cassidy hutchison. the white house aide who testified to the january 6th committee about what she saw happen, inside of the lighthouse, before, during, and after, january 6th. today, we learned that the similarities between butterfield, and hutchison is the accident. we see the release transcript of her closed-door testimony, before the january six committee. this is what she said about how she ultimately, made the decision to testify before the public. quote, i start to google watergate. there must be somebody that participated in watergate, that either had a similar job to me, and had exposure. how did they handle this? i did not know that much about watergate, but then, i came across this man named alex butterfield. it looked as if he had a similar role, and title, to what i had in the white house. i found that he, a couple of years ago, worked on this book with bob woodward. i ordered two copies. i read it three times. he had talked about how he fought the moral struggle, where he felt like he still

and cassidy hutchison said i did not take this as sarcasm. pamela, of course peter navarro has been indicted for not complying with the committee's subpoenas. but as these transcripts trickle out here as we are expected throughout the week, there are a lot of crucial new details in here that we might not have seen before. >> yeah. it is just remarkable that a top administration official like peter navarro will be giving credence to qanon, and these ridiculous conspiracy theories. we are also learning more about what former white house deputy press secretary john deere told the committee, and rumors that he heard about the former president conceding during the week after the 2020 election, what do you know? >> yeah. john deere told the committee that he really heard this all is gossip from his white house colleagues. still, it was the week after the 2020 election, he heard from him that trump in fact was considering conceding, and even inviting the bidens to the white house. so judge there said that he was looked in on these conversations, bec

you know, and if cassidy hutchison -- if he listened to cassidy hutchison's advice and didn't go through with some of the things, he maybe should send her a christmas card and thank you for that. it will be an interesting -- it will be an interesting choice, though, for the committee. because they have referred meadows once, on his failure to comply with the subpoena. and the justice department did not prosecute that case. if they refer him a second time on different -- on different allegations, i'm sure that will be a consider for the committee. that, you know, we tried once, justice rejected it. should we try again with these different allegations against the same individual. you know, i'm sure that will be a topic that comes up this sunday when the committee discusses this matter. because it is a fair question. >> john, you know, these names, clark, eastman, rudy, and meadows are interesting, but they're also known to already be, in one way or another, under scrutiny for their conduct on that day. i wonder about people that in the final public hearing, they made clear, had lied to the

, their start witness, and the lawyer was steffen passinino, who was representing cassidy hutchison, getting payments through an llc that he set up to represent her and other witnesses and so that she, right before she was about to give her public testimony that was very damaging to donald trump, she changed lawyers. there was a big mystery around this. and now there is a he said/she said happening of what happens. the committee is saying that she did say a client did tell them that the lawyer was advising her that she should testify, she couldn't recall certain things, that there were certain things she was going to say that could cast a bad light on donald trump, and she was saying that the lawyer told her, we don't want to go there, we don't want to talk about this. so those are some really accusations that the committee is levying. now, he did release a statement to cnn about what happened here. he said, i represented ms. hutchison honorably, ethically, and fully consistent with her sole interest as she communicated them to me. i believe she was being truthful and cooperative wit

cassidy hutchison goes there and i said, if i do remember things. but not every little detail that i said. wouldn't i be perjuring myself? and he had said, stephen had said something effective. the committee doesn't know what you can and can't recall. so you want to be able to use that as much as we can, unless you really really remember something clearly. and that is where you give a short, sweet response. the correct answer to that question. if i do remember things, but not every little detail wouldn't i be perjuring myself? the correct answer to that question is yes. you would be perjuring yourself. stefan passantino lied to his client about that. if cassidy hutchinson's testimony. if cassidy hutchinson who had never -- and cannot afford a lawyer. had been offered this free lawyer from what she called -- it cassidy hutchinson's the mid to remain under the control of that they are paid by donald trump. she would have -- of the testimony. is now the basis of the committees criminal referral of a former president united states. for prosecution by th

the part that was really a page turner for me was listening to cassidy hutchison talk about, quote, trumprump world where the only attorneys who came and offered her basically free representation if she didn't have the hundreds and thousands of dollars that it takes to hire a good attorney to represent or in these hearings. she looked, she looked, she looked, finally she had to go against her instincts and sign up with attorneys who represented trump world. and they came and did everything they could to make her say i don't recall, i don't recall, i don't recall. and limit her testimony to the most innocuous types of things that she struggled and struggled with her own conscience until she finally astonishingly back door to her own attorney and gave information to the committee and then ultimately fired the attorneys from trump world who have been trying to arrange jobs for her and such. and as soon as she did, that everything on that front went silent. i mean, it was a real exposÉ of what trump world was doing to try to keep witnesses in line. >> let me follow up on that, because i total

the part that was really a page turner for me was listening to cassidy hutchison talk about, quote, trumphow trump world where the only attorneys who came and offered her basically free representation if she didn't have the hundreds and thousands of dollars that it takes to hire a good attorney to represent or in these hearings. she looked, she looked, she looked, finally she had to go against her instincts and sign up with attorneys who represented trump world. and they came and did everything they could to make her say i don't recall, i don't recall, i don't recall. and limit her testimony to the most innocuous types of things that she struggled and struggled with her own conscience until she finally astonishingly back door to her own attorney and gave information to the committee and then ultimately fired the attorneys from trump world who have been trying to arrange jobs for her and such. and as soon as she did, that everything on that front went silent. i mean, it was a real exposÉ of what trump world was doing to try to keep witnesses in line. >> let me follow up on that, because i

the latest documents include former white house aide cassidy hutchison's testimony.f burning documents in his fireplace about a dozen times. politico previously reported that meadows burned papers in his office after a meeting with republican congressman scott perry, working to challenge the 2020 election results. the committee also released the transcript of former labor secretary eugene scalia. according to his transcript, scalia told the committee he called former attorney general bill barr shortly after the january 6th capitol attack and barr advised him to resign from the trump administration. barr himself stepped down from his post december 2020. joining us now, nbc news justice reporter ryan riley. good morning. we know the doj is investigating former -- the former president's 9 handling of those documents he took to mar-a-lago. do you foresee them also looking into mark meadow's burning papers as well? >> this is kind of an unexplored area of the law. something not, certainly frowned upon and not supposed to be done. all of these records preserved under the p

in particular, the cassidy hutchison testimony where members of the secret service refuted major aspectshe had to share including her recollection of the explosive incident inside the presidential motorcade the day of the insurrection where the former president demanded to be taken up here to the capitol. we know since the testimony, the committee has spoken to two members of the secret service who have been involved. bobby engel and tony ornato. it was ornato who she said told her that story. does the committee reveal any information on that? that's going to be an important thing to look for. then the specific evidence they believe they've collected that they're going to hand over to the department of justice. we've talked a lot about how these recommend days really carry no legal weight. this is just member of congress asking the department of justice to look into it. what kind of evidence do they have to support that. that's what prosecutors are going to be most interested in. >> we're seeing capitol hill police officers attending the hearing, this meeting, we're not supposed to be ca

a team of investigators and nine members of congress. >> we have these new transcripts from cassidy hutchison's testimony, she is pretty clearly describing an attempt to influence her ahead of the deposition. i said if i do recall something, but not every detail, can i still say i don't recall. and he said yes. during her testimony in the actual hearing, hutchison insists passintino never told her to lie but clearly told her not to respond to the committee's questions here. what's your reaction? >> that is a little bit of a fuzzy line. a lawyer certainly cannot tell a client to lie. it would be unwise counsel to say just always say you don't recall, never give proof otherwise. and telling her things, if you don't have a full recollection, it's fine to say you don't recall, that's okay. from the other public report i've seen, if he's saying thing like it will be better if you didn't recall, things will go well for you, if you avoid these areas, that's pretty questionable, and that's probably crossing the line. but it's hard to make a case against a lawyer for obstruction without knowing more. bu

cassidy hutchison, for example. marc short, the vice president's aide. these people had critical information that goes to some of those potential charges that the committee has referred to d.o.j. but the first people to really crack open that information were the congressional committee, not an fbi agent at the instruction of a department of justice prosecutor. >> carol, why wasn't it? >> i hope to answer that question in more detail in the future. >> i'm sure you're working on that. thank you. chuck rosenberg, i know you're sticking around with us. >>> joining us is congressman jamie raskin of the january 6th select committee. let's talk about the legal case that you believe you have or the d.o.j. might have for connecting donald trump to insurrection, or inciting insurrection. i want to put up a graphic about donald trump, a tweet he sent, 2:24, on that day, evidence shows that 2:24 p.m., the tweet immediately precipitated further violence at the capitol. this is a tweet about vice president pence. immediately after this tweet, the crowds both inside a

. >> and it's revealed that former white house aide cassidy hutchison said she saw mark meadows burning documents in his office about a dozen times. she also told the committee there were several discussions in the white house involving qanon conspiracies. >> and russian forces have killed thousands of ukrainian forces. on tuesday they destroyed a maternity ward in kherson fortunately after doctors delivered two babies. fortunately no one was killed in the attack. >> a woman from buffalo, new york jumps into action and uses facebook live to get a man the medical attention he needed. we'll be talking to her just ahead. >> we begin with the major melt down still under way at southwest airlines as the airline comes under federal scrutiny. more than 2,500 flights have already been cancel today as thousands of passengers are trying to figure out how they're going to get to their destination and where their baggage is. >> meltdown is the right word. this is an unacceptable situation. you look at the number of passengers stranded and how hard it is even to get someone on the phone to address i

they interviewed other people in the motorcade in addition to cassidy hutchison. they have an understanding now where everybody heard what everybody said. they've been asked a second or third time. it is my understanding that some people's memories failed them. so that may be what there may be mention of that in the report and we'll certainly see that in the transcripts when they come out. who got amnesia at convenient times and who had detauld memory of events. robin voss came in about him trying to overturn the election a year later. and he add muted he lost the election. so you can see how even the interviews this week may affect the final report in the different avenues of the investigation. >> tim, you've been out in the country ahead of the mud terms. and the big lie affected our democracy, affected states like arizona and candidates and the republican loser in that race is the only one that hasn't conceded her defeat s that right? and i think it's something notable that the refusal to concede that donald trump ushered in. but just talk about the impact of w

we learned yesterday, that first trump paid attorney that cassidy hutchison has was clearly saying to her, you can't get in trouble if you sa you don't remember. >> right the differences, jack smith ha the resources of the justice department available to him in this investigation. so, what that means is for every one of those people that i've mentioned, the fbi is going to interview not only them, but all of them, and say, is i really true that he said nothing about january 6th when it happened? so, they have a whole suite of resources available to them. a subpoen power that congress doesn't. with respect to that attorney, staff, i don't think that gu gets away with anything. cassidy hutchison, bravely told the truth, despite th pressure on her, and her fea of bucking the trump world. now, the transcripts are in black and white for everyone to se what this attorney did. i don' know if it is true, but if i is, and i suspect it is, tha attorney committed various federal crimes, and will fac very severe consequences, an that modus operandi of tryin to hold over on witnesses, something, t

that's according to testimony from his former aide cassidy hutchison. that's not to say anything of the many text messages meadows turned over the committee before performing on a crucial bright about-face and decided he would no longer cooperate, which otherwise made their way to the media. texts would portray him, would betray him as something of a gatekeeper, collecting truly bonkers election conspiracy theories from trump allies on behalf of his bat. so surely trump is the most responsible for the attempted coup coup, and my next guest has been warning for warning for years, the ex presidents grounds itself people are culpable as well. congressman adam shift, democratic california, sits on the geniuses committee. he's chair of the house intelligence committee and he joins me now. congressman, good to have you. i wonder, as we read through the report and we look and meadows role, how do you understand his role and his culpability in this? >> i think the reason meadows had staying power in the trump administration is that he would go along with what t

really unconscionable and a slap, i think, in the department's face that congress interviewed cassidy hutchison, for example, before the justice department did. i don't know how that happened and shouldn't have happened. this was an apparent crime and really should have been investigated by the justice department. so i do think the committee, you know, assembled evidence that the doj didn't, and at periods of time, and i think can be credited in getting the justice department to investigate this matter very thoroughly. >> we're not -- step back for a moment. big picture. where is donald trump legally speaking most vulnerable? is it from the feds? from the state of new york? is it georgia? is it some place i'm not thinking of? >> if i was his attorney, i would be the most focused on the mar-a-lago case. that's what i think is his biggest source of liability. it is a straightforward legal case. if you have classified documents in your baitment or garage you are in trouble, and he had some potential defenses that you or i wouldn't have. we are in that situation, that's because he was the former pr

>> well, laura, the committee is actually designating six pages of the report this, detailed cassidy hutchisonut out there in her testimony over the summer. of, course after she put it forward, there is an avalanche of criticism. some people call in, out say that what she was asserting was unfounded. and of course, cassidy hutchinson had said that the president demanded to go the capital, that he became irate when he was told he can go to the capitol on january 6th, and that he lunged towards his secret service agent, bobby, angle and also launched at the steering wheel with another hand. this committee has done painstaking interviews to try to operate what costly hutchinson said, and they've detailed in these particular six pages of the report, they say they have interviewed numerous people associated, and working for the secret service as well as the white house, they say they've come up with witnesses describing the president of angry, irate, and furious and in particular this is something that our team reported one month ago, there are now getting confirmation of and in this committee repo

. >> you know, i know there ar some things in the transcripts of cassidy hutchison hutchinson's interview tha particularly jumped out to you attention. what is in there that you thin the people should be focusin on especially from a crimina standpoint >> so, katie, i think this i some of the most shockin testimony that we have seen. we had some angling that thi was coming from comments tha were made during her testimony in front of the committee. but, now that way see it i it's full force it is clea that hutchinson was bein groomed to commit perjury when she testified to the committee they language her lawyer use is very careful. it is couched in terms of if you do not remember than you can say that you do no remember, but read it in context she is clearly being encouraged when she does, in fact remember to liberally refuse to recall testimony that would be contrary to trump's bes interest and to mark meadows her boss's best interests. this raises a lot of questions perhaps more questions than we can answer, are any of these folks beyond hutchinso cooperating? is mark meadows, who is clea

with from cassidy hutchison. she told the committee, about what they told her about what happened. jared kushner faces a lot of i don't know and i don't recall answers to stop -- on november the 5th. rudy giuliani shows that he considered the committee's interview quote, illegal, and he thinks that trump won the 2020 election. he told the committee that he put together quickly a team of lawyers, yeah lawyers, when trump asked him to take over the campaign in the days after the 2020 election, along with learning more about the run up to the capitol riot, we are also finding out about the former president's tax returns, how much tax he paid or didn't pay. the house ways and means committee released six years of trump's tax returns earlier today, nbc's garrett hague has more on that. >> reporter: thousands of pages of trump's tax returns show the former president paid relatively little in federal taxes, from 2015 through the end of his term, including a zero dollar federal tax bill in 2020 as his businesses struggled. the returns showing that despite a pledge to donate his 400,000 dol

it really does trump out you, for cassidy hutchison and jared kushner next to each other. or some of the other, stephanie, who was quite forthcoming, who was the former chief of staff for the first lady, versus some other transcripts that have been released. i want to ask about another portion of transcripts that are really fascinating, and confirms the thing that i think that we have all known, but confirms it. and this has to do with ginni thomas. now, jimmy tanis, of course though wife of clarence thomas, she came into talks with the committee, the reason is because she saw several attacks urging mark meadows to essentially do what he can to carry out the coup. she also contacted members in the states. so i'm just gonna read this and i want to get your feedback on it, these are about the text that she is sending to mark meadows at the time. this is pretty shortly after the election. their response. this is a good fight over evil, evil also looks like the evil until the king of king triumphs. to not be -- i stayed my career on, it or at least my time in d.c. on. it >> an

and that's and that's kept cassidy hutchison saying she saw mark meadows do that dozens of times. >>es, maybe once or twice a week. when you look through the scope of the transcripts released today you see this kind of movie asked playing out dramatic drama, burn documents, dueling loyalties. you also see hutchison talk about how far reaching conspiracy had become in the white house. they mentioned the involvement of congresswoman marjorie taylor greene, and possibly talking about qanon. it shows the scope of just how much kind of chaos and really kind of below the seal of president the conversation and become at that time. but also at this point expected, because so much information had come out from this point of the january 6th committee. we know this about the former president. it remains shocking nonetheless. >> because paul, the qanon stuff. it never does not shock, frankly. marjorie taylor greene, went into the white house and here is the testimony from the new transcript. ms. greene came up and came talking to us, this is from cassidy hutchinson, and qanon, and qanon going to

from cassidy hutchison before doj did so it wouldn't surprise me if doj gets all sorts of new evidence. >> gloria, how much more do you think we could learn from the select committee's final report, which is expected to be released in the coming days? >> i think we could learn a lot because there are going to be details in there we haven't heard before. perhaps we'll be able to see some of their investigative files. one thing we haven't heard yet is what their legislative referrals are going to be to stop another attempted cue oup m happening again or a january 6th from happening again. we have a pretty full picture, but what the public is going to be looking at is in fact in many ways what the department of justice is going to be looking at because the committee chairman, bennie thompson has said we're going to put it all out there. and the justice department will be as interested in it as elie says as the american public. >> what do you think, elliot? >> no, absolutely. you know, look. these referrals are symbolic. it's important step for congress. it's a co-equal branch of governmen

what struck you most about, we've seen a lot of cassidy hutchison's transcripts before. what struck you most what you heard from transcripts released yesterday? >> hutchison transcript interesting. three things stood out to me personally. first, the fact meadows was burning documents in his fireplace. now hutchison couldn't elaborate or confirm any of the details of the kinds of documents he was burning, and i'm not sure that's something even the doj can probably corroborate but interesting think about the timin hutchinson testified one of these snts when perry was actually in the chief of staff's office. talking about election issues, talking about the vice president's role on january 6th and certainly circle evidence, that seems to be very damns. two other things that stood out to me that hutchinson was in the room for part of trump's call to georgia secretary of state brad raffensperger and she seemed to notice how the white house counsels were quite concerned after that call, and as we have since found out, doj is investigating that call. the georgia district attorney

you a gut check, nothing that the team has combed through so far has gone to the extent of cassidy hutchison'sg nuggets in these testimonies. for example, a piece of former senior trump adviser stephen miller's testimony says that to this day, he still believes that former president trump won the 2020 election. another piece from the chief of the capitol police reveals that he wasn't too alarmed about an intelligence assessment that was conducted before january 6th that warned that congress was the primary target on january 6th. he says that there are lots of other protests that happened in dc that target congress that didn't alarm him too much. dc mayor, muriel bowser also said that she tried to get a hold of the capitol police chief several times to no avail. so several key nuggets that came out of really the initial glean from our team through the transcripts. >> and allie, news that the committee is withdrawing its subpoena, trump's legal team is saying that this is a victory for the former president. what is your reporting about this? >> so remember trump's legal team actually filed a law

it's very clear that cassidy hutchison's testimony for fire under the justice lit a department and acceleratedheir investigative efforts. but they are pretty far down the road now. but they're very interested in what people like, you know, people like tony ornato for example told the committee. they want these transcripts so they can compare the interviews they're doing with the interviews that people have already done with the committee and they want all of the evidence that the committee had, and build on it, it is not so much as a handleoff as sort of a running, passing of the baton in a relay race, the justice department picked it up now and they move forward. >> ken dilanian, ryan nobles, thank you very much. appreciate it. >>> and still ahead, i will talk to the co-chair of the congressional ukraine caucus about president zelenskyy's prime time address which is now just a couple of hours away. first up though, we're going to take you inside the situation at the southern border, as the supreme court weighs the future of title 42. as the supreme court weighs the fute ur of title 42. even w

the cnn report that don trump talk ethics or stephen peasant keno advised his former client, cassidy hutchison person, who gave that explosive testimony to the committee to summer, pasadena told her to advise the committee that she did not recall details that she did indeed remember. according to cnn, trump's save america political action committee paid for passing pinot to represent hutchinson. which is something that should certainly demand further investigation. in other words, the questions around january 6th certainly haven't all been answered. and there are likely to be more of them tomorrow. in less than 24 hours, the committee will start to make the mother lode of its evidence public. and that will include much of its nearly 1200 witness interview transcripts and tons of documents about trump's involvement in january 6th. for months, the doj has asked the committee for many of these items. and for months, the committee has been reluctant to acquiesced that request. until now. hours ago, punchbowl news reported that the justice department's butt justic department's but jack smith sent t

you made a great point with cassidy hutchison. believe -- look, let me be very clear that i think she's incredibly brave and i know because i know what it means to testify to truth to power. i give her all the credit in the world. but i don't believe that her testimony will do what so many people are talking, simply because there is nothing to back it up. it is all hearsay and trump world lied with impunity to any member of congress, to the press, to you, to anyone, in order to protect himself. there is no emails, no text messages. that's why i constantly say, jack smith needs to go after the stuff you can prove. that's the mar-a-lago -- >> because mar-a-lago is actually documents, which donald trump had said and acknowledged he had in his position because he had said at various times that they are his or heeded his jedi mind trick and declassified them. -- in his possession is not in dispute. >> he claims he took them, they are his, and more importantly, i want them back. and so, there is nothing to argue. he made the statements.

don't recall, you can talk to me a little bit more about his testimony and whether it defied cassidy hutchison's or just didn't line up? >> sometimes you get a gut feeling, like this just doesn't seem right, for someone in the position and that level of authority, and responsibility, within the white house, to be advising the president. the number of things that he didn't recall on that day was staggering. there were junior staff with, you know, much less level of responsibility who remember with great clarity, many details throughout the day, and you know, i think that we have a level of concern within the committee that his "i do not recall," his lack of recollection, details, concerning the events that day, it could fall in this category of testimony that is not fully forthcoming or perhaps influenced by some outside factors and we wanted to make sure to highlight that in our analysis of his testimony. >> so who are you highlighting it for, the american public, so they get a sense for themselves, on what they believe to be truthful and not truthful, or is this a highlight for the department o

. >> do you guys remember when cassidy hutchison did testimony, she was dropping these accusers at thes. that was one of the big one she dropped. she sent out a warning, don't try to intimidate these witnesses. i think that is also leading to speculation about who they are talking about. >> i'm sorry. i just got to say, it'll be interesting to see on wednesday whether some of the consequences from people not named donald trump are still about trump, eastman, and giuliani, -- actually, no. the committee spelled out today that it is trump and eastman, and others. they really didn't spell it out. when we get the door stop on wednesday, people who aren't named trump, and maybe including some bar association -- >> though the people they mention in terms of this council that they're pressuring, the secret service agents. there are a lot of questions about what the agents knew to the degree to which they were protecting the president, maybe lying or not being forthcoming under oath. they said, a small number of secret service agents engaged private counselor for their interviews rather than r

you'll hear a lot more of cassidy hutchison's testimony and other key witnesses.ill be some very interesting new information in the report and even more so in the transcripts that we released. >> the release of that full report of the 1/6 committee marks the end of the panel's work and now focus fully turns to the department of justice which we know is already cooperating close will you with the select committee as it, doj, tackles the massive, historic unprecedented decision that lies ahead whether to issue criminal indictments against a former president of the united states. joining us now from capitol hill. can you just -- i made a joke about a paper jam. i guess it is a printing thing. what is it -- we've been sitting around all day waiting for the 800 pages to show up. everybody ready to plow through it. sorry. tomorrow. what happened? >> i know. i had my reading glasses at the ready about to dig into this report. but it mute be revenge of the prudenter? we've been told it could be a printer, we did call over to the publishing office, maybe it's printed but n

but i think when we see those cassidy hutchison transcripts, it will be very clear, i don't know if they dissuaded or steered her from testifying. >> there will be, her first attorney was paid for by trump world. that person was suggesting that she not cooperate. and she wanted to cooperate. >> what is wording is here today is, the committee has substantial concerns regarding potential efforts to obstruct the investigation, including by certain counsel. we don't know the name of that counsel yet. but if you put two and two together, that seems to be the implication. >> and we know that she was not cooperative and was with the attorney paid for by trump world. and then she got a new attorney. and i think alyssa farrah griffin said she helped her get a new attorney and then she became cooperative. >> to step back about why this is important. we care about cassidy because mark meadows wouldn't speak to the committee or to anyone else. that is very important. there are people they couldn't get to that they believe in a criminal investigation. could be spoken to. i think the other thing is th

call cassidy hutchison, saying that pat cipollone told her, we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we move from the ellipse to the capitol. he, according to cassidy hutchinson, was adamant against moving them. he had already expressed feelings about obstructing justice and obstructing the electoral count, that it would live look like trump was obstructing justice and obstructing the electoral count if they did actually move to the capitol from the ellipse and incited a riot or encouraged a riot on capitol hill. so there are tons of threads that were revealed from the january 6th public hearings that the department of justice is most likely following up on. and probably, much more. because as we've seen today, the grand jury does hold a bit more sway and power in terms of compelling people to appear before them. dan scavino has not spoken in a year and a half. he was almost held in contempt before the department of justice dismissed that contempt charge from congress. he appeared before them. these people were flies on the wall for nearly every single one of these mome

report is no exception i want to go back and show some of the testimony because they added to it cassidy hutchison testifying to trump's knowledge he had been defeated in november but they added hoke hpe hicks and we sawt for the first time let me play this. >> and i recall him saying to him something to the effect's riders got to the capitol we need to see the president now. mark looked at him, he doesn't want to do anything about it. >> i didn't speak to the president about this directly but communicated to people like eric herschmann is was my view it was important that the president put out some kind of message in advance of the event. >> and what was mr. hirschmann's response >> mr. hirschmann said he had made the same recommendation directly to the president, and that he had refused. >> so both women also testified ostensively to trump knowing he lost but not wanting other people to notice and i'm not a psychologist i don't really know in what world he thought other people wouldn't notice he was an outgoing president, claire, but the voluminous amount of people who had incredible ins mayes w

ornato apparently told the committee he didn't recall saying any of this to cassidy hutchison and the find his account credible. very interested to read his transcript and the transcript of any other witnesses speaking to that particular anecdote, just to try to get the full picture of what potentially the justice department could prove about what happened there. >> all right. so curious what you will look for and also just curious, is it possible some high-level members of the trump administration are already working with the doj? we know that these referrals are not legally binding and doj can completely ignore them, or look at it as part of a path to follow. they may be on their own. and i just wonder if there are any indications to you by whose name, for not complying to subpoenas and whose not -- that might be indication the doj is already on a trail? >> yeah. i'd say that's a great question. there is a very tantalizing comment in the executive summary. it's hard to call it that, because it's 160 pages, but in that executive summary there's a reference to why the department of ju