work for joe biden, bernie sanders. i'm like look, my values are not tied to any political candidates. my values when i was an operative were anchored by myself, what i believed and stood for. when we see what the january six committee is painted, there are a lot of people who have divert compromised their values or talk to them aside just to appease the ego of the former president. so what i think is important here is accountability. when i spoke with the chairman of the january 6th committee, bennie thompson in mississippi, in advance of the support coming out, the thing that he hammered home was the best way to prevent ten, or six from happening again is that there is accountability for january 6th. that means the justice department does to do their part, but as the report lays out as i was coming through it, staff, the committee looked up to the bar association with what to do with the

individual's names in this report. the bar associations across the country, local bar associations have to step up. local prosecutors have to step up the accountability piece is the piece here, and that is what folks will be looking for. >> we certainly will, symone thank you. if you are just joining us right now i'm stephanie ruhle. it is midnight on the east coast and i am on the west coast, we are continuing our breaking news coverage of the release of the january 6th committee's final report on the siege of the capital and donald trump's effort to change the results of the 2020 election. it was made public just over an hour ago, it totals 845 pages. what is the first passage all about? the big lie. with that, let's get smarter with a lead off panel, former you new york prosecutor in civil rights attorney charles coleman. pulitzer prize-winning reporter for -- an joyce vance, who spent 25 years as a federal prosecutor

and symone sanders-townsend still with us along with stuart stevens. charles, i turn to you first. i would normally want to talk about your jacket, you certainly came to party, but there is no party to be had tonight. this could not be more serious or more grave when you actually read all 845 pages and understand what happened on january 6th, what happened before leading up to it, and really cover-ups that went on after it. long after, even now. what is your take away? >> you know stephanie, even with the best with lighting the mood, what you said is on point. this report lays out what is unequivocally the most serious and egregious attack on american democracy that we are seeing in our entire lifetimes. you cannot compare anything that we have already seen to this. we cannot compare watergate, just this really was the beginning and the plot for what would've been a civil war, a small version on january 6th.

and that is laid out even in the first few pages of this document. from a legal standpoint, from a principled standpoint, it absolutely has to be taken seriously. it is not just an indictment on democracy, sorry an indictment on the republican party, it is as clear statement on how these people will go to any and many lengths to literally dismantle american democracy. and that is no laughing matter. >> katie, in 845-page report that is now sitting in the lap of the department of justice. jack smith, a report like this isn't like a pot potato that they now have to deal with or do they just get a winning lotto ticket? there are all sorts of details in this thing. >> i think based on -- in the summer over the election in the fall and now more recently the subpoena sent out to the fake electors plot i don't think that much of this information is new to the

special -- who have been working on this investigation that when working on the justice department itself. it creates a bit of a political problem for the justice department, they very much want to separate themselves from politics under the trump administration, the justice department was seen as a tool of politics as a weapon, as a weapon against trump's enemies. or trump would see the department as the enemy itself. it was highly politicized and i think that the department is trying to get away from the idea that it does things at the behest of politicians. and so in this way, this report is probably more of a problem for the justice department than it is something that gives the new avenues to investigate. a lot of these roads are already being watched by investigators. one thing that we hope to see is the committee out of the report is out finally transmit all of its transcripts and all of its information to the justice department and move it. it has refused to do that for a very long time. prosecutors need that information, they want to look at this transcript, and they

want to compare what people told the committee to what people vardy said before the grand jury and they want to use it to figure out whether or not they can start putting more people in for his interviews in the questions they might want to ask. >> is coming. that was capitol police officer harry message to donald trump, and that accountability is going to come from jack smith. charles, what is tonight like for jack smith? what is tomorrow like for jack smith as he is handed these 845 pages? >> well you know stephanie, i do not think that jacques misses under an enormous amount of pressure under what he's been under before. i think that jackson's is keenly aware of most of, if not all of everything that is going on and upon this report. it is important for viewers to remember and understand that there is already a doj investigation, an invest fbi investigation that is occurring on top of everything that has been occurring on the 16 committee on top of this report.

so he is keenly aware of everything that is at stake here, if anything the public merit has already put an enormous amount of pressure on him. he is aware that he is handling that, i think it does accelerate is clock slightly, but ultimately what was going to happen with jack smith as special prosecutor is still going to happen. i suspect that he will see indictment i do not necessarily know if all the criminal referrals will result in an indictment by the doj, or from jack smith position, it only further enables him to report in a matter that i suspect was already going to. so i do not know that this is going to put a huge amount of pressure on him that was not already there. but, from a public narrative perspective, he does have to be mindful of how he can control the narrative going forward because it is going to naturally increase questions, increase inquiries, and decrease peoples patients. >> joyce, you take us to jack smith, what he is looking at what he's taken from this report and where he's going from here? >> well, what smith will have folks coming with this report for us is to see if there are

any gaps in the doj's investigation. typically, doj is out in front of anyone else who is looking at a scenario where doj is running a criminal investigation, but it was apparent early on that doj is not ahead of the house committee in that they were surfacing witnesses earlier. so now it is an exercise of due diligence, and maybe a point of pride for the doj investigators just to make sure that they have fill that gap and there is nothing that the committee has that they do not have. the committee has been awfully meticulous in documenting its work. we have talked about that a little bit earlier, staff, and so not only does doj have, in many, ways the early in that the committee has in talking to witnesses. doj also has an obligation to scrutinize every transcript for every witness that it might consider using in its prosecutions. federal prosecutors have an obligation to turn over any

material to defendants that could tend to be exposed qatari information that might be something a defendant could used to argue that they are not guilty. it is something -- a very serious legal obligation prosecutors must comply the failure to do that can have very negative consequences, including dismissal of a criminal prosecution. so one of the most important things that they will be doing will be looking through these transcripts, every witnesses trans -- to see if there is anything that any of the witnesses said that are arguably exculpatory. that is something that they would have to do to assess whether they have got sufficient evidence to move forward. >> simone, i want to talk about what this does politically to donald trump within his own party. i'm thinking back to when he is in office. when i used to talk to hope hicks or jared, or jared's guy of the, after they will be a humiliating thing or scandal with trump. they would all say nothing and just hope that the news cycle

would move on and people would forget. but now this is all laid out in many cases, in their own words. i want to read something to you, it is a bit long. it's page 612. trump's rhetoric, and these are the reactions from trump's own team. some of the closest people on his team. trump's rhetoric killed someone. a member of the speech writing team, patrick mcdonald, conceded the next day in that text. maybe the rhetoric could -- as the riot was in full throttle, even steadfast supporter ali alexander of stop the steal, texted this. potus is not ignorant for what his words will do. quote, we all look like domestic terrorists now. hope hicks texted julie referred, text separately hicks texted herschmann. so predictable and so sad. this is hope hicks, one of donald trump's closest confidants, she left the white house and came back in the. and herschmann response, i know. tragic.

i am so upset. every thing that we worked for, wiped away, she continued. that is hope. i agree, totally self inflicted, he wrote. that is freshman. brad parscale, trump's former campaign manager texted katrina pierson, she was an adviser, and campaign surrogate for trump. he texted her at 7:21 p.m. on january 6th, saying the days events were the result of a, quote, sitting president asking for a civil war. quote, this week i feel guilty for helping him win. a woman is dead, mask all added. you do realize this was going to happen, pierson answered. quote, yes if i was trump into my rhetoric, he said, it was not the rhetoric she, she said. her scalp replies, yes it was. six symone people can try to say all day and every day that

this is partisan, this is democrats putting this. every word i just said blaming, indicting, pointing the finger at donald trump showing regret for siding with him, why are trump's closest people. whole picks, katrina pierson, brad parscale, that is a trifecta of trump human shield for their. >> it truly is and i would hope that people would, first of all, get to the 600 plus stage to be able to read that. i hope folks that are watching would click this and send this around and that it could change the mind and belief of some republicans and folks that are still with donald trump out there. but the reality is, it will not. the why go back to the point of accountability. accountability is the only thing that it is going to demonstrate to folks, that the then lead up to and happened on and thereafter january 6th are not okay. and without that accountability

i do think that it is just a hope and a prayer that everybody turns away from president trump. i would just say this, i always talk about looking at the base. it is important to look at the base of support that president trump has, and those folks have not turned away from. they are still with him. that is why you do not see more republican elected officials speaking out. some folks went to jail, some people lost their jobs, if some people were expelled from congress for aiding and abetting instruction, i think that people would start seeing a different tune in might start to pay attention. but those are uncomfortable conversations that i think we need to have. can i just say something about what katie was saying and all the very fabulous federal prosecutors here. in my conversation with chairman kim thompson, he specifically said that the january 6th committee found people and opposed people that the department of justice had not, could not find. that they had not gotten testimony from. since then, we now know that jack smith, special counsel, had sent a letter to the

chairman and the chairman says that they -- handing over the documents. if the department of justice would like to speak to anyone else, speak to anyone on the committee or need their help finding anyone, they are happy to do so. so, we do not know what is going to happen with jack smith, but i do think that the information is in fact there. >> charles, take us to a court of law. we always hear that intent is very difficult to prove and so here we have some of trump. closest advisers blaming him, saying it was his rhetoric. we knew this was going to happen. so sad, so predictable. >> you know stephanie, one of the things that i have been saying ever since the 16 committee -- and the public hearings began is that they have done a masterful job of communicating to the public and everyone else who's been watching exactly what trump knew exactly what he did after that. there's a good evidence of that from a legal standpoint is that it closes the door on the question of intent.

when you do not have a completed action, when you are trying a case that deals with -- meaning that the final angle is not completed and you are talking about the attempt of a crime, the interim becomes paramount to establish because you need to be able to establish beyond a reasonable doubt what is it that this person intended to do. oftentimes intent is one of the more difficult aspects of proving a crime. in this case, because you have so many different people who have been on record proving trans to grips, text messages, and testified about the fact that donald trump, literally acknowledged openly that he lost, and he knew he lost, and yet he proceeded on with what he knew was going to be an event where people were armed, he egged him on, he told them that they were going to the capital. he told them that we were going to put pressure on mike pence to do the right thing. it is very clear that his intent was not to disrupt the election and overturn it, but that he knew that he lost.

that is something that is a really important part of the entire work of the committee, they were not able to prove direct connection between trump but what they can trump is that through his intention, through his knowledge and notice, he orchestrated this entire plot and that he is the one who is behind it all. >> choice, we keep hearing the phase a dereliction of duty. is it a dereliction of duty, though, on the part of the military or law enforcement if the commander-in-chief is the one telling you do not to do anything? >> it is a complicated question was a lot of moving parts. obviously, when we talk about dereliction of duty we think about trump's failure to have fidelity to -- the hundred and 87 minutes where he sat and did nothing while he could've been in the unique position to call of what was going on at the capitol and

prevent any further loss of life and permits the certification of the election to proceed. so, primary responsibility sets with the commander and chief. but the question that you asked, stephanie, is essentially one of whether people should have gone out side of their chain of command to protest what they saw as january 1st, rather january 6th grew closer. one of the most interesting aspect of the information that we are seeing set forth in the report is precisely how much information had filtered to federal law enforcement and the military in advance of january six. there is a paragraph for the committee reaches the conclusion that there was sufficient information that the president, or someone in the white house, should have called off the speech on the -- show defended all of the day's activities. that suggests to some extent

that the secret service should have played a greater role here in advising the president that he could not engage in these activities, that they were risky to him. there should have been a more fulsome assessment of the risk on capitol hill. of course, the district of columbia, where those lines are very unclear. it is not like being in a state where there are clear lines of authority. here you have to think about who has command over different aspects of the federal government when you are in a territory that is the district of columbia's territory. essentially, what we see in appendix two to the report, it is very much a group of people who are giving conflicting orders. no one seems to be aware of who is in charge, perhaps nobody wants to be in charge. there is some suggestion that doj was going to take the lead here. the military really did not want to be perceived as being involved in taking charge here. there is a good reason for that, there has been some suggestion

filtering out into the public that trump was thinking about using the military to stay in power at this point. there is a decided to point at the doj that says we really shouldn't appear publicly to be taking charge, and the expectation was that doj would play a greater role than they did. at doj, the leadership that morning was saying things like, you're going to hope for the best and be prepared for the worst. but even in early morning the intelligence they were getting from the head of the national security division was that they did not things to get out of hand. so obviously, there is a failure and how that intelligence is filtered and whether people should have stood up independently and perhaps elevated directly to the president and to the white house the need to change course. >> simone, members of congress being embarrassed does not bother them. in two weeks when jim jordan is

on judiciary committee it will not bother him that he ignored subpoenas from congress when he was subpoenaed. so, will there be any sort of consequences within congress for any of these members that are named in the report, because just getting called out and embarrassed, that does not matter. >> so, i will say this, to my understanding members of the january six committee believes there should be consequences. the reason that what we see in the report is referrals to the ethics committee and nothing stronger is because the committee members could not come to a consensus on what to recommend other than that. they make recommendations unanimously. they also felt that the law was silent and a little murky if it is a criminal referral for example to the department of justice by the department of justice could take up. the ethics committee is 50/50 for folks out there who do not know that. it is equal number of democrats and republicans and it will be that in the next congress and

the ethics committee members all also swear an oath. they take this seriously it is a big girl big boy big people committee. the question is what is the ethics committee going to do. he did not note that he heard anything new from the ethics committee, he feels that they should be held accountable but now the ball is in their court. >> an ethics violation, symone, it does not do much. before we go to break, katie, give us a timeline update. i don't know we do not know anything firm, but we knew there is a deadline to this report. now that we move to the department of justice phase, any insight there into where we are going? >> they're gonna be scouring transcripts first and foremost, and they're going to be wanting compare again what people told the grand jury versus what people told, congress and they're going to want to see if there is anything that could be used against their own case. keep in mind, jack smith is a very skilled prosecutor and he moves really fast.

he is very thorough, and one of the ways that he operates is constantly thinking what information the defense has. what information do we have that helps the defense. we have not seen the full transcript of all the witnesses, and we know that from the reportings that some of these witnesses were not willing to go so far to say that they thought donald trump committed a crime. only that they thought what he did was wrong. so it's going to move fast, but the january 6th case is the far more complicated case for him. i do not think it is going to be resolved anytime soon. instead, i think what we should do is look at a report as a looking into the future of if donald trump would win again, sort of demanded make on them, and the sorts of pressure is that he would bring to bear if you were in office. for smith, this piece is the thorniest piece. it's going to take a little bit longer, i think if we see any prosecution it would come out of the mar-a-lago case, which is a little bit more straightforward. >> wow. despite all that is in these

845 pages, if we see any prosecution it is likely going to be in a completely separate and unrelated case about the documents that trump potentially illegally took to his house in florida. katie bennett, symone sanders-townsend gwen, i charles coleman -- i'm going to read you one passage. i'm guessing those who have not gone to page 600. and the president did not, by any account, express grief or regret for what happened at the capitol. neither did he appear to grasp the gravity of what he had set in motion. and his last phone call of the night, the president spoke with johnny mcentee, the director of personnel. it is a crazy day, the president told him. mcentee said that his tone was one of, wow, i cannot believe this. did he express sadness over the violence of the capitol? no, mcentee said. i believe he was shocked by it,

it getting a little out of control, but i do not remember sadness specifically. that was his director of personnel. think about those words as we go to break and you are looking at images of the u.s. capital being terrorized on january 6th. our special coverage continues just after this break, please do not go anywhere. anywhere i love what downy does for my sheets and towels. but did you know downy provides 7 benefits for your clothes, like making them softer and fresher. plus, downy fights fading and stretching. make your laundry softer, fresher, and look newer longer.

♪♪ over the last 100 years, lincoln's witnessed a good bit of history. even made some themselves. makes you wonder... what will they do for an encore? ♪♪ ♪limu emu & doug♪ it's nice to unwind after a long week of telling people how liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. showtime. whoo! i'm on fire tonight. (limu squawks) yes! limu, you're a natural. we're not counting that. only pay for what you need.

♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪

"puss in boots" has been nominated only pay for what you need. for best animated movie of the year. ha! ha! and it takes the "shrek" franchise to exciting new places. i am on my last life. it will strike a chord with movie goers of all ages. when you only have one life, that's what makes it special. rated pg. only in theaters. listen to me, we both know that

after six years of donald trump, if there's one thing that he is doing its watching cable news especially when his name in the headlines. what you want to time tonight? >> accountability is coming. that is it. accountability is coming. >> accountability is coming, donald trump. you heard it from officer harry dunn who, unlike you, has a job with the u.s. government and he's going to work tomorrow. >> that is just some of what we heard from officer harry dunn a short time ago. we are still working our way through the january six committee report in realtime, 845 pages to go through it. some of the best reporters and analysts out there are just doing that. i want to bring in the justice

department for -- scott wong, senior congressional reporter, and harry lippman, former u.s. attorney and former deputy attorney general. harry, i know that you have a lot to say. what is your biggest take away? the doj they've got to be looking at this thing with the same eyes that you are. >> i think that is right. and look, i think that is what the committee has in mind. we have these eight pristine set pieces that they presented to the american people, and i think that they continually decided that if they did not have it, solo to not included. this, the difference between the hundred and 60 page executive summary, and the 800 pages i think as intended for two audiences. one, history, like the 9/11 report. it will go on library shelves. we will not read it covering cover but they'll have a comprehensive view. second, the department of justice. there is all kinds of stuff in here, staff. sort of wispy, different trails

that they do not stitch up completely, but that are about mark meadows and his many context to the electors. roger stone, that is exactly the kind of stuff to give over to the doj. katie banners point last time was very, right when you are a prosecutor and you get two things to compare, you have got a lot to go on when you interview. as joy says, if one of it is exculpatory, you have to let the defense know. but having this extra stuff, including a lot of material that they did not have in the first instance, really gives the doj a lot to work with even if it is material that the committee did not feel comfortable about presenting to the american people in a tie. >> let's stay on that name, can't -- that is a name people are not necessarily familiar with until now. until it is now is all about john eastman, people believe he was the architect of the whole fake electors scheme.

but the way it is laid out in the report, what it really sounds like is that eastman was the front man who communicated with trump but the actual architect of this big, most likely illegal scheme, was chesbrough. if that is the case what are the consequences for him look like? i have to tell you, when you said this is important for the history books, that just does not feel like enough. >> okay. what -- first of all, whatever eastman is looking at, chaz burrow is looking at. if you could call it this for such a harebrained scheme, he is the brains behind their job and it really is him that comes up with these crazy theories about phony electors and alike. so he is in the same hot water, maybe even a little hotter as a matter of conspiracy law then is eastman. that is serious stuff and it is a little interesting that the committee did not really

fronted in the way that they did with eastman. i think that is because they had eastman more solid from the opinion of a federal judge, seeing to let him out. chaz burrow absolutely is of an equal rank and guild for exactly the same reasons as eastman. >> but potentially guilty of what? , what does hot water look like? to me, looking like a bad guy in the history books, who cares? darth vader. if you have an ethics violation, again, no big deal. what is hot water? >> defrauding the united states, 18 usc, ten years or more. a scheme to actually defraud the people and the country of the rightful election and the peaceful transfer of power. does that do it for you? >> it most certainly does. ryan, what is your take away from this report? >> you know one thing i've been

focused on is the components about the law enforcement failures that we saw on the lead up to january six, and i think that is something that the committee tried to shield away from a bit, frankly in this report. they did a lot of that to essentially pivot when they talk about law enforcement failure, they talk about how is a unique situation and it could not have anticipated what don trump said that day. but if you look at the original summit of the january six, committee it was formed on, that was supposed to be a central part of what they investigated here. there is some new revelation there that we are relegated to the appendix of this report, but it really is, for something that was considered the biggest law enforcement failure intelligence failure since 9/11, it really does get put on the backburner here. this comes at a time when the justice department, the fbi specifically, is about to receive half a billion or more per year specifically for the purpose as congress says of

investigating domestic terrorism. they don't really have deep insight into what went wrong, despite all of these red flags that were going up all over the place. i just reported this week about an fbi informant who on the very day that donald trump said that tweet, told the fbi that the far-right was seeing this as a call to arms. and yet, it does not seem like until the day before january 6th, on january 5th, that they actually put together a -- a sort of all the threats that they received around this time. it really just seems like there are a lot of missed signals here and the report sort of goes out of its way to dismiss a lot of those. you can almost see the edges that came in afterwards, because when the blue team, which was assigned to do this, had their decision that their chapter would be left on the cutting room floor, they worked in a lot more of these and it's that were coming from the leadership of the committee. if there is one thing that

worked at the very end, one of these lines were said that the -- this was the conclusion of the appendix on the law enforcement section, is that the defense against this sort of situation will come not from law enforcement, but from active citizenry. that just really seemed, like it almost sounds like an eighth grade social studies paper that was trying to make these general platitudes instead of talking about the real law enforcement failures that we saw that day. when you're talking about -- he would think that you would want to hold on to that idea and inform about the law enforcement failure and believe they're smart enough to hold two ideas in their head at once. those ideas being that donald trump did these extreme things in the lead up to january 6th, and they want to make the point that they did a lot of things wrong. and also that there are major law and, for some villas that

those. two things can be true at once and this report does not seem to believe that the american people had walk into gum at the same time. >> no, but it is also a reminder of what we're talking about yesterday. the irs, they do not do their job. there are so many other, when it was agencies during the trump administration, senior report teased by don, trump over and over we would hear that they did not do their job. the question is why? the pattern, and the pattern takes you back to donald j trump. it's got, in the last hour, you walked us through the committees recommendations. i want you to do that again for us because what is important to remember is that we are a week plus away from nick divided government, so where these recommendations are going to go, it is unclear. walk us through. >> that is right. >> this is page 69. >> -- in just a couple weeks here, having won in the midterm elections. however, the congress, as we

talked earlier stephanie, as part of this government funding package, it has inserted a provision in there specifically in response to the january 6th attack. it is a reform to the electoral count act of 1887 that would make it more clear that the vice president's role in the certification of electoral votes would count the votes, not to step in and say i think this person should be the president of the united states, that is what we heard from donald trump and his team, that they believe. the vice president had this awesome authority to pick and choose a president, well we know that certainly is not the case. congress wanted to make clear, in very certain terms, that the vice president did not have that authority. the january six panel also has several other recommendations at the end

-- -- of this report and remember they were charged with coming up with some legislative recommendations. they wanted congressional committees to examine whether to create a formal mechanism to evaluate former president trump and other individuals or specifically named in this report should be able to hold future office, or be banned from future office under the 14th amendment. another provision or recommendation calls for designating january 6th the certification of future presidential elections that happen every four years, in the congress. to designate that event as a national security event. what that work would require is more planning, more coordination, among law enforcement agencies. similar to inaugurations which are very orchestrated, well thought out events with massive

security. we can certainly expect that future january 6th certification then, that will happen every four years. will be much, much more secure, more on par with what we have seen had inaugurations and those types of events. >> before we go to break, brian, i want to ask you what has still not been released from the committee. the washington post reported this. quote, many close observers from the january six committee are still looking for the testimony transcripts, particularly with key white house advisers and campaign aides. transcripts of the most marquee names still unreleased. why is that? >> it's a good question. i think that some of those are rolling out, putting out a little drops today. they are also selective about what ones they chose to put out, transcripts from certain individuals. cassidy hutchinson, for example, as we all know her famous

testimony and she made that very serious and grave decision to come forward and tell the truth about what happened. but, they did not release the first transcripts that she did before she switched lawyers and there might be a few reasons for that, as many experts have commentary, her lawyer might be in some potential jeopardy there. releasing those transcripts might complicate potentially any efforts to hold that lawyer accountable if, indeed, that lawyer was trying to obstruct her testimony in some way or tell her to lie. so that is one of the reasons why they held their testimony back, for example. this idea of law enforcement sensitivity to hold back any reports that might be about some of the failures of law enforcement that day. that is an easy sort of out for, them in terms of being able to say that this is lost insensitive. so there are a lot of reasons, but i do think in the coming days will get more information and board transfers to come out

of. that >> hold on. they're yelling at me to go to break, but i can't, because harry explained to me law enforcement sensitive. why can't the american people be okay with that? we are the taxpayers, we are the ones who should deeply understand what our law enforcement does and does not do. why is there insensitivity to protect them if it is about their failures? >> you are right. i don't think there is. i think they're going to release it all. the idea might be that if you are somehow revealing compromising investigations, et cetera. i do not think that will happen. i think they're kind of teasing us and choreographing it. i want to see ornado, caitlin mcenany, and ivanka trump, this three people that said were less than candid. but i think they are just feeding it to us in a way to keep us just a little bit hungry. >> they couldn't recall. ryan riley, scott wang, we are only letting you go because you absolutely have to go to sleep because tomorrow you are going to have a full day of

reporting. harry lippman, no such luck for you. you are sticking around. more of our coverage of the january six report after this break. them eabrk. them

when you're through with powering through, it's time for theraflu hot liquid medicine. powerful relief so you can restore and recover. theraflu hot beats cold. we are still breaking down the

final report from the january six committee. so let's bring in my colleague john allen, senior national reporter for nbc, and are my dear friend david -- and former member of the house

of representatives. he is now the chairman in the serve america movement and msnbc political contributor. david, you said that this report made clear how trump betrayed this country. you've also been saying that for six years. what are your biggest takeaways and as this reporter change anything? >> yeah, as everyone is said, it is now a record for history. i do find it compelling that the committee led their narrative was the fact that this is a betrayal of the nation and not pointing the finger first at trump, but in bringing out testimony at one of the defendants who is a member of the proud boys to acknowledge that he felt like he had betrayed the nation. that is and followed up by the testimony of a marine who is facing conviction who said, my entire family has been a part of the marine corps and today i am embarrassed by my actions of betraying the nation. once that predicate is laid, the committee then assigned

culpability to donald trump. to say that it was all done in his, name it was down with his malice, his forethought, and ultimately done with the -- necessary to bring a criminal conviction for incitement of insurrection. it is a powerful narrative, i do not know there is a lot of new formation in terms of the four corners of our prosecution might, happen but it is clear for all of history that donald trump decided to incite an insurrection, and he did incite that insurrection, but nearly pulled off a full betrayal of the nation if only in his heart could've actually happened should have been successful. >> what more would need to have happened for this to have rise to the level of a criminal indictment? david? >> this is an interesting question, stephanie, because within the four corners of the law, this is clear that donald trump violated the spirit of the law. he clearly intended to lay out a predicate of misinformation to seize on that and stop the

certification of the election. that is incitement of an insurrection. the prosecutors have to determine if they can get a conviction under the letter of the law. what could have happened, what if they had gotten to mike pence that day? what have they done that? what if they toppled security in the senate chamber or the capital, what would've happened? what we have had martial law? well, we know from the committee's work is that donald trump would not have allowed the national guard to respond. he said that he is going into late now the magnetometer is because they are my people. he was on the side of the insurrection that day. he wanted to succeed, fortunately it did not, but he is guilty as charged for wanting to topple the republic on january six. >> john, what was your biggest take away? >> well not only did former president trump want the insurrection to succeed, the whole point was that all of this activity after the election was to get to that place where joe biden would not

be certified by the congress. it was not just this one isolated incident, i think that is what the committee had spent all these months, about 18 months looking at. if we can zoom out, it is important remember that the congress and the house of representatives, you teach trump for incitement of insurrection, and they spent two years in painstaking detail this 800 page report exactly why it did not -- what he did to earn that impeachment. i think there are a lot of people who are looking at what's going on and what effect there's gonna be had. the answer that is that obviously has been very politically damaging to trump, if you look at his poll numbers, the republicans they, have fallen away. in addition to that, obviously putting them in greater legal jeopardy is politically damaging as well. potentially damaging to his ability to remain free. >> he was impeached, and what

did he do? he kept pushing the big lie and raising hundreds of millions of dollars off of it. does any of what's in this report change things for those continued election deniers? i want to point to page, i do not know where pages looking at. one 88, david, where hope hicks is talking about a phone call that donald trump is on the phone with sydney powell on speakerphone. paul is going on and on about her conspiracy theories, she's talking hugo chavez. trump needed sir, the president muted her speakerphone and laughed at, powell telling others in the room, this does sound crazy doesn't it? this is from hope hicks testimony. does the spirit of any of this get to the hard-core election deniers, that donald trump himself would listen to sydney powell's antics and then tell his crew, this is crazy? >> yeah, listen stephanie, i am so glad to bring this up.

if you think about this in a forward thinking, lens liz cheney's forward thinking lens is to not let donald trump return to power. i think there is a broader theme, here and you seize on it perfectly with your question, and is this. this is a story about the danger of lies and conspiracies in american politics and the ability to manipulate voters, and sometimes i suppose viewers, with misinformation and with malice and the deadly consequences of succeeding with those lies and conspiracy theories. here's why it's important. it is not just about donald trump returning to power. when -- a house leadership declares last week that joe biden is compromised, that is the beginning of a lie and conspiracy theory that can be have deadly complex commences. that is perhaps the greatest -- the danger of lies and conspiracies. for my former republican colleagues who are about to embark on some of the craziest, wildest conspiracy theory investigations you could ever

do in the house of representatives look at what it turns into in the case of january 6th. >> pushing the craziest, wildest conspiracy theories. i hope parents are watching who are seniors in high school, who are under an enormous amount of pressure to get in college. i want to remember, -- went to harvard. thank you both so much. we are going to be back, we're gonna come back with the most important profile in courage. in spite of some of the worst sort circumstances, a woman who showed true patriotism and continues to to this day. when our breaking news coverage continues. continues. thankfully, we also have tide ultra-oxi with odor eliminators. between stains and odors, it can handle double trouble. for the #1 stain fighter and odor remover, it's got to be tide. detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is for some adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment

or replacing their current hiv-1 regimen. detect this: no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. research shows people who take hiv treatment as prescribed and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit hiv through sex. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you take dofetilide. taking dovato with dofetilide can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. hepatitis b can become harder to treat while on dovato. don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor, as your hepatitis b may worsen or become life-threatening. serious or life-threatening side effects can occur, including allergic reactions, lactic acid buildup, and liver problems. if you have a rash or other allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are, may be, or plan to be pregnant.

dovato may harm your unborn baby. use effective birth control while on dovato. do not breastfeed while taking dovato. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. even before the late night

release of january six committee's final report, the panel made big news by releasing the transcript of its interview with former trump white house aide, 26 year old cassidy hutchinson. you will remember, she revealed shocking details during a hearing over the summer. in the transcript of her closed-door interview in september, she told pownal her lawyer allegedly tried to influence her testimony. -- cool stuff in pasadena, you are looking at him in the right hand of the scream, his fees were paid by, guess who? trump allies. hutchinson testified that as she prepared for her first interview with investigators earlier this year, passantino told her, quote, the less you remember the better. keep your answers short, sweet, and simple.

and, i do not want to perjury yourself, but i don't recall isn't perjury. they do not know what you can and can't recall. so, given all of that enormous pressure, this 26-year-old woman who is part of the trump administration, what did she do? she did something very, very few others did. she did what was right. as nbc news put it earlier today, quote, cassidy hutchinson knew she was going to be nuked for turning on trump. she did it anyway. a reminder of her courage and her bravery in the face of threats, pressure, and attacks from the right. the former junior white house aide, a girl from new jersey, showed absolute and true patriotism. for a party that claims to be the one of patriots, cassidy hutchinson is the real deal. and on that note, we will allow miss cassidy hutchinson to take

us off the air tonight. i wish you all a very good and very safe night, thank you for joining us with this breaking news coverage. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thank you for staying up late for a special breaking news coverage. i will see you at the end of today. today. psoriasis really messes with you. try. hope. fail. no one should suffer like that. i started cosentyx®. five years clear. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infection, some serious and a lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reaction may occur. best move i've ever made. ask your dermatologist about cosentyx®. andrew weizmann and daniel

goldman are with us. they were scheduled to be our first guest tonight, they have