very place we know for sure was right here, fascinating. a lot of people have told the life of jesus, it's a humbling and audacious task, this is different because we took you there. >> thanks for everybody watching. stay for special coverage of the january 6th select committee meeting right now. >> sandra: special coverage of the january 6th committee proceedings. in just moments the panel will announce criminal referrals to the justice department for prosecution during what is expected to be its final meeting in the investigation of last year's capitol riot. looks like it is just moments away now. welcome, everybody. sandra smith in new york. hello. >> john: good to begin another week with you. this meeting is set to begin at any moment, all nine members of the committee, seven democrats, two republicans will present portions of their findings after

an investigation that lasted nearly 18 months. >> sandra: we have been getting some hints of what is to come, leading up to this moment. the panel says it is going to introduce new evidence, including transcripts of interviews as well as depositions. >> john: the hearing, we expect will probably last an hour, maybe a little bit more, will wrap up with a vote on the final vote and lawmakers are expected to issue several criminal referrals targeting former president trump and his allies for their roles in the capitol riot and attempts to overturn the 2020 election. >> sandra: we will see what comes from this, john. this is all convening this afternoon. this is likely to be the final public meeting, we are told, at least, on this monday afternoon, and this really culminates a year and a half long inquiry, john, into all this, that brings us to this point on capitol hill this afternoon. >> john: congress will be turning over in just a little more than a couple of weeks, and so republicans certainly are not

going to be pursuing this any further than the democrats have. what will be interesting to find out, and we'll talk about the legal experts about this, there will be criminal referrals of the president and some of the other players who have come to light during these series of january 6th hearings. adam schiff believes that there is reason for criminal referrals. he's been after the president as you know for a long, long time. he said "in terms of the criminal statute, if you can prove someone incited an insurrection, incited violence against the government or aid and comfort to those who did, that violates the law." so we'll see what congress does. a lot of people think this, sandra, is nothing more than a political exercise if there are referrals to the justice department. >> sandra: we will see when it's underway moments from now. andy mccarthy first, as we await what the panel will introduce, sort of the final act, if you will. what are your expectations for

today, andy? >> act is a good way of putting it, sandra. it's theater. the best thing said about criminal referrals is that they don't make any difference to the justice department. i say that's the best thing that can be said because the worst thing that could be said is if you actually have a case as a good prosecutor that is evidence-based and that you could get convictions on, a congressional referral of the kind we are talking about here can actually be used by the defendant at trial to suggest that the prosecution is a political exercise rather than something that's evidence-driven. we should remember that these referrals, if that's what we are going to see, are completely unenforceable. they have no legal effect. prosecutors do their own investigation, their own means of gathering evidence and frankly better at assessing it than congress because it's not only their job to do that, they

are accountable. the january 6th committee makes a recommendation for prosecution and there's a prosecution that happens that ends in acquittal, they walk away unscathed. justice department has to live with that record. >> john: jonathan, if you look at this and presentation of the january 6th committee, two republicans on it so they can say it's partisan, not the republicans that kevin mccarthy wanted on the panel. however his topics were disallowed, he decided he was going to walk away from the entire process. through this process we have seen what amounts to, you know, almost a congressional prosecution of the events of january 6th, there was no rebuttal, really, whatsoever, we are talked about this before. so, if there are criminal referrals that come out of this, is it going to look as andy suggested like a very one-sided

politically motivated action? >> well, the committee really did destroy its own credibility and how it proceeded. both sides have pointed fingers at each other about a relatively unprecedented framing of this committee that have no members effectively appointed by the opposing party. these committees generally have left to the individual parties to select their members. but even after that fight was over, the committee could have gone further to guarantee greater balance. they could have allowed for more witnesses to give opposing views, alternative views or interpretations. they didn't. this was highly scripted. they brought in a producer, they had members reading from teleprompters. witnesses were sort of like

props, and looked more performative than investigative. and i think it's a shame. there is material that came out of the committee that's deeply disturbing. it's not proprietary ownership of the democratic party. riot on january 6th was a desecration of our constitutional process and yet it's been weaponized to some extent by this committee which did not pursue other issues in these public sessions. such as why was the capitol so poorly prepared for a potential riot even they were warned. but adam schiff, who says we are going to introduce bombshell new evidence, and then replayed much of the other evidence. we will see if they have a direct evidence of the conspiracy or if it's a performative act.

>> sandra: looks like they are about to gavel in. >> justice department has prosecuted upwards of 800 people and have not alleged trump is a co-conspirator, particularly the violent crimes they have investigated and prosecuted in connection with january 6th. >> john: jonathan, you want to quickly speak to that? >> yeah, i think that's part of the disconnect here, much of the evidence are things that didn't occur, letters written that were not sent, appointments suggested and not made. you can't make a criminal case out of that, at least not an easy one. >> quorum being present, select committee to investigate the january 6th attack on the united states capitol will be in order. without objection the chair 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 deposition material presented during today's meeting and further its approval to release deposition material that accompanies release of the select committee final report. good afternoon, and may god bless the united states of america. to cast a vote in the united states is an act of faith and hope. when we drop that ballot in the ballot box we expect the people named on the ballot are going to uphold their end of the deal. the winner swears an oath and upholds it. those who come up short ultimately accept the results and abide by the rule of law. that faith in our system is the foundation of american democracy. if the faith is broken, so is our democracy.

donald trump broke that faith, he lost 2020 election and knew it but he chose to try to stay in office through a multi-part scheme to overturn the results and block the transfer of power. in the end, he summoned a mob to washington and knowingly they were on and angry, pointed them to the capitol and told them to fight like hell. there's no doubt about this. this afternoon my colleagues will present our key findings, reminding you of some of the information we presented in earlier hearings and telling you how it fits in our broader conclusions. those conclusions have helped shape the committee's final report we will adopt pursuant to house resolution 503, which establishes the select committee nearly a year and a half ago.

i expect our final work will be filed with the clerk of the house and made public later this week. beyond that release, the select committee intends to make public the bulk of its nonsensitive records before the end of the year. these transcripts and documents will allow the american people to see for themselves the body of evidence we have gathered and continue to explore, the information that has led us to our conclusions. this committee is nearing the end of its work. but as the country, we remain in strange and unchartered waters. we have never had a president of the united states stir up a violent attempt to block the transfer of power. i believe nearly two years later this is still a time of reflection and reckoning. if we are to survive as a nation of laws and democracy, this can

never happen again. how do we stop it? this committee will lay out a number of recommendations in this final report but beyond any specific details and recommendations we present as one factor i believe is most important in preventing another january 6th accountability. so today beyond our findings we will also show that evidence we have gathered points to further action beyond the power of this committee or the congress to help ensure accountability on the law. accountability that can only be found in the criminal justice system. we have every confidence the work of this committee will help provide a road map to justice and the agencies and institutions responsible for ensuring justice under the law will use the information we

provided to aid in their work. and for those of you who have followed this committee's work, i hope we have helped make clear that there is a broader kind of accountability, accountability to all of you, the american people. the future of our democracy rests in your hands. it's up to the people of this country to decide who deserves the public trust, who put fidelity to the constitution and democracy above all else. who will abide by the rule of law, no matter the outcome. i'm grateful to the millions of you who followed this committee's work. i hope we lived up to our commitment to present the facts and let the facts speak for themselves. let me say in closing, the women and men seated around me on this dias are public servants in the most genuine sense. they put aside politics and

partisanship to ensure the success of this committee in providing answers to the american people. i especially want to thank and acknowledge our vice chair, who has become a true partner in this bipartisan effort. miss cheney of wyoming. and i also recognize her for any opening statement that she would care to offer. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and thank you for your tremendous leadership of this committee. i know we all have benefitted greatly from your wisdom and your wise counsel. thank very much. in april of 1861 when abraham lincoln issued the first call for volunteers for the union army, my great, great grandfather, samuel fletcher cheney, joined the 21st ohio volunteer infantry. he fought through all four years of the civil war.

stonesriver, to atlanta, he marched with his unit in the grand review of troops up pennsylvania avenue in may of 1865, past a reviewing stand where president johnson and general grant were seated. silas canfield, regimental historian of the 21st ohio volunteer infantry described the men in the unit this way. he said they had a just appreciation of the value and advantage of free government, and the necessity of defending and maintaining it. and they enlisted, prepared to accept all the necessary labors, fatigues, exposures, dangers, and even death, for the unity of our nation and the perpetuity of our institutions. i have found myself thinking often, especially since january 6th, of my great, great grandfather, and all those in every generation who have

sacrificed so much for the unity of our nation and the perpetuity of our institutions. at the heart of our republic is the guarantee of the peaceful transfer of power. members of congress are reminded of this every day as we pass through the capitol rotunda. there, eight magnificent paintings detail the earliest days of our republic. one painted by john trumbell, depicts the moment in 1793 when george washington resigned his commission handing control of the continental army back to congress. trumbell called this "one of the highest moral lessons ever given the world." with this noble act, george washington established the peaceful transfer of power in our nation. standing on the west front of the capitol in 1981, president ronald reagan described it this

way. the orderly transfer of authority as called for in the constitution routinely takes place as it has for almost two centuries and few of us stop to think how unique we really are. in the eyes of many in the world, this every four-year ceremony that we accept as normal is nothing less than a miracle. every president in our history has defended this orderly transfer of authority except one. january 6, 2021, was the first time one american president refused his constitutional duty to transfer power peacefully to the next. in our work over the last 18 months, the select committee has recognized our obligation to do everything we can to ensure this never happens again. at the beginning of our investigation, we understood that tens of millions of americans had been persuaded by president trump that the 2020

election was stolen by overwhelming fraud. and we also knew this was flatly false. knew dozens of state and federal judges had addressed and resolved all manner of allegations. our president would not accept the outcome. among the most shameful of this committee's findings was that president trump sat in the dining room off the oval office watching the violent riot at the capitol on television. for hours he would not issue a public statement instructing his supporters to disperse and leave the capitol despite urgent pleas from his white house staff and dozens of others to do so. members of his family, his white house lawyers, virtually all those around him knew that this simple act was critical. for hours he would not do it.

during this time, law enforcement agents were attacked and seriously injured. capitol was invaded, electoral was halted, and lives at risk. in addition to being unlawful, it was an utter moral failure and clear dereliction of duty. evidence of this can be seen in the testimony of president trump's own white house counsel and several other white house witnesses. no man who would behave that way at that moment in time can ever serve in any position of authority in our nation again. he is unfit for any office. the committee recognizes that our work has only begun, only the initial step in addressing president trump's effort to remain in office illegally. p prosecutors are considering the conduct we describe in the

report. as are citizens across the nation. 1761, john adams wrote, the very ground of our liberties is the freedom of elections. faith in our elections and the rule of law is paramount to our republic. election deniers, those who refuse to accept lawful election results purposely attack the rule of law and the foundation of our country. the history of our time will show that the bravery of a handful of americans doing their duty saved us from an even more grave constitutional crisis. elected officials, election workers, and public servants stood against donald trump's corrupt pressure. many of our committee's witnesses showed selfless patriotism and their words and courage will be remembered. the brave men and women of the capitol police, the metropolitan police and all the other law

enforcement officers who fought to divide us that day saved lives and our democracy. finally, i wish to thank my colleagues on this committee. it has been a tremendous honor to serve with all of you. we have accomplished great and important things together, and i hope we have set an example, and i also want to think all of those who have honorably committed to the work of our committee and the report. we have accomplished much for a short period of time. sackis foo -- you have sacrificed for the country. >> this is our final meeting of our committee. over the course of the last year and a half we presented evidence in ten public hearings, testimony from our brave law

enforcement officers, senior white house, and campaign officials and many others. today we are prepared to share our final findings with you. but before we do so, it's important to remember what we have learned and critically exactly what happened at the united states capitol on january 6th. without objection, i include in the record a video presentation of some of the key evidence our investigation has uncovered. >> there were officers on the ground, they were bleeding, they were throwing up, i mean, i saw friends with blood all over their faces. i was slipping in people's blood. >> as swarmed by a violent mob,

ripped off my badge, stripped me of my radio, seized ammunition secured to my body, began to beat me with their fists and felt like hard metal objects. >> the key thing to do is claim victory, we won, [bleep] you, sorry, we are wrong, [bleep] you. >> out of the box on election night the president claimed that there was major fraud underway, i mean, this happened as far as i could tell before there was any potential of looking at evidence. >> that led to me stepping away. >> generally discussed on that topic was whether the fraud administration abused irregularities, if aggregated and read most favorably to the campaign would that be outcome

determinative, and i think everyone's assessment in the room, at least among the staff, it was not sufficient to be outcome determinant. >> i told him that i did believe, yes, that once those legal processes were run, if fraud had not been established, affected the outcome of the election, that unfortunately i believed what had to be done was concede the outcome. >> what were the chances of president trump winning the election. >> after that point? >> yes. >> none. >> so what are we going to do here, folks? i only need 11,000 folks, fellas, i need 11,000 votes, give me a break. >> numbers are the numbers, numbers don't lie. many allegations, investigated every one of them. >> did one of them make a comment they didn't have evidence but had a lot of

theories? >> that was mr. giuliani. >> what did he say? >> my recollection, he said we have lots of theories, just don't have the evidence. you are asking me to do something that's never been done in history, the history of the united states. and i'm going to put my state through that? without sufficient proof? >> tape earlier in the day of ruby freeman and two other people, quite obviously, passing around usb ports as if they are vials of heroin or cocaine. >> mr. giuliani accused you and your mom of passing a usb drive. what was your mom handing you on the video? >> an ginger mint. >> do you know how it feels to

have the president of the united states to target you? the president of the united states is supposed to represent every american. not to target one. >> i made it clear i did not agree with the idea of saying the election was stolen and putting out this stuff which i told the president was bull [bleep]. >> he wanted to talk about he thought the election had been stolen or was corrupt and that there was widespread fraud, and i had told him that our reviews had not shown that to be the case. >> and i said something to the effect of sir, we have done dozens of investigations, hundreds of interviews, the major allegations are not supported by the evidence developed. >> my first thought was this is a terrible idea, jeff hart cannot be installed as acting attorney general of the united states.

>> you told us you described the meeting, that georgia letter proposed an f-ing murder-suicide pact. do you remember using the term murder-suicide pact? >> yes. >> was it your impression the vice president had directly conveyed his position on these issues to the president, not just to the world through a dear colleague letter but directly to president trump? >> many times. >> my view is the vice president had, didn't have the legal authority to do anything except what he did. >> and i said hold on a second, i want to understand what you are saying. you are saying you believe the vice president acting as president of the senate can be the sole decision maker's who is the next president of the united states? and he said yes. i said are you out of your f-ing

mind? >> the president was -- all the attention was on what mike would do or mike wouldn't do. >> a telephone conversation between the president and the vice president, is that correct? >> yes. >> the conversation was pretty heated. >> apologize for being impolite, but do you remember what she said, her father called him? >> the p-word. >> it was clear that it was escalating and escalating quickly. so then when that tweet, the mike pence tweet was sent out, i remember us saying that that was the last thing that needed to be tweeted at that moment. felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire by tweeting that. >> they have gained access to the second floor and i have public five feet below. >> second floor, moving in now. we may want to consider getting out and leaving now.

copy? >> members of the v.p. detail at this time were starting to fear for their own lives. there were calls to say good-bye to family members, so and so forth. >> approximately 40 feet, that's all there was. 40 feet between the vice president and the mob. >> donald trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present danger to american democracy. >> we got derogatory information suggesting that some very, very violent individuals were organizing to come to d.c. >> as mr. giuliani and i were walking to the vehicles that evening, he looked at me and said something to the effect of cass, are you excited for the 6th? it's going to be a great day. i remember looking at him and saying rudy, would you ex what's

happening on the 6th. he responded something to the effect of 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. >> we were invited by the president of the united states! >> he personally asked for us to come to d.c. that day and i thought for everything he's done for us, if this is the only thing he's going to ask of me, i'll do it. >> well, basically, you know, the president, you know, got everybody riled up, told everybody to head on down, so he basically were just following what he said. >> we have lost the line, we have lost the line! >> within 15 minutes of leaving the stage, president trump knew that the capitol was besieged and under attack. >> so are you aware of any phone call by the president of the united states to the sent of defense that day?

>> not that i'm aware of, no. >> are you aware of any phone call from the president of the united states to the attorney general that day? >> no. >> are you aware of any phone call by the president of the united states to the homeland security that day? >> not aware of that. >> the president ask for the national guard? >> no. >> did you ever hear for the president ask for law enforcement response? >> no. >> got an assault going on the capitol of the united states of america. nothing, no call, 0? >> 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 it, pat, he thinks mike deserves it, he doesn't think

they are doing anything wrong. >> you on the staff did not want people to leave the capitol. >> on the staff? >> in the white house. >> i -- i can't think of anybody, you know, on that day who didn't want people to get out of the capitol once they were -- once the violence started, no. i mean -- >> what about the president? >> she said the staff. so i answered. >> no, i said in the white house. >> oh, i'm sorry, i apologize, i thought you said who else on the staff. i can't reveal communications,

but obviously i think, you know -- yeah. >> said good job, now i'm going to give you the best free legal advice you are ever getting in your life. get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer, you are gonna need it. >> general flynn, do you believe in the peaceful transition of power in the united states of america? [inaudible] >> another officer unconscious. >> i don't want to say the election is over, i just want to say congress has certified the results without saying the election is over, ok?

>> the chair new recognizes the gentlewoman from california for an opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. over the last 18 months the select committee has conducted a congressional investigation of enormous scale, seeking to uncover the depth and breadth of ex-president trump's multi-part plan to reverse a lawful outcome of the 2020 presidential election. we have compiled an immense volume of documents, collected from countless investigation, law enforcement agencies, federal and state authorities. many of our efforts to get the evidence required litigation in federal court, including the u.s. supreme court. we have taken the testimony of hundreds of witnesses. while we couldn't show them all during the hearings, we focused on those who were most central,

including our ex-president's white house aides, senior department of justice officials, and senior members of his campaign. based on this assembled evidence, the select committee has reached a series of specific findings. many of these findings pertain to what has been called the big lie, enormous effort led by ex-president trump to spread baseless accusations and misinformation in an attempt to falsely convince tens of millions of americans that the election had been stolen from him. beginning even before the election, and continuing through january 6th and thereafter, donald trump purposely disseminated false allegations of fraud in order to aid his effort to overturn the 2020 election. ex-president trump's decision to declare victory falsely on election night wasn't a spontaneous decision, it was

premeditated. the committee has evidence that ex-president trump planned to declare victory and unlawfully to call for the vote counting to stop and that he told numerous allies about his intent in the weeks before the election. the committee found that mr. trum raised hundreds of millions of dollars with false representations made to his online donors. the proceeds from his fundraising, we have learned, have been used in ways that we believe are concerning. in particular, the committee has learned that some of those funds were used to hire lawyers. also obtained evidence of efforts to provide or offer employment to witnesses. for example, one lawyer told a witness, the witness could in certain circumstances tell the committee that she did not recall facts when she actually did recall them. that lawyer also did not disclose who was paying for the

lawyers' representation, despite questions from the clients seeking that information. he told her "we are not telling people where funding is coming from right now. we have learned a client was offered potential employment that would make her "financially very comfortable" as the date of her testimony approached by entities that were apparently linked to donald trump and his associates. these offers were withdrawn or did not materialize as reports of the content of her testimony circulated. the witness believed, this was an effort to affect her testimony and we are concerned that these efforts may have been a strategy to prevent the committee from finding the truth. throughout the post election period, ex-president trump was told repeatedly by his campaign advisors, government officials and others there was no evidence to support his claims of

election fraud. even since our last hearing, the select committee has obtained testimony from new witnesses who have come forward to tell us about their conversations with ex-president trump on this topic. here is one of his senior advisors. >> evidence of fraud on a scale that would have impacted the outcome of the election and i was becoming increasingly concerned that we were damaging -- we were damaging his legacy. >> what did the president say in response to what you just described? >> he said something along the lines of, you know, nobody will care about my legacy if i lose, so that won't matter. the only thing that matters is

winning. >> despite all that, he continued to purposely and maliciously make false claims, sometimes within a day of being told that a particular claim was false and unsupported by the evidence. by the time the electoral college met to cast votes on december 14, 2020, a member of president trump's senior staff, cabinet officials and members of his family were urging him to facilitate a peaceful transition to the incoming administration. he disregarded their advice and continued to claim publicly the election had been stolen from him. numerous state and federal courts evaluated and rejected the trump campaign's claims of voter fraud, including 11 judges appointed by ex-president trump himself. many of these courts issued scathing opinions, criticizing the lack of evidence that ex-president trump and his

allies had advanced to support their claims. numerous individuals associated with these efforts have since acknowledged that they were unable to find sufficient evidence of fraud to affect the election results, including in testimony to this select committee. still, ex-president trump repeated those false claims and tried to convince his supporters the election was stolen. this was an attempt to justify overturning the lawful election results. donald trump knowingly and corruptly repeated election fraud lies which incited his supporters to violence on january 6th. he continues to repeat his meritless claim the election was stolen even today and continues to erode our most cherished and shared belief in free and fair elections. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr.

adam schiff for an opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. building on his constant repetition of the big lie, president trump engaged in an unprecedented effort to obstruct the joint session on january 6th. proceeding where his electoral loss would be certified by congress. this effort began in part in the states which hold, count and ultimately determine winners of presidential elections. many state officials were targeted by president trump and his campaign. the local election workers he accused baselessly of election fraud, the state officials he pressured to stop the count or to find votes that didn't exist and the state legislative he urged to disregard the popular will of the voters and oath of office and name him the winner instead. here are the findings about president trump's state pressure campaign. president trump and his enablers repeatedly pressured state

officials to take action to overturn the results of the election. most dramatic example of coercion was the president's january 2, 2021, call to georgia, secretary state brad raffensperger, the president urged the sent to find 11,780 votes he needed to change the outcome in that state. during that call, president trump again repeated conspiracy theorys about the election that his own appointees at the department of justice had already debunked. trump also made what secretary raffensperger considered a threat, accurately considered a threat, suggesting that raffensperger and his attorney, that they could be subject to criminal prosecution if they did not follow through with his demands. then in repeated telephone calls and in-person meetings, donald trump pressured state elections officials and state legislators

to alter official election results. but courageous public servants, including republicans like rusty bowers held firm and refused to put donald trump over their oath to the constitution. when the pressure campaign did not achieve the results he wanted, he sought to transmit the false ballots to congress and the national archives. created by fake republican electors on december 14th. at the same time the actual certified electors in those states were meeting to cast their votes for president biden. by that point in time, election-related litigation was over in all or nearly all of these states, and trump campaign election lawyers realized that the fake slates were unjustifiable on any grounds and may be unlawful. in spite of these concerns and the concerns of individuals in the white house counsel's

office, president trump and others proceeded with this plan. the select committee has developed evidence these intentionally false documents were transmitted to multiple officers of the federal government, and were intended to interfere with the proper conduct of the joint session, the existence of so-called competing slates of electors would serve as a pretext for legitimate electoral votes to be rejected. president trump repeatedly attacked state and local officials who refused to do his bidding. as well as local elections workers who he baselessly accused of fraud. as republicany freeman and the testimony of other elections officials so powerfully demonstrated, the people who drew president trump's ire or were the subject of his lies faced real world consequences, including public harassment, and death threats. some of these elections workers and officials have been forced

to leave their homes. others have been forced to leave the jobs they loved. take a listen to ms. freeman's story. >> i won't even introduce myself by my name anymore. i get nervous when i bump into someone i know in the grocery store who says my name. i'm worried about who is listening. i get nervous when i have to give my name for food orders. i'm always concerned of who is around me. i've lost my name, and i've lost my reputation. >> treatment of miss freeman and her daughter, and so many others around the country was callous, inhuman, inexcuseable, and dangerous. and those responsible should be held accountable. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> gentleman yields back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mfor te opening statement. >> certainly one of the many important components of our federal government is the department of justice. it's the body that represents -- responsible for enforcing our laws and investigating criminal wrongdoing. for this reason it's the -- enforces federal laws without fear or favor. it is this critical function that president trump sought to corrupt. as he sought to use the department of justice to investigate and prosecute purported election fraud, and to help him convince the public that the election was stolen. the select committee has made the following findings with respect to the department of justice. in the weeks immediately

following the 2020 election, attorney general bill barr advised the department of justice had not seen any evidence to support trump's theory that the election was stolen by fraud, no evidence. over the course of the three meetings in this post election period, attorney general barr assured president trump the justice department was properly investigating claims of election fraud. he debunked numerous election fraud claims, many which the president would then go on to repeat publicly and made clear that president trump was doing "a great, great disservice to the country by pursuing them." after attorney general barr's resignation, president trump requested the acting leadership of the department, jeffrey rosen and richard donahue "just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the

republican congressmen." in other words, just tell a small lie to put the facade legitimacy on this lie and the republican congressmen and i can distort and create doubt ourselves. between december 23rd and january 3rd, president trump called or met with them nearly every day. and was told repeatedly the department investigation showed no factual support for trump's fraud allegations. mr. rosen and mr. donahue told him that the fraud claims were simply untrue. as mr. rosen and mr. donahue continued to resist, president trump then tried to install a loyalist named jeffrey clark to lead the department as acting attorney general. on several occasions clark met with the president, apparently along with representative scott perry, without authorization, promising to take the actions that barr, rosen and donahue refused to take.

in particular, mr. clark intended to send a letter that he had drafted with the help of a political appointee that the white house installed at doj with just weeks left in the administration. mr. clark intended to send the letter to officials in numerous states informing them falsely, of course, the department had identified significant concerns about the election results in the state and encouraging the state legislatures to come to special session to consider appointing trump rather than biden electors. and reaction to mr. clark's proposed letter. >> drafting letters without the knowledge of what the department had actually done in terms of investigations, that he was being reckless and i recall toward the end saying what you are proposing is nothing less than the united states justice department meddling in the outcome of the presidential

election. >> knowing leadership would not support the false election claims, president trump offered mr. clark the job of acting attorney general. in a dramatic january 3rd meeting in the oval office, rosen, donahue, white house counsel pat cipollone and eric herschmann objected to the appointment of mr. clark. mr. clark pleaded his case and offered to send the letter that he had drafted. the white house counsel called the letter a murder-suicide pact. numerous white house and other lawyers all threatened to resign if mr. clark was appointed. donald trump would be leading a graveyard. it was only after the threat of mass resignations that president trump rescinded his offer to mr. clark. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> gentleman yields back.

gentleman from california. >> former president trump's multi-part plan did not stop with the states or with the department of justice. it touched nearly every component of our federal system, ranging from the courts, to congress, to his own vice president mike pence. in the weeks before january 6th, mr. trump turned to the man who had served him loyally for four years. he embraced an illegal scheme proposed by john eastman and others who concocted an unfounded legal theory that the vice president could reject joe biden's electoral votes during the joint session. when vice president pence and many others, including trump's own lawyer, john eastman, told him incorrectly that former president trump spearheaded an unprecedented campaign to coerce him to do it anyway. ultimately, culminating in a

dangerous threat to mr. pence's life on january 6th. these are the select committee's findings with respect to the pressure campaign against the vice president. john eastman admitted in advance of the 2020 election that mike pence could not lawfully refuse to count official electoral votes. but he nevertheless devised a meritless proposal that deployed a combination of bogus election fraud claims and the fake electoral ballots to say that mike pence, presiding over the joint session, could reject legitimate electoral votes for president biden. still president trump accepted and repeated eastman's theory and used it to pressure the vice president to take unlawful action. in multiple heated conversations, president trump directly pressured vice president pence to adopt the eastman theory and reject the electors or send them back to

the state legislatures. the vice president consistently resisted and repeatedly told the president that he did not possess the authority to do what president trump directed. this culminated in an angry phone call on the morning of january 6th between president trump and vice president pence during which the former president repeatedly berated mr. pence by cursing and levelling threats. white house staffer nick luna was one of the many witnesses who heard the call as it happened. take a listen to his testimony. >> did you hear any part of the phone call, even if just the end the president was speaking from? >> i did, yes. >> all right. and what did you hear? >> so as i was dropping off the note, my memory, i remember hearing the word wimp, either he called him a wimp, i don't remember if he said you are a wimp, you'll be a wimp, wimp is the word i remember, something to the effect this is the wording is wrong, i made the

wrong decision 4 or 5 years ago. >> in the face of the vice president's resistance, the former president and others exerted both private and public pressure to change his mind. in a speech on the afternoon of january 6th, former president trump told the crowd that vice president pence needed the courage to do what he has to do. once the riot began, president trump deliberately chose to issue a tweet attacking mr. pence, knowing that the crowd had already grown violent. almost immediately thereafter, the crowd around the capitol surged and between 2:30 and 2:35 p.m. the metropolitan police line on the west side of the capitol broke. the first time in mpd history that a line like this had broken. rioters at the capitol were heard chanting "hang mike pence"

through the afternoon. as a result of this unrest, vice president pence was forced to flee to a secure location where he actively coordinated with law enforcement and other government officials to address the ongoing violence. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida, miss murphy, opening statement. >> thank you. ultimately president trump did not succeed in bending state and federal officials to his will. at every turn, state officials, the department of justice, mike pence, and many others stood up for the rule of law and resisted the president's wishes. in that way, our american institutions held after the 2020 election. but that did not stop president trump. instead, he turned to his supporters, those who believed his lies about a stolen election. he summoned a crowd to the nation's capitol on january 6th,

hoping that they would pressure congress to do what he could not do on his own. the select committee has made the following findings on this issue. two years ago today in the early morning hours of december 19th, donald trump sent a tweet urging his supporters to travel to washington for a protest on january 6th. be there, we'll be wild, he tweeted. between december 19th and january 6th, the president repeatedly encouraged his supporters to come to washington. the president's december 19th tweet galvanized domestic extremists, including members of the oath keepers, proud boys and organized militia groups. these individuals began organizing to come to the capitol in large numbers with the specific intent to use violence to disrupt the certification of the election during the joint session. prior to january 6th, fbi, secret service, u.s. capitol

police, d.c. government and other law enforcement agencies gathered substantial evidence suggesting the risk of violence at the capitol during the joint session. prior to january -- sorry. these included warnings like the following. their plan is to literally kill people, please, please take this tip seriously and investigate further. president trump supporters have proposed to occupy capitol hill. alert regarding the vp being a dead man walking if he does not do the right thing. and several other alerts saying they will storm the capitol if he does not do the right thing. in the days leading up to january 6th, president trump's advisors told him he should encourage his supporters to be peaceful that day, but he refused. one witness, hope hicks, provided the committee with records of her text messages on january 6th. in one exchange with another staffer, he texted her hey, i know you are seeing this, but

he, referring to president trump, really should tweet something about being nonviolent. i'm not there, hicks replied, i suggested it several times monday and tuesday and he refused. when miss hicks came in to provide testimony to the committee, we asked her about this exchange. her explanation is that the he in this text wasn't the president, but rather it was eric herschmann. take a listen to her testimony. >> when you wrote i suggested it several times and it presumably means that the president say something about being nonviolent, you wrote i suggested it several times monday and tuesday and he refused. tell us what happened. >> sure, i didn't speak to the president about this directly, but i communicated to people like eric herschmann that it was my view that it was important that the president put out some kind of message in advance of the event.

>> and what was mr. herschmann's response? >> mr. herschmann said he had made the same, you know, recommendation directly to the president, and that he had refused. >> so i understand, mr. herschmann said he had already recommended to the president that the president convey a message that people should be peaceful on january 6th and the president had refused to do that? >> yes. >> the public will be able to review this in the transcripts and see the perspective eric herschmann gave before we took her testimony. despite threats of violence by the crowd on january 6th, president trump gave an incendiary speech, declaring without basis the election had been stolen and encouraging his supporters to fight like hell. and during the speech and immediately thereafter, president trump stated his intention to travel to the capitol with his supporters in an effort to influence the joint

session. the select committee has developed evidence indicating that president trump did, in fact, intend to go to the capitol on the afternoon of january 6th, and that he repeatedly expressed that intention during the afternoon and in the days prior. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> recognizes the gentlewoman from virginia for opening statement. >> all of president trump's efforts came to a head on the afternoon of january 6th. standing on the stage, president trump told tens of thousands of angry supporters the election was stolen, that they had the power to change that if they marched to the capitol. and that they would not have a country anymore if the presidency was taken away from him. he told them he would be there with them. and then as the crowd descended on the capitol, president trump

watched it on television. despite pleas from his senior advisors, from lawmakers on the hill, and from his own children, president trump would not issue a public statement, instructing his supporters to disperse and leave the capitol. mr. trump's failure spanned the period from 1:10:0ten to over 4. as we have established through months of investigation, that is because the mob wanted what president trump wanted, to impede the peaceful transition of power. these are the select committee's findings about president trump's dereliction of duty. from the outset of