right now. >> miss hutchinson, was this the only instance that you are aware of where the president threw dishes? >> it's not. >> and are there other instances in the dining room that you recall where he expressed his anger? >> there were several times throughout my tenure with the chief of staff that i was aware of him either throwing dishes or flipping the table cloth to let all the contents of the table go on to the floor and likely break or go everywhere. >> and miss hutchinson, attorney

general barr described to the committee the president's angry reaction when he finally met with president trump. let's listen. >> and i should -- i know that you are dissatisfied with me and i'm glad to offer my resignation and he pounded the table very hard, everyone sort of jumped and said accept it? >> mr. chairman, i reserve. >> chair woman reserves. the chair requests those in the hearing room to remain seated until the capitol police have escorted our witness to the room. pursuant of the order of the committee today, the chair declares the committee in recess for a period of approximately ten minutes. >> sandra: you have been watching the sixth public hearing of the january 6th house select committee. they are breaking for a quick recess. we were told at the start of

this hearing, surprise hearing i'll add about an hour ago, they would break for about 12 minutes. we'll continue on with this when it resumes, john. what we heard there from the sole witness in the hearing room, cassidy hutchinson who is the former aide to mark meadows, chief of staff, to then president donald trump, talking about mark meadows telling her january 6th would get real bad. she said she had heard about general plans for a rally and tentative movements about trump going to the capitol but after hearing meadows and rudy giuliani, when she started to get scared and nervous for what could happen. >> john: also talked about a conversation she had with white house counsel pat cipollone before going over to that speech on the mall, and, or down in the ellipse, saying pat cipollone said please, whatever you do, do not let that movement to the capitol happen because we could be in all sorts of legal trouble for doing it. but the president as you heard

from cassidy hutchinson, quite insistent about wanting to get up to the capitol, even as he was being told the secret service, no, mr. president, you have to go back to the white house. let's bring in bret baier, fox news political anchor and anchor and executive editor of special report. we were sitting together, bret, and you had the reaction to the tale she told of the president in the dining room following that. >> bret: first, the dining room and then inside the beast, the car, the limo, saying he wanted to go up to capitol hill and they said you have to go back to the white house, and according to her testimony, says i'm the f-ing president, take me there and goes to grab at him. listen, this testimony is first of all stunning, because we have not heard this. two, it's compelling because of her proximity to power. all of these people directly having conversations with her. i think as we have seen before,

it's methodical, we always point out the caveat, there is not a minority here that's pushing back or questioning the other way, but it leads up to january 6th, the concern that it might "get real, real bad" in the days before, the concern that the proud boys and oath keepers would be there, the concern there would be weapons on the mall and then radio transmission that they saw weapons, ar-15s and others. and the testimony the president was really concerned about the crowd, that they were not allowed in through the magnotometers, he wanted the crowd to be bigger, more robust, and she was there in the back room behind the stage, i don't f-ing care that they have weapons, they are not here to hurt me, take the f-ing mags away, let me people in. they can march to the capitol from here, let the people in, take the f-ing mags away. listen, all of this is firsthand, so it's from her listening to it.

that's why it's so compelling and that's perhaps why we have this hearing that popped out of nowhere. >> sandra: i was going to add to that, bret. obviously making headlines is that the former president wanted to -- the secret service to get rid of the mags for the rally at the ellipse, even though some had weapons, knowingly had weapons. the witness testifying trump said they are not here to hurt me. but to your point about the hearing happening when it is, we all learned of this yesterday afternoon. we were not expecting to see another hearing until next month, until july, chad pergram pointing out the congressional side of this, at the top of this hearing saying how sort of unprecedented that is to have such an emergency hearing happen. i suppose what we have heard over the past hour or so would tell us why. >> bret: and she had another, obviously another session behind the scenes with the committee they are playing the sound bites from and realized the power of

this testimony and perhaps politically in the wake of roe v. wade and everything else to keep january 6th on the front burner. bottom line, the testimony is stunning and we are going to likely hear from the former president and his reaction to all of this, in one way or another. but you also have other officials, pat cipollone, white house counsel, you have others who are weighing in here behind the scenes through her testimony, and listen, i think this -- it does move the ball in this hearing. >> john: joining us now is martha maccallum, john dean who we remember from the nixon era and the watergate hearings tweeted this morning about this. better be a big deal, because he was reflecting back on the one surprise witness in the hearing in the watergate hearings in

1973. back then that was alex butterfield, who testified to the existence of nixon's secret taping system, blew it wide open. do we have anything approaching that from this witness? >> martha: i would say, john, i agree with what you have been talking about, i would say we had sort of the basic parameters of what happened with regard to this. we heard before that the president wanted to go to the capitol and that there was pushback against that. so what we are getting today are a lot of details and fill-in into just how dramatic that whole situation was. i think that she comes across very credible, she has a good memory for all of these different conversations that were being had and clearly the description of what happened in the beast, which is the president's vehicle, of course, of him wanting to lunge toward the steering wheel from the account of bobby, the secret service person in the vehicle who was very shaken up

afterwards. the question is, you know, all of this is obviously riveting, it's very dramatic, it was clearly a very difficult day for her and for those who were involved and for everybody who witnessed it, i would add but in terms of the department of justice, does it move the ball at all on any legal action they could pursue or is it sort of an overall filling in the gap, filling in the story that has an impact on whether or not the former president decides to run again and whether or not any of these details impact people's feelings about that all around? >> sandra: sort of an amazing turn at the end when the former aide to meadows, the witness there, described the president smashing his lunch against the wall, ketchup on the wall after reading barr's a.p. interview. jonathan turley writing a few moments ago in no way is this an

exoneration of the president's role, but he's pointing again to the leaving out of the peacefully heading to the capitol, no exoneration but the lack of any alternative perspective or questioning on the committee in that room. nonetheless, martha, we are learning a whole lot more, and the memory and the details around the basic framework we had, she was also known to be a very good note taker, so clearly she's providing a lot of detail for the committee and for the country today. >> martha: absolutely. i'm not sure it shocks anybody that the president, knowing what we have seen, observing him over of the years if he got angry that he might throw his lunch. it's obviously a very dramatic detail and the way she describes it is. i'm not sure it's wholly out of character of the donald trump

and president trump people know over the years and people out there shared his feelings of frustration, the problem was they could not back it up with anything in the courts and could not back it up with evidence they produced, and that obviously was probably a source of deep frustration as well. things were clearly not going his way. it's revolutionary in terms of character and action and people to take in and do with that information what they will over the course of time. whether or not the d.o.j. has more to go on here based on this testimony, i'll leave that to jonathan turley and others. that's the question in terms of action. >> john: martha, back to bret, has more thoughts on this. first of all, point this out. donald trump clearly has been watching what's going on. here is what he just wrote on true social. i hardly know who this person cassidy hutchinson is other than i heard very negative things about her. a total phony and leaker and requested to go to florida after

served a full term in office i personally turned her request down. why does she want to go with us if she felt we were so terrible. i understand she was upset and angry if she wanted to be a member of the team, she is bad news. >> bret: we would hear from the former president right away and knew we would, and she did change lawyers just in recent days, which she was cooperating differently at the beginning. >> john: she was with stefan passentino, and then with jodie hunt, jeff sessions chief of staff. >> bret: 30,000 feet here, the committee is trying to say former president trump was a threat, and that he wanted a coup, essentially. that's what they are trying to say. jonathan turley is right to point out they always leave out the snippet of we are going to go peacefully and patriotically,

they focus on we have to fight like hell and fight for this. the part about the weapons and the mags and he wanted to go to the capitol, and then the caricature of him, we heard through barr in the book how upset he was but not the level of detail and specifics she's laid out. i've covered politics a long time. i don't think there has been testimony like this, kind of jaw-dropping in a way on the inside workings of a white house in crisis after, you know, at this moment, january 6th, that we have seen since watergate, really. >> john: i basically lived with that team in the white house four years, and i knew how insistent the president could be when he wanted to do something, even if it was not feasible in terms of security. but obviously the secret service had a different idea what could happen that day. >> sandra: let's bring in our legal panel, andy mccarthy and

jonathan turley, both are fox news contributors. jonathan, i was quoting you earlier, but also looking at your most recent observation that in that moment where the secret service would have been refusing to comply with a direct order of the president to proceed to the capitol, you know i'm not sure of the authority to do so by sub -- subordinate, the security team believed it would endanger him. you first. >> yeah, that's a breathtaking moment and i cannot remember anything that would be its equivalent. the president is obviously the head of the executive branch. everyone in that car was subject to his orders. i'm not too sure what the authority was. i understand the motivation, which was the best of motivations, you know, the security team did not believe they could protect the president

under these circumstances. and also understand a person of integrity in that position would refuse to do so, i'm surprised this altercation would have occurred and he did not prevail as the head of the executive branch. his authority seemed quite clear in that sense. i mean, these are counts really quite stunning, seems to be taking a johnny depp turn in terms of the account. as bret noted, the question is what are you trying to achieve here, this is not contributing to the building of a criminal case. >> john: when it comes to security, ultimately the secret service has the last chase, picked dick cheney up, and carried him off on september 11th, no day in that. and cassidy hutchinson testified that pat cipollone had said whatever you do, don't let him go to the capitol. legal liabilities beyond

anything we could imagine. >> obviously that's very important in terms of if you were evaluating this as a matter of a crime, the fact that there's consciousness leads to the potential of guilt in the minds of people in the white house. i must say watching this, a couple things. first of all, it's devastating testimony, and having been one of us who stress the number of times that the committee doesn't have cross examination and as a result you have to discount virtually everything you hear because in a normal proceeding you would have that. i also have to, on the other side of the coin, note if this was a grand jury proceeding you would not get cross examination. the grand jury would be presented the evidence in the really the best light favorable to the prosecution, and this would be the kind of evidence that would have a great impact on a grand jury that was considering whether to bring charges or not.

i would say two other things. on the issue of incitement, i've stressed, john has stressed, it's a complex legal issue and relevant that trump said peacefully march, which is something they continue to leave out. however -- not the only charge that's relevant here. >> government officials, including members of congress, and what this testimony shows as bret was just pointing out, the president we now know knew powerfully that there was a heavily armed crowd that he was basically encouraging doing down to the capitol. >> john: andy, sorry to interrupt. >> attended rallies january 5th. on january 5th and six mr. stone was photographed with multiple

members of the oath keepers allegedly serving as his security detail. as we now know, multiple members of that organization have been charged with or pled guilty to crimes associated with january 6th. mr. stone has invoked his fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination against this committee. general michael flynn has also taken the fifth before this committee. mr. stone previously had been convicted of other federal crimes unrelated to january 6th. general flynn had pleaded guilty to a felony charge also pre-dating and unrelated to january 6th. president trump pardoned general flynn weeks after the presidential leaks and in july of 2020, commuted the sentence roger stone was to serve. the night before january 6th president trump instructed his chief of staff, mark meadows, to contact both roger stone and

michael flynn regarding what would play out the next day. miss hutchinson, is it your understanding the president asked mark me does to speak with roger stone and general flynn on january 5th? >> that's correct, that is my understanding. >> and miss hutchinson, is it your understanding meadows called mr. stone on the 5th? >> i understand mr. meadows completed a call to mr. stone and general flynn the evening of the 5th. >> do you know what they talked about that evening? >> i'm not sure. >> is it your understanding mr. giuliani, mr. eastman and others had set up what is called "a war room" at the willard hotel on the night of the 5th? >> i was aware of that the night of the 5th. >> do you know if mr. meadows ever intended to go to the willard hotel on the night of the 5th? >> mr. meadows had a conversation with me, he wanted

me to work with secret service on a movement from the white house to the willard hotel so he could attend the meeting or meetings with mr. giuliani and his associates in the war room. >> and what was your view as to whether or not mr. meadows should go to the willard that night? >> i had made it clear to mr. meadows that i didn't believe it was a smart idea for him to go to the willard hotel that night. i was not sure everything that was going on at the willard hotel, although i knew enough about what mr. giuliani and his associates were pushing during this period. i didn't think it was something appropriate for the white house chief of staff to attend or to consider involvement in. i made that clear to mr. meadows. throughout the afternoon he mentioned a few more times going up to the willard hotel and then dropped the subject the night of

the 5th and said he would dial in instead. >> so general flynn has appeared before this committee and when he appeared before our committee he took the fifth. let's briefly view a clip of general mike flynn taking the fifth amendment. >> general flynn, do you believe the violence on january 6th was justified? [inaudible] >> could you repeat the question, please? >> general flynn, do you believe the violence on january 6th was justified? >> clarification, is that a moral question or asking a legal

question? >> i'm asking both. >> i said -- i said the fifth. >> do you believe the violence on january 6th was justified morally? >> i take the fifth. >> you believe the violence on january 6th was justified legally? >> fifth. >> general flynn, do you believe in the peaceful transition of power in the united states of america? >> the fifth. >> let's move on now to january 6th and the conduct of donald trump and mark meadows during the attack on the capitol. miss hutchinson i would like us to listen to your description what transpired in the west wing

during the attack. context in this clip you describe the time frame starting at about 2:00 p.m. >> i remember mark being alone in his office for quite some time and we have spoke about going out and one point and i don't remember ben going in, i don't doubt he went in, but i remember being alone in his office for most of the afternoon. around 2:00 to 2:05, around 2:00 to 2:05, you know, we were watching the tv and i could see the rioters were getting closer and closer to the capitol. mark had not popped out of his office or said anything about it, i went into his office, i saw he was sitting on the couch on his cell phone, same as in the morning where he was scrolling and typing. i said hey, are you watching the

tv, chief? the tv was small, and you could see it but i didn't know if he was really paying attention. watching tv, chief? yeah. rioters are getting really close, have you talked to the president? >> no, he wants to be alone right now, still looking at his phone. so i start to get frustrated because i sort of felt like i was watching -- this is not a great comparison, but a bad car accident about to happen where you can't stop it but you want to be able to do something. and i remember thinking in that moment mark needs to snap out of this and i don't know how to snap him out of this, he needs to care. and i blurted out and said mark, do you know where jim is at right now and he looked up at me and said jim? i said mark, he was on the floor a little while ago giving a

floor speech, did you listen? yeah, it was good, did you like it? i said yeah, do you know where he's at right now? he said no, i haven't heard from him. i said you might want to check in with him, mark. and i remember pointing at the tv, the rioters are getting close. they might get in. and he looked at me and said something to the effect of all right, i'll give him a call. >> not long after the rioters broke into the capitol you described what happened with white house counsel pat cipollone. >> no more than a minute, a minute and a half later i see pat cipollone barrelling down the hallways towards our office and rushed in and looked at me, and said is mark in his office, and i said yes. he just looked at me and started shaking his head and went over to open mark's office door, stood there with the door

propped open and said something, mark is on his phone, i remember glancing in, he's on his phone and i remember pat saying to him something to the effect of the rioters have gotten to the capitol, mark, we need to go down and see the president now. and mark looked up and said he doesn't want to do anything, pat. and pat said something to the effect of and very clearly said, something to the effect of mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your f-ing hands, this is out of control, i'm going down there. and mark stood up from his couch, with his phone in his hand, his glasses on still, he walked out with pat, put his phones on my desk and said let me know if jim calls and they went down to the dining room. >> a few minutes later representative jordan called back.

>> a couple minutes later, so likely around between 2:15 and 2:25, i know the tweet went out at 2:24, i don't remember if i was there when the tweet went out or happened afterwards, but jim had called, i answered the phone. i said one second, he knew it was -- i introduced myself, i don't remember if he called my cell phone or one of mark's, but i answered the phone and said one sec, mark is down the hall i'll hand the phone to him. ok. so i asked the valet if mark was in the dining room, valet said yes. i opened the door to the dining room, briefly stepped in to get mark's attention, showed him the phone like flipped the phone his way so he could see it said jim jordan. he stepped where i was standing there holding the door open, took the phone talking to jim

with the door still propped open so i took a few steps back so probably was two feet from mark, he was standing in the doorway going to the oval office dining room. they had a brief conversation and in the crossfire, you know, i heard briefly like what they were talking about, but in the background i heard conversations in the oval dining room at that point talking about the hang mike pence chant. >> that clip ended miss hutchinson with you recalling you heard the president, mr. meadows and the white house counsel discussing the hang mike pence chant, and then you described for us what happened next. >> wasn't until mark hung up the phone, handed it back to me, i went back to my desk. a couple minutes later him and pat came back possibly eric herschmann, too, i'm pretty

sure eric herschmann was there, but confident it was pat was there. i remember pat saying something to the effect of mark, we need to do something more. they are literally calling for the vice president to be f-ing hung. and mark had responded something to the effect of you heard him, pat, he thinks mike deserves it, he doesn't think they are doing anything wrong, to which pat said something this is acting crazy, we need to be doing something more, briefly stepped into mark's office and when mark had said something, mark had said something to the effect of he doesn't think they are doing anything wrong, knowing what i had heard briefly in the dining room coupled with pat discussing the hang mike pence chants in the lobby of our office and mark's response, i understood there to be the rioters in the

capitol that were chanting for the vice president to be hung. >> let me pause here on this point. rioters chanted hang mike pence. the president of the united states, donald trump, said that "mike deserves it" and those rioters were not doing anything wrong. this is a sentiment he has expressed at other times as well in an interview with abc news correspondent jonathan karl, president trump was asked about the supporters chanting hang mike pence last year. instead of condemning them, the former president defended them. >> said hang mike pence. >> it's common sense, it's common sense that you are supposed to protect -- how can you -- if you know a vote is fraudulent, right, how can you pass on a fraudulent vote to congress? >> president trump's view that

the rioters were not doing anything wrong and that "mike deserved it" helps us to understand why the president did not ask the rioters to leave the capitol for multiple hours, in fact he put this tweet out at 2:24 p.m. miss hutchinson, do you recall seeing this tweet which the president said the vice president did not have the courage to do what needed to be done? >> i do. >> what was your reaction when you saw this tweet? >> as a staffer that worked to always represent the administration the best of my ability and to showcase the good things he had done for the country, i remember feeling

frustrated, disappointed, it felt personal. it was really sad. as an american i was disgusted. it was unpatriotic, it was un-american, we were watching the capitol building get defaced over a lie and it was something that was really hard in that moment to digest knowing what i had been hearing down the hall in the conversations happening, seeing that tweet come up and knowing what was happening on the hill and it's something that still, i still struggle to work through the emotions of that. >> we have also spoken to multiple other white house staff about their reaction to donald trump's 2:24 tweet condemning

mike pence for not having the courage to refuse to count electoral votes, an act that would have been in legal. matthew potinger, former marine intelligence officer served in the white house four years, including as deputy national security adviser, was in the vicinity of the oval office at various points throughout the day. when he saw that tweet, he immediately decided to resign his position. let's watch him describe his reaction to the president's tweet. >> one of my staff brought me a printout of a tweet by the president, and the tweet said something to the effect that mike pence, the vice president, didn't have the courage to do what he -- what should have been done. i read that tweet and made a

decision at that moment to resign. that's where i knew that i was leaving that day, once i read that tweet. >> ultimately members of the white house staff, sara matthews, cabinet members resigned as well. here is secretary devos's resignation letter. as you can see, in resigning on january 6th, being secretary devos said to the president there's no mistaking the impact your rhetoric had on the situation and it is the inflection point for me. let's also look at secretary chow's resignation statement. secretary chow resigned, spoke of the january 6th attack and said "as i am sure is the case with many of you, this is deeply troubled me in a way i simply cannot set aside." miss hutchinson, in our prior interviews we have asked you

about what the president advisers were urging him to do during the attack. you described roughly three different camps of thought inside the white house that day. can you tell us about those? >> there is a group of individuals that were strongly urging him to take immediate and swift action. i would classify white house counsel's office, mr. herschmann, miss ivanka trump in that category of really working to get him to take action and pleading with him to take action. there is a more neutral group where advisers were trying to tow the line knowing that mr. trump didn't necessarily want to take immediate action and condemn the riots. but knowing something needed to be done, and then there was the last group which was deflect and

blame. let's blame antifa, these aren't our people. it's my understanding that mr. meadows was in the deflecting a blame category but he did end up taking a more neutral route, knowing that there were several advisers in the president's circle urging him to take more action, which i think was reflected in the rhetoric released later that day in the videos. >> you told us that the white house counsel office was in the camp encouraging to stop the attack and leave the capitol. >> white house counsel's office wanted a strong statement out to condemn the rioters and confident in that. >> let's look at just one example of what some senior advisers to the president were urging. miss hutchinson, can you look at the exhibit we are showing on the screen now?

had you seen this note before? >> that's a note that i wrote at the direction of the chief of staff on january 6th, likely around 3:00. >> and written on a chief of staff note card but that's your handwriting, miss hutchinson? >> my handwriting. >> why did you write that note? >> chief of staff was in a meeting with eric herschmann, and mark handed me the note card with one of his pens and started dictating a statement for the president to potentially put out. >> and i'm sorry, go ahead. >> that's ok. there were two phrases on there. one illegal and then one without proper authority. the illegal phrase was the one that mr. meadows had dictated to me, mr. herschmann had chimed in and said also put without legal authority. there should have been a slash between the two phrases, it was

an or if the president had opted to put one of those statements out. evidently i didn't, mark came back from the oval dining room and put the palm card on my desk with illegally crossed out and said we didn't need to take further action on that statement. >> so to your knowledge, this statement was never issued. >> to my knowledge, it was never issued. >> did you understand that ivanka trump wanted her father to send people home? >> my understanding, yes. >> play a clip of you addressing that issue. >> i remember her saying at various points now she wants him, she wanted her dad to send them home, she wanted her dad to tell them to go home peacefully and wanted to include a line he was not necessarily on board with at the time. >> you will hear more about this

at our later hearings. we have evidence of many others, imploring donald trump and mark meadows to take action. here is some of that evidence, text messages sent to mark meadows during the attack. text message at 2:32 from laura ingram. hey mark, the president needs to tell people in the capitol to go home. the next message, this is hurting all of us, and then he's destroying his legacy, and playing into every stereotype. we lose all credibility against the b.l.m. antifa crowd if things go south. the president's son, don, jr., also urgently contacted mark meadows at 2:53 he wrote he's got to condemn this [bleep] asap. the capitol police tweet is not enough. as you will see, these are just two of the numerous examples of trump supporters and allies urging the president to tell his

supporters to leave the capitol. would not have been hard for the president to simply walk down to the briefing room a few feet down the hall from the office, as nora o'donnell noted during an interview with kevin mccarthy, where he believes the attack was un-american. >> quickly bring in kevin mccarthy, the house minority leader. leader mccarthy, do you condemn this violence? >> i completely condemn the violence in the capitol. we are currently watching unfold is un-american. i am -- i am disappointed, i'm sad, this is not what our country should look like. this is not who we are. this is not the first amendment, this has to stop and this has to stop now. >> leader mccarthy, the president of the you state has a briefing room steps from the oval office. it is the cameras are hot 24/7, as you know.

why hasn't he walked down and said that now? >> i conveyed to the president what i think is best to do and i'm hopeful the president will do it. >> republican house member mike gallagher also implored the president to call off the attack. >> mr. president, you have got to stop this. you are the only person who can call this off. call it off. the election is over. call it off. this is bigger than you, it's bigger than any member of congress, it is about the united states of america which is more important than any politician. call it off. it's over. >> despite the fact that many people close to donald trump were urging him to send people home, he did not do so until

later. much later. 4:17 p.m., donald trump finally told the rioters to go home and that he loves them. here is portion of the video president trump recorded from the white house. >> we have to have peace. so go home, we love you, you are very special, you have seen what happens, you see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. i know how you feel. but go home and go home in peace. >> but as we will show in even greater detail in future hearings, donald trump was reluctant to put this message out. and he still could not bring himself to condemn the attack. miss hutchinson has told us that, too. >> he put out at 4:17. >> i'm sure elaborate if i hadn't already at that point.

i recall him being reluctant to film the video on the 6th, i was not involved in any of the planning for that video. i remember seeing the video go out and feeling a little shocked after it went out. >> on the evening of january 6th, and the day after, the president's family and his senior staff and others tried to encourage the president to condemn the violence and commit to the peaceful transition of power. at 3:31 p.m. on january 6th, sean hannity of fox news texted mark meadows. he said "can he make a statement? i saw the tweet. ask people to leave the capitol." later that evening, mr. hannity sent another text message to mark meadows. this time he shared a link to a tweet. that tweet reported that president trump's cabinet secretaries were considering

invoking the 25th amendment to remove president trump from office. as you can see on the screen, the 25th amendment to the constitution creates a process for the transition of power if a president is unfit or unable to serve. 25th amendment has never been used to remove a president. but the committee has learned that after the attack on the u.s. capitol, this was being discussed by members of president trump's cabinet as a way of stripping the full power of the presidency from donald trump. president trump supporters were worried. in addition to the tweet that he sent mark meadows after the attack, sean hannity apparently spoke with president trump and warned him about what could happen. we understand that this text message that sean hannity sent to kayleigh mcenany on january 7th shows what mr.

hannity said to the president. first, no more stolen election talk. second, impeachment and 25th amendment are real. many people will quit. miss hutchinson, you told us that you were hearing about discussions related to the 25th amendment. here is part of what you said. >> reached out to have the conversation with mr. meadows in case he had not heard the discussions among cabinet secretaries, and what i understand it was more of a, this is what i'm hearing, i want you to be aware of it, but it's on your radar, you are the chief of staff, technically the boss among the cabinet secretaries and you should be ready to take action on this, i'm concerned for you and your positioning with this. reach out to me if you have any questions or be helpful with you

at all. >> inside the white house the president's advisers, including members of his family, wanted him to deliver a speech to the country. deputy white house counsel pat philbin prepared the first remarks, of national healing and a pretaped video on january 7th. when he arrived at the white house on the 7th, he believed more needed to be said he started writing. shared the draft with pat cipollone, also believed the president needed to say more. mr. cipollone agreed with the content, as did eric herschmann who reviewed the draft. the committee has learned the president did not agree with the substance as drafted, and resisted giving a speech at all. miss hutchinson, do you recall discussions about the president's speech on january 7th? >> i do. >> let's listen to what you told us about that and about the

process of crafting those remarks. >> i learned from a conversation with mark and overhearing between him and white house counsel and eric herschmann as well that he didn't feel he needed to do anything more on the 7th than what he had already done on the 6th. when he was convinced to put out a video on the 7th, i understand he had a lot of opinions about what the context of that announcement were to entail. i had original drafts of the speech, several lines did not make it in there, about prosecuting the rioters or calling them violent. he didn't want that in there. he wanted to put in that he was potentially part of them, and just with the increased emphasis

of his mindset at the time which was he didn't think they did anything wrong. the people who did something wrong that day, or the person who did something wrong was mike pence by not standing with him. >> the president's advisers urged him to give the speech. >> who convinced him to do the video on the 7th? >> i'm not sure who convinced him or if it was a group of people that convinced him. >> who was in the group that you are aware of? >> that i'm aware of, mark, ivanka, jared kushner, eric, pat cipollone, pat sylvan, those are people i'm aware of. >> do you know why they felt it necessary to release a statement? >> i believe kayleigh mcenany as well. from what i understood at the

time, and from what the reports were coming in, there is a large concern of 25th amendment potentially being invoked and there were concerns what would happen in the senate if it was the 25th was invoked. so the primary reason i had heard other than, you know, we did not do enough on the 6th, need a stronger message out there and condemn this, otherwise it will be your legacy, secondary reason to that was think about what might happen in the final 15 days of your presidency if we don't do this. there's already talk about invoking the 25th amendment, you need this covered. >> the president ultimately delivered the remarks, he did not ad lib much. recited them, without significant alterations except one. even then on january 7, 2021, the day after the attack on the u.s. capitol, the president

still could not bring himself to say "this election is now over." one other point about the speech, miss hutchinson, did you hear that mr. trump at one point wanted to add language about pardoning those who took part in the january 6th riot? >> i did hear that and i understand mr. meadows was encouraging that language as well. >> thank you, and here is what you told us previously about that. >> you said he was instructed not to include that. who was instructing him not to include language for the pardon. >> i understood from white house counsel's office coming to our office that morning they did not think it was a good idea to include that in the speech. >> that being pat cipollone? >> that's correct, and eric herschmann. >> miss hutchinson, did rudy giuliani ever suggest that he was interested in receiving a presidential pardon relating to january 6th? >> he did.

>> miss hutchinson, did white house chief of staff mark meadows ever indicate that he was interested in receiving a presidential pardon related to january 6th? >> mr. meadows did seek that pardon, yes, ma'am. >> thank you, police hutchinson. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> i want to thank our witness for joining us today. the members of the select committee may have additional questions for today's witness and we ask that you respond expeditiously in writing to those questions. without objections, members will be permitted ten business days to submit statements for the record, including opening remarks and additional questions for the witness. without objection, the chair recognize the vice chair for a closing statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i want to begin by thanking miss hutchinson for her testimony today. we are all in her debt. our nation is preserved by those

who abide by their oaths to our constitution. our nation is preserved by those who know the fundamental difference between right and wrong. and i want all americans to know that what miss hutchinson has done today is not easy. the easy course is to hide from the spotlight to refuse to come forward, to attempt to downplay or deny what happened. that brings me to a different topic. while our committee has seen many witnesses, including many republicans testify fully and forthrightly, it's not true of every witness. and we have received evidence of one particular practice that raises significant concern. our committee commonly asked witnesses connected to mr. trump's administration or campaign whether they have been contacted by any of their former colleagues or anyone else who

attempted to influence or impact their testimony. without identifying any of the individuals involved, let me show you a couple of samples of answers we received to this question. first, here is how one witness described phone calls from people interested in that witness's testimony. "what they said to me is as long as i continue to be a team player, they know i'm on the right team. i'm doing the right thing, i'm protecting who i need to protect. you know i'll continue to stay in good graces in trump world and they have reminded me a couple of times that trump does read transcripts and just keep that in mind as i proceed through my interviews with the committee." here is another sample in a different context. this is a call received by one of our witnesses.

"a person let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. he wants me to let you know he's thinking about you. he knows you're loyal and you are going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition." i think most americans know attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns. we will be discussing these issues as a committee, carefully considering our next steps. i yield back. >> chair woman yields back. thank you. thank you for doing your patriotic duty and helping the american people get a complete understanding of january 6th and its causes. thank you for your courage in testifying here today. you have the gratitude of this committee and your country. i know it was not easy to sit here today and answer these

questions but after hearing your testimony in all its candor and detail, i want to speak directly to the handful of witnesses who have been outliars in our investigation. the small number who have defied us outright. those whose memories have failed them again and again on the most important details and to those who fear donald trump and his enablers because of this courageous woman and others like her, you attempt to hide the truth from the american people will fail. and to that group of witnesses, if you've heard this testimony today and suddenly you remember things you couldn't previously recall, or there is some details you would like to clarify, or you discovered some courage you had hidden away somewhere, our

doors remain open. the select committee will reconvene in the weeks ahead as we continue to lay out our findings to the american people. chair requests those in the hearing room to remain seated until the capitol police have escorted the witness and members from the room. without objection, committee stands adjourned. >> sandra: you've been listening to the live testimony. the next scheduled testimony was in july. this is the six of the hearing called before the committee there is cassidy hutchison, who was a former aide to the chief of staff of former president donald trump, mark meadows. testifying there that she felt disgusted at the former president's unpatriotic, un-american attacks on the former vice president, mike pence in the moments of january

6 saying that trump said former vice president pence deserved it as rioters changed hang mike pence at the capitol on january 6th. that was according to hutchison, a top aide to meadows saying she heard a conversation, john, between meadows and the white house counsel, pat cipollone in which trump was happy with the rioters. >> john: you know, we were wondering about why this hearing was suddenly called when there was supposed to be hiatus for two weeks. a lot of talk about serious concerns for cassidy hutchison's safety given the fact that so much of her testimony in previous hearings has been explosive. she was going to be brought in likely at some point. let's bring in bret baier for some analysis on this, the anchor of "special report." we learned something new. rudy guliani and mark meadows said they were interested in receiving presidential pardons.

>> yeah, that's brand new. she's testifying from hearing it first hand she says that both of those men requested pardons from the president. i think what you pointed to, sandra, is the most compelling, when she quoting mark meadows saying pat, you heard the president, he doesn't care. he thinks mike deserves it. he doesn't think they're doing anything wrong as far as their literally calling for the vice president to be hung and pat cipollone says this is f-ing crazy according to hutchison. this testimony was very compelling from beginning to end. she obviously had access to all of the players. we're now hearing from the former president on various posts where he questions her accuracy, he goes after her directly. he says he doesn't know who she is and he didn't lunge at the secret service agent in the beast. that didn't happen. he didn't throw his lunch

against the wall and that she's lying. cassie hutchison is under oath on capitol hill. the president is on truth social making his statements. what is so compelling is how it was laid out. we always point out that there's not a push back and it would have been great to hear jim jordan or some congressman say some other angle to this. but the testimony in and of itself is really powerful. sandra? can you still hear? >> sandra: i am here. no, bret, to your point, i wonder for the country watching this in this moment, how much this changes what people believed or did not believe. again, this is the sixth public hearing of this nature. to your point about obviously the lack of bipartisan nature of these hearings and lack of push back in these hearings, those that believe what they want to believe and in many cases have

not changed their mind. do you think this moves the needle? >> i think this testimony testimony does. it changes the dynamic a bit. if people were just tuning in today and they heard that testimony, that would be compelling about the day. something that we didn't know. i think there are more shoes to drop in this hearing. they're clearly making a case. you saw liz cheney at the end say that she thinks that witnesses have been contacted to possibly affect their depositions or interviews. that opens up another possible legal challenge as we know from past impeachments. there will be people in this country that are split over january 6th from the beginning. this testimony was significant. >> john: you mentioned the truth social post that the former president was challenging what she testified to about grabbing the wheel or throwing his lunch against the wall. he also said she changed lawyers a couple days ago and with it

her story changed. shocker. >> sandra: brett, we'll see you at 6:00. thanks for joining us for our special coverage here. i'm sandra smith. i'm john roberts. our coverage continues post hearing with martha maccallum who starts us off on "the story." >> martha: thanks very much, john and sandra. our special coverage of the january 6th committee hearings continues with the surprise testimony today of cassidy hutchison, the former aide of ex-white house chief of staff mark meadows. andy mccarthy is standing by. first to aishah hasnie, reporting live on capitol hill where this has all been playing out over the past couple hours. aishah? >> martha, good afternoon to you. quite dramatic testimony that we just watched for a few hours here. cassidy hutchison right off the