the electoral college is slanted — college. the electoral college is slanted to— college.is . slanted to the republicans. hillary clinton _ slanted to the republicans. hillary clinton won— slanted to the republicans. hillary clinton won by— slanted to the republicans. hillary clinton won by 3 _ slanted to the republicans. hillary clinton won by 3 million _ slanted to the republicans. hillary clinton won by 3 million votes - slanted to the republicans. hillary clinton won by 3 million votes butl clinton won by 3 million votes but the popular— clinton won by 3 million votes but the popular vote _ clinton won by 3 million votes but the popular vote does— clinton won by 3 million votes but the popular vote does not- clinton won by 3 million votes but the popular vote does not count. i clinton won by 3 million votes but i the popular vote does not count. joe biden— the popular vote does not count. joe biden won _ the popular vote does not count. joe biden won by— the popular vote does not count. joe biden won by 7,000,020 _ the popular vote does not count. joe biden won by 7,00

>> i think the electoral college is here to stay for a while. you have to have a whopping majority in the senate to get rid of it, and if it is working for republicans, why would they want to do away with it? that is the rule of engagement. if you are the democrats, you have to make a defined strategy of winning the elect oral college game map. spending a lot of time in wisconsin, michigan, the midwest. i think pennsylvania they do well, but there is a corrosion in ohio. wisconsin you cannot tell. iowa is turning red, florida is red. the democrats have to keep virginia and put north carolina in play. obama won north carolina, the democrats need to try to expand their attempts of winning. >> do you fear a separation? >> i do not, i think we are more united. on a local basis, people live day to day, we are doing well in our country, the economy is as good as anywhere in the world. we still have great universities, research centers. but there are warning signs that are threatening. and it is the public's lack of trust in government. we are dealing

there was a law passed that says let's say two candidates are running for president and the electoral college vote will go to whoever wins the election. x wins the popular vote and he should get the electoral vote. the legislature in illinois -- let's say the popular vote in illinois goes with x and he should get the electoral votes but if it goes toy, should that go to y? can you see in federal court challenge on this? if anybody voted for x and y gets the electoral vote, it will disenfranchise people. guest: i will give it a step. this is something called the national popular vote that's been kicking around for about 20 years. illinois and many other states have passed similar laws saying if 270 electoral votes, the majority of the electoral college joins this compact, we are all going to throw an error votes to the winner of the national popular vote. the argument is that we don't want to have state-by-state elections. we want to have a national popular vote. there are lots of reasons why think there will be litigation if you get to 270 electoral votes, right now it's at 195. many states h

their state, the final decision as to who the state legislatures -- authorize be sent to the electoral college is a decision made solely by the legislature. any legislative body may decide on the basis of overwhelming evidence of fraud to send electors to the electoral college who accurately reflect the president's legitimate victory in their state, which was illegally denied him through fraud. we must be prepared to lobby our republican legislalegislatures. my personal contact. and by demonstrating the overwhelming will of the people in their state -- in each state, that this may need to happen. >> that occurred and was caught on video november 5th, 2020. it is new to the world right now tonight. stone dictated that extreme plan, as you saw there, to his associate on the computer. and it was not only earlier than some of those other trump figures' plans, i mentioned, some of which are part of indictments and looming trials. let me make a clear point about this exclusive here on "the beat" tonight. that was before the presidential race had been called for biden. this is important, take a look.

president of the united states in that role is to preside over a joint session of congress where the electoral college votes that are certified by the states are opened and counted. the constitution, martha, says that they shall be opened and they shall be counted. the electoral couldn't act adopted more than 150 years ago also specifies the amount of time and the procedure. i was going to make sure that we heard any objections and we heard any evidence that people wanted to bring forward. but the idea that i as vice president had the unilateral authority to overturn the election had no basis in the constitution, no basis in history. i want the american people to know that. i'll continue to stand on the principal that i did my job that day by god's grace. >> martha: coming up, the former vice president reveals whether he hopes to challenge former president trump on that debate stage, his former team partner and whether or not he will make the debate stage. how are his numbers looking? that is next. so to speak. after watching the admiral that just made up my mind, i said, i'm calling newday usa tomorr

governor samuel tilden of new york won 250 thousand more votes hayes the republican and 19 or electoral collegebut tilden was still one electoral vote -- one, short of the required 185 majority. and 20 votes remained uncounted in florida, louisiana and south carolina, because their votes were too close to call. each party accused the other of fraud. and in oregon, one elector was declared illegal and replaced with controversial results, you had a crisis here, greatest electoral crisis in american history. and threats of another civil war, it wassi 1876, what happened? congress establishes a 15 member commission of senors, congressman and supreme court justices. so they said, we can't figure it out, let's have a commission, that is about as far as from popular vote in electoral as you can get. but keep something in mind, congress is making the decisions. not a department of justice. not a prosecutor. in every one of these case from fraud is alleged or lobbying or pressure, and so forth, it is the give and take of politics. and congress has the final say under the constitution. congress. and nobo

he's probably winning the electoral college today. you can say we _ the electoral college today.ou look at _ without all these losses but if you look at the polling data today he certainly — look at the polling data today he certainly in a position to win and people _ certainly in a position to win and people like to back winners. among those five talking _ people like to back winners. among those five talking points, _ people like to back winners. among those five talking points, it - people like to back winners. among those five talking points, it would . those five talking points, it would seem that the gop strategy going forward will be to strap hunter biden and the president to a similar scandal. it is a significant chance thatis scandal. it is a significant chance that is being discussed at the moment that the house will vote for impeachment, whether they get the votes or not is another thing. the idea is to make it look likejoe biden did the same things as trump. what would it mean if there was in the impeachment ofjoe biden? anyway just to balance the record for what is g

that's unlike other parts of the role but not in the electoral college.ase to federal court requires a federal defense and so far, trump's offered nothing that would come plausibly in it. and third, the supreme court has said that the standard to remove a case to federal court can't impose too great a burden on the states and here i think it undoubtedly won't. for the same reasons this maneuver was rejected in new york, i think it will be rejected here. >> andrew, you had some misgivings. >> we never disagree with neil. he's a far greater appellate lawyer than i am. i do think it's important to note it is a strong argument in the manhattan case. in the manhattan case, it was laughable. there was nothing about it that related to what donald trump's position was as president. yes, he was signing some checks in the oval office but in a personal capacity. not as president of the united states. here, they will try to conjure up as many arguments as they can and you know, the concern is which court decides this and there is going to be a federal judge at the fe

because they have the electoral college. that makes them dictators or strongmen not a president. bush got in losing the popular vote, trump got in by losing 2.8 one million votes and he claimed close to getting it by losing 7 million votes. host: he did mention that the court changed after that decision. any further thoughts? guest: george bush won the popular vote but the electoral college and popular vote have been mismatched and recent election that has caused debate whether or not we want that kind of system and there is no question, it continues to resonate as a topic of conversation among your viewers. host: this is a law perverted announcer: washington journal continues. host: we are joined by co-authors ja'ron smith, former deputy assistant to the president under the trump administration, and chris pilkerton from the sba acting administration. they are co-authors of the new book "underserved: harnessing the vision of lincolns reconstruction." we want to dive into the book. since you both served in the trump administr

the whole electoral college process it is meticulously defined in federal and state law and electoral for doing it. there is no doubt that they will just counter -- counterfeiting the electoral process. the idea that is protected by the first amendment, that is absurd. there's people in jail today because they counterfeited one vote, one ballot. if you go in and you pretend you are an elector, you are a voter and you are not that voter or you fill out a registration form with a phony name or addressing your vote that, you will go to prison for years. they try to do that to the entire election. they tried to counterfeit not one ballot, but the entire election, stealing away the victory that joe biden had won 306 to 232 in the electoral college. the idea that that is freedom of speech is preposterous. >> we only have a minute left, but i did want to ask you, you lived this, you are in the capital, you've done so much work on this. there could be a discussion of a plea deal. we don't know at this point where it'll head. would you be able to stomach a deal that doesn't include prison time

they look like these and they basically say, okay, this is who gets our states electoral college votespt in 2020. that's when the former president and his allies got to work, convincing loyalists in seven states that they should back republican electors in key battlegrounds won by the democrat in the race. joe biden. the focus, on arizona, georgia, michigan, nevada, wisconsin, new mexico, and pennsylvania. some of those so-called fake electors showed up at state capitals where the real electors were meeting. the even created phony certificates, like the ones you see here. the goal? apparently so ten through this fake slate of electors to congress, where the vice president presides over the official count. the thinking seemed to be that then vp mike pence could grant mr. trump the disputed electoral votes or send the issue back to the states, opening the door to keeping mr. trump in power. you probably know what happened next. pence rejected the scheme, citing the constitution. >> donald j trump. >> and mr. trump, on the national -- told his supporters, the election was being stolen. it

electoral college, which is archaic, which l do win, quite often, the electoral. ege, which is archaic, which has been left he was by the much - college, which is archaic, which has i been left he was by the much vaunted founding _ been left he was by the much vaunted founding fathers _ been left he was by the much vaunted founding fathers who _ been left he was by the much vaunted founding fathers who designed - been left he was by the much vaunted founding fathers who designed the - founding fathers who designed the system _ founding fathers who designed the system that— founding fathers who designed the system that worked _ founding fathers who designed the system that worked for— founding fathers who designed the system that worked for the - founding fathers who designed the system that worked for the 1790si founding fathers who designed the i system that worked for the 1790s and does not _ system that worked for the 1790s and does not work— system that worked for the 1790s and does not work in _ system that worked for the 1790s and does not work in the _ syste

and there have been updates and changes to the electoral college act. in your, opinion however, given what you know and given your role in the matter, and given what you've read in the indictment, are we in the future protected from a scheme in an effort like we have now seen was underway to overcome the 2020 election? i will protect you against that in the future? is there enough it has changed for that can happen again? >> i think that's exactly the right question, ali, to ask. and the answer is this. in the 11th hour it did pass the electoral count or form a clarifying in strengthening the act that has proceeded its. in addition as ear now the plan to overturn the over the 2020 presidential election depended upon something called the independent state legislature theory of constitutional interpretation. that was wrong in the case more versus harper which was decided by the supreme court at the end of this last term. roundly rejecting that theory. together with the changes and reforms to the electoral count act, and the rejection of the independent st

your own money, now you run afoul the counterfeit laws, and it's the exact same thing with the electoral college. they can say, well, we don't think that joe biden really wanted these things even though every federal and state court rejected all of their claims of electoral fraud and corruption. the minute that they start manufacturing counterfeit electors and trying to have them substitute for the real electors that came through the federal and state legal process, at that point, they've crossed over from speech to conduct. i think that the indictment is really tight in terms of folks just on the conduct and, in fact, they left out one charge that the january six committee had put in their, which was about aiding and abetting and giving aid and comfort to insurrectionists. i suppose they did that because it's a statute that has not been prosecuted much before. donald trump, everything in his world is a case of first impression, pretty much, but they tried to stay away from that, because i think they did not want that debate about freedom of speech, even though i think it's clear that donald tru

he can also go to court _ electoral college. he can also go to court as— electoral college.ns of times in federal court to challenge — dozens of times in federal court to challenge the count every single time. _ challenge the count every single time, being told no by the court, including — time, being told no by the court, including a — time, being told no by the court, including a supreme court with three justices _ including a supreme court with three justices that she appointed and not a single _ justices that she appointed and not a single one of them signed with this argument. what is not entitled to do— this argument. what is not entitled to do is— this argument. what is not entitled to do is put— this argument. what is not entitled to do is put extraordinary pressure, uses _ to do is put extraordinary pressure, uses office — to do is put extraordinary pressure, uses office to put pressure on the vice president of the united states to violate — vice president of the united states to violate the constitution to simply — to violate the constitution to simply declare hims

. >> the final decision as to who the state legislatures authorized be sent to the electoral college is a decision made solely by the legislature. we must be prepared to lobby our republican legislatures. >> that's newly exposed tapes that show how roger stone was part of some of that plotting. we first broadcast it on "the beat" last week. stone has not been charged with wrong doing by jack smith or the atlanta d.a., but this footage may remind you when he was first apprehended by the fbi and later convicted of obstruction and witness tampering in 2019 in the mueller probe. this is footage he released to sinclair, he did evade prison time through a trump pardon. i want to remind folks in a rare public comment, bob mueller himself later discussed that exact case and said stone became a central figure in that probe because he communicated with russian intelligence, officers and claimed advance knowledge of wikileaks release of stolen e-mails. he remains a convicted felon and rightly so. andrew is here, and i very much was curious to hear your analysis of all of this because you were a

at the electoral college donald trump is winning.ing. the democrats, i was a democrat in the past, bill clinton inspired — democrat in the past, bill clinton inspired me to be a democrat, and there _ inspired me to be a democrat, and there is— inspired me to be a democrat, and there is no— inspired me to be a democrat, and there is no inspiration behind joe biden _ there is no inspiration behind joe biden it — there is no inspiration behind joe biden. it was clear that the view wasn't _ biden. it was clear that the view wasn't 2020, they needed to get trump _ wasn't 2020, they needed to get trump out — wasn't 2020, they needed to get trump out at all cost and joe biden was the _ trump out at all cost and joe biden was the best bet. it's actually quite — was the best bet. it's actually quite sad _ was the best bet. it's actually quite sad. isn't that richard richard, _ quite sad. isn't that richard richard, if they swap their candidate at this point they would have a _ candidate at this point they would have a very good chance of winn

the only representation we have in the -- bc are three votes in the electric college. -- electoral college. the only time our voices count is in the eyes of the federal government when we cast them for president of the united states and have the alleged crimes succeeded, we would have had that right grip to wait -- right ripped away. the people of d.c. will be asked to rise to the role and decide one of the most consequential cases and a b american history and we will. there are those who will cast the people of d.c. as part of the problem and that is because they don't know us. they paid us with a broad brush, claiming we are all alike, beholden to the federal government but we are a proud people, truly representative of the nation. we come from all background -- backgrounds and incomes and races and all general -- gender identities and political parties. like no other place in the country, we are proud to be the nation's capital. we never take for granted our democracy. we have fought for all -- far too long for the scraps we have been given, the people of d.c. deserve the full and equal

your own money, now you run about the counterfeit loss, and it's the exact same thing with the electoral collegell, we don't think that joe biden really wanted these things even though every federal state court rejected all of their claims of electoral fraud and corruption. the minute that they start manufacturing counter bid electors and trying to have them substitute for the real electors that came through the federal and state legal process, at that point, they've crossed over from speech to conduct. i think that the indictment is really tight in terms of folks just on the conduct and, in fact, they left out one charge that the january six committee had put in their, which was about aiding and abetting and giving aid and comfort to insurrectionists. i suppose they did that because it's a statute that has not been prosecuted much before. donald trump, everything in his world is a case of first impression, pretty much, but they tried to stay away from that, because i think they did not want that to be about freedom of speech, even though i think it's clear that donald trump did aid and comfort

as our three votes in the electoral college. we are locked out of the senate. our voice in the house is just that, a voice. we have no final vote on the policies under which we live. the only time our voices count is in the eyes of the federal government when we cast them for the president of the united states and had this succeeded we have -- would have had that right ripped away as well. we feel the impact of these crimes because they happened in our home and will be tried in our court made of a jury of our neighbors. the people in d.c. will be asked to rise to decide one of the most consequential cases in american history and we will. there are those that will again try to cast the people of d.c. as part of the problem. that is because they do not know us. they do not know our neighborhoods. they paint us with a broad brush claiming we are all alike beholden to the government or a part of the swamp. but we are a proud people truly representative of the nation from all backgrounds, all incomes, all races, all sexual orientations, gender identities, and politi

i would prefer to talk about it when we talk about how the electoral college works. that's a very interesting movement. and whether or not that actually has validity based on what the constitution says. thank you for getting us started on that. that's all for tonight, thank you very much. [applause]

electoral college makes it official, biden won, trump lost. now, on the conspiracy chart, that's mid-december there. but over in fraudulent world, the indictment recounts how those fraudulent electors convened sham proceedings, pretending to be the real electoral college meeting. why the indictment dedescribes it, one of those actual meetings on video. this is what you see here now criminal evidence. arizona republicans met on the same day as the real electoral college, but they held a sham, fraudulent proceeding. doj has evidence that six other states pulled off this same fraud and told on themselves because they didn't just do it and hold meetings, they even posted their fraudulent certificates on the internet. so that fraud played out in the open. and let's be clear. unlike, say, a politician giving a speech or even lying in public, what i just showed you crosses well beyond speech, which we all are supposed to respect under law, and if you really want to get in the weeds, before i did that job, i practiced first amendment law, care a great

the capitol claiming, the state capitol in michigan on the day in which we were finalizing the electoral college capitol claiming on the outside of the capitol they were the rightful electors so there's a lot of evidence, an abundance of evidence i would argue that the individuals involved in the scheme in michigan knowingly sought to interfere with the process, knowingly sought to lie about the winner of michigan's electoral college votes and there are many republican officials who at that time which was again after the certification of the vote, after legal avenues had been pursued and dismissed, they declined to be a part of this scheme and that should have been a sign right there that something was up. so, again, i'm confident in the lehman process as it plays out and confident where necessary justice will be served against any and everyone in this un-american scheme to unseat the rightfully elected president of the united states. >> yesterday matthew duperno was arraigned for unlawful possession of voting machines in your state of michigan in this on going investigation with attempts by tru

i would prefer to talk about it when we talk about how the electoral college works. that's a very interesting movement. and whether or not that actually has validity based on what the constitution says. thank you for getting us started on that. that's all for tonight, thank you very much. [applause] >> starting monday, september 18, watcspa's new series th shaped america. those will fea0 bos that have provoked thought, won awards, led to significant societal changes, andtill talk about today. and i had of its premiere, we are using the c-span archives to gain more insight into each book and its author. on tuesday at 9:00 p.m. eastern, brigham young university professor jay buckley talks about the expedition led by meriwether lewis and william clark across the american west after the louisiana purchase as documented in their collection of journals. >> he wrote it but 10 days, and he was gone those 10 days on that hunting trip. he accounted for basically every day of the expedition, which is remarkable. when you look at the words that they use, they wrote more words th

i would prefer to talk about it when we talk about how the electoral college works. that's a very interesting movement. and whether or not that actually has validity based on what the constitution says. thank you for getting us started on that. that's all for tonight, thank you very much. [applause] st monday, september 18, h c-span's series books that shapedmeri, that will feature 10 books that have provoked god, won awards, led to societalhanges, and are still talked about today. ahead of its premiere, we are using the c-span archives to gain more insight into each book and its author. tonight at 9:00 eastern, brigham young university professor j buckley talks about the expedition led by meriwether lewis and william clark along the american west after the louisiana purchase. it is documented in their collection of journals. >> clark rode all but 10 days, and even those 10 days on a hunting trip, he basically accounted for every day of the expedition, which is quite remarkable. when you look at the words of lewis and clark, they wrote more words than are contained i

power and to simply appoint donald trump president, declaring him president and nullify the electoral collegeople in arizona, pennsylvania, georgia, wisconsin and so on. they basically wanted pence to vaporise the election and when he wouldn't do it, they turned the wrath of the insurrectionary rioters against him, and we heard them chanting, "hang mike pence". where did they get the idea, as trump supporters, to be attacking donald trump's own vice president? how do you think the rest of the world is watching today, seeing the former president indicted now for the third time? well, i don't know — you'd be a betterjudge of that than me. i mean, i hope that people will see it as a vindication of the american system of justice, that we don't say that because someone once held a public office as president or vice president or a member of congress or governor that they can commit any crime that they want. people understand how absurd that is if you're talking about a murder or a rape. it's no less absurd when you're talking about trying to overthrow an election or trying to interfere with a feder

trump declaring he won, even though he lost by more than 7 million votes, and lost the electoral college by losing several key battleground states. part of the indictment, that famous phone call to georgia's republican secretary of state, saying, "look, i just need you to find 11,780 votes." former white house chief of staff mark meadows, who allegedly set up that call, as i said, among the indicted. rudy giuliani also charged with racketeering, a legal approach he often used as a prosecutor himself, going after the mob in new york. and when asked if she plans to prosecute them all at once, fulton county d.a. fani willis said yes. abc's senior investigative reporter aaron katersky leading us off tonight from atlanta. >> reporter: tonight, the clock is ticking for donald trump, given ten days to surrender in georgia. the former president charged with leading a "criminal organization," attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. 18 of his lawyers, aides, and associates charged alongside him. >> i am giving the defendants the opportunity to voluntarily surrender no

we support a big set of holistic changes and we like to reform the electoral college, the filibuster to bring the decision-making structure and our democratic society back in line with where the majority opinion is. host: let me ask you about supreme court ethics. this is an article in politico from yesterday. before you answer that coming here is a tweet -- what are your thoughts on that tweet and also the supreme court ethics? guest: the summer is traditionally a time where the justices get to let their hair down a little bit and they are in recess so they are not hearing cases over the summer and they do a lot of appearances. this has now become an annual ritual they sort of trade barbs. the justices have a debate indirectly by dueling appearances they have over the summer. justice kagan was at an appearance this past week was asked about a recent interview that her colleague sam alito gave to the wall street journal where he sort of weighed in on this debate that's been happening in congress about whether to impose a code of ethics on the supreme court. sam alito's position was t

the end of the 2020 election, which delivered him the when both in the popular vote and the electoral college to become the us president at which trump denied which he spread the prolific wise and the worth of this indictment that he had won the election. so this is notable, it is the 1st time that a former us president is charged with essentially standing in the way of a peaceful transition of power between, between administrations. now, this indictment is $45.00 pages long and it does lay out in detail. what prosecutors hope establishes trumps criminal motives. why is that? it's so important. it's because trims defense this entire time and he continues to spread the is election false with saying that he earnestly believes even to this day that he won the election. of course, we know that is false, and this indictment lays out the many times the specific dates times places where trusted advisors in the intelligence community, the f. b i. the vice president told president trump at the time, which proves that he had indeed lost the election, that there was no fraud and get his choice to disreg

but the one place our founder said the president had no role is with the electoral college.for the best of reasons. because, who is the person who has the most self interest in the electoral college, how it functions, how the votes are president counted? the president, the sitting president. -- so, our founders cut the president entirely out of the electoral college. and in order for this case to be moved for any of the defendants, they have to be performing the federal function. these folks just weren't. the second thing is, there's no federal cover-able offense, which is -- necessary. i don't think there's any immunity claim or anything like that that is going to cut the mustard. and lastly, in order to remove a case to federal court, you can't put too much of a burden on state court, state officials. that's what the supreme court said 30 years ago. and -- obviously moving the trial to federal court would impose that burden. so, i don't think it's going anywhere. it's a long answer. sorry for all the details. but basically, bottom line, this move, i think, will fail. >> no

you remember democrats brought objections to electoral college votes in three of the last four lechsublicans prevailed -- >> under the law. >> right. >> i did ask the parliamentarian -- i did ask the parliamentarian very directly, chuck, i asked her because i was hearing rumors and i was hearing in the newspaper that there were alternate electors and i asked her point-blank. >> was anyone in the white house asking you -- >> i don't recall that, i just remember hearing it in the public and i wanted an answer whether or not the parliamentarian had received electoral votes and she had not. we actually changed the language as those electoral college votes were recorded, but look, you know, chuck, i've told you many times and i've said it again at the iowa state fair. i had no right to overturn the election. the constitution is quite clear. as vice president my job was to preside over a joint session of congress where the constitution says the electoral college votes shall be open and shall be counted. i did my duty that day. >> donald trump said this week that he never asked you to disre

also, i mean, he just said the goal was to reverse the electoral college.you can prove that a lawyer was using the legal process to try to achieve a legal end that can get you there, too. >> let's talk about mark meadows. he's asking that a federal judge stop fani willis from seeking his arrest in and state charges as we're seeing it all play out this week because they're waiting for a decision on whether or not his case will be moved from state court into federal court. why? >> so meadows, jeffrey clark and probably at some point donald trump will argue we were federal officials acting within the scope of our federal jobs, therefore, the case should be moved over to federal court. it's in the process of being heard and decided by the federal court. it will take weeks. what meadows is asking and, judge, while we're waiting i want you to pause my surrender date, give me extra time to surrender. i don't think there's much chance that a federal judge will get involved in that level. i think the federal judge will say i will hear your case and i'm going to rule

talking about the idea that we all go vote, somebody wins in state and that winner gets the electoral college votes. oh, no, wait a second, we are going to have the state legislator make some decision that there was fraud and they will pick the winner instead. that is just not how american democracy works. it is just a very serious overturning of the will of the people that they were discussing her. >> and it is also very telling because again, the timeline is, you are saying this before it was announced. you are anticipating -- this is a person who is saying, i lost the game because the field is bad. well, you aren't even playing yet, the game hasn't been called. well, your intent is to make sure it means your way regardless of what actually happened. lisa, i want to play you some sound from cassidy hutchinson testifying about what trump said in this case, and get your thoughts on the other side. >> is it your understanding that president trump asked mark meadows to speak with roger stone and general food when on january 5th? >> that is correct, that is my understanding. >> ms. hutchinson, i

do you accept that as the valid final step that the electoral college took?g a client. it was regrettable to make an understatement that it was interrupted as it was. >> which crimes do you think he was worried about being indicted for? >> any reasonable person urn those circumstances as john eastman was would only prudently take that step. >> you see that as kind of standard. everybody want a pardon. it would seem especially since he's a lawyer this he thought he had criminal exposure. >> oh, not at all, not at all. >> most people who leave government without doing so suggest some exposure. the pardon if you accept it is itself tantamount to being guilty. >> he looked at history, looked at the historic examples, presented the various options and recommended at the end what he thought was the best option consistent with the law, to delay the certification. >> he didn't do just that. how is it good faith if he reverses himself and gives advice up in a way that of course fed, part of the plot to overthrow the election. >> you brainstorm dork research, talk to o

so, our founders cut the president entirely out of the electoral college.order for this case to be moved for any of the defendants, they have to be performing the federal function. these folks just weren't. the second thing is, there's no federal colorable offense, which is -- also necessary. i don't think there's any immunity claim or anything like that that is going to cut the mustard. and lastly, in order to remove a case to federal court, you can't put too much of a burden on state court, state officials. that's what the supreme court said 30 years ago. and -- obviously moving the trial to federal court would impose that burden. so, i don't think it's going anywhere. it's a long answer. sorry for all the details. but basically, bottom line, this move, i think, will fail. >> no, we want the detail, we need it, especially tonight. fani willis wants this thing to go to trial within six months. what happens to trump's campaign if he gets convicted while he is actively running for president? >> yeah, so, i think that there is a very strong case that, if he i

mr trump's team told them they had the power to decertify the state's electoral college results. allegedly coordinated a scheme to have fake members of the electoral college cast their votes for mrtrump in georgia, rather thanjoe biden, who won the state. and, mr trump's campaign lawyers also reportedly worked with a data firm to copy sensitive data from election systems in a georgian county. the most serious charge — violating the racketeer influenced and corrupt organizations act — is punishable by a maximum of 20 years in prison. the act is designed to help take down organised criminal syndicates like the mafia. former president trump denies all charges and has taken to the social media site truth social stating "the witch hunt continues" and claiming election interference. here's the bbc�*s north america correspondent sean dilly who explained the charges and what is in the indictment document. quite a lot of details. there's also quite a lot of overlap between the unrelated or at least theoretically unrelated federal case that was held in the washington, dc courtjust maybe a