john eastman and greg jacob. in that meeting, based on under oath testimony from greg jacob before the january 6th committee, eastman reportedly says, "well, i did a float this theory to trump and have authored this memo, but i am not really sure it is going to hold water." and jacob explodes. he is a mild-mannered person, but he explodes in terms of being a lawyer, saying how is this circulating at the highest levels of the federal% government? yet pence persisted. on jan january 6th, communicatea text messages and emails, eastman is saying follow the plan. >> john: this is something the former president still believes now, he has not changed his mind on the outcome of the election, however wrong they may be. >> he has waited into the possibility of becoming president again and issuing pardons for anyone implicated in this. so that puts in a nutshell his approach to the facts, to the law, and to power. if he reclaims it, he will pardon those who helped put this in motion. >> john: jeff pegues, we have about a mi

one is obviously the issue of the insurrection and i think greg jacob raised this as an issue. whatre would've happened if durg the insurrection those who breached the capital had actually had a more organized opposition, and had machine guns and it managed to actually kill a majority of congress? how would we have thought about what that would have happened? and the issue raised also by norm augustine about a nuclear attack. i'm sure rebecca will talk about that in the few minutes as well that might not be the suitcase bomb but in the wake of attacks in i ukraine as greg jacob mentioned. we can imagine other forms of nuclear attack not just coming from russia or from north korea or from china if we are able to engage in a more extensive war over taiwan and so on. so these are cases where mass events, and i i had not thought about the syndrome dr. fins just raised when large numbers of the cabinet as well as congress could be taken out in a single event you can imagine chemical weapons during the same n a circumstance where there wasn't necessarily a designated survivor as was

but what he said there in the clip in indiana today's consistent with what marc short and greg jacobold us. which was, he was consistent that he did research and asked for advice. he was pretty convinced all along that -- he did not have such authority and diligence, to only confirm that. i don't know, lawrence, if he is the star witness. he is an important witness. but -- star witness in this case, in my view, there are so many important voices who corroborate each other, that you can remove any one of them, and the case remains strong. we didn't have mike pence, obviously, to make good criminal referrals that we made. so, i don't know, candidly, that i see any one star witness in this case. >> barbara mcquade, my argument about star witness here is based -- its evidentiary but it's also -- impact. it's also a vice president of the united states, a first one in history, to testify in a criminal case after being vice president is testifying against the former president. he's going to say to that jury under oath that that man said to me, you are too honest, and in terms of dramatic ju

it and and more sort of aspirationally could this inspire the kind of bipartisanship that that greg jacob was talking about there were sort of lacking right now, and of course it would have implications for future vacancies. so i i contacted the birch by archives at the university of indiana and and try to reach senator by who unfortunately at that stage of his life was was not in a position to to remember that that part of his life and and had been suffering from some illnesses, but they did very nicely recommend that i speak to jay berman who i think is on this panel on the zoom today and he was a senator bias cheapest staff and he very graciously had lunch with me at the century club in new york. city and we talked about this phrase party opposite. he said, you know, it sounds like senator by and and and then i found some more information that albert didn't want to take a partisan advantage and become president and and he did not know about this plan to resign but jay told me that he recall the possible ted sorensen memo advising carl albert about this that and the other and and he sai

both mark short and my general counsel greg jacob as i recounted the book had been there at my side givingcounsel and support as we sought to stand firm to do our duty i will always believe we did our duty that day. ensuring the peaceful transfer of power under the constitution of the united states and the laws of this country. [applause] when it was all over at 4:00 a.m. i stepped down off the rostrum and i had a number of members of congress that were searching me graciously thanking me for what we had done in the stand we have taken but there's only one person i was looking for. i walked out into the speakers lobby i tended to ignore the members that were expressing kindness to me and there she was at the far end of the lobby, my wife karen. i walked up put my arms around her and she looked at me and said i'm proud of you. that was all i needed to hear. [applause] as we walked out of the building i realized i had lost track of my chief of staff, a man i literally worked with for 10 years he was my chief of staff when i was the conference chairman for house republicans we stayed close du

both mark short and my general counsel greg jacob as i recount had been there at my side . giving me steady counsel and support as we sought to stand firm and do our duty. and i'll always believe that we did our duty that day. ensuring the peacefultransfer of power . under the constitution of the united states and the laws of this country.[applause] when it was all over at four in the morning, i stepped down off of the rostrum, and i had a number of members of congress approaching me. graciously thanking me. for what we had done. the steps that we had taken. butthere's only one person i was looking for . i walked out into the speakers lobby, i intended to ignore the members expressing kindness to me . there shewas at the far end of the lobby . my wife karen. and i walked up, put my arms around her and she looked at me and said i'm proud of you . and it was all i needed to hear. [applause] but as we walked out of the building, i realized i lost track of my chief of staff. but man i literally worked with for 10 years and he was my chief of staff when i was conference chairman

so one of the things that is problematic for him is that there's testimony by greg jacob and others around mike pence when eastman was trying to persuade everybody that the vice president had the power to reject unilaterally the election results of georgia and from other states. one of the problems is that craig jacobs says that eastman knew that the supreme court was going to -- >> craig joiacobs -- >> pence's former general counsel. knew this would be rejected by the supreme court. yet he kept pushing forward, partly because thait wanted the chaos. they wanted enough time to be able to get the political actors to come in and essentially overturn the election results. so that's part of what you see in the georgia election there -- i'm sorry -- in the georgia charges is this idea that they were pressuring people in georgia, legislators. they were trying to get access to voting machines. they were doing all kinds of things, all in the pursuit of buying time so that then the political actors could take over and sway the election to the former president that he had lost. >> this role of the l

that as you have indicated as the indictment indicates and writing and then in conversation with greg jacobin a meeting on january 4th as well. so none of it matters, the sequence, both ideas were battered unconstitutional. john eastman knew it, mike pence certainly know, time is donald trump noted. >> so barbara mcquade, donald trump's defense lawyer has tonight publicly entered two statements from donald trump very similar in warding but two statements that andrew suggests could be admissible in the trial, a trial or no one expects donald trump to take the stand and testify himself, this might be evidence in that case as presented by the prosecution as an admission to what they are accusing donald trump of doing? >> i think donald trump and his lawyers play different gain in the rest of us. i think we are all focused on the evidence it's gonna come in on trial in the court, and i think what he said tonight is harmful and, it's not gonna provide any valid legal offense, but i think donald trump's game is to win in the court of public opinion. detained the potential jury pool, solely needs

could this inspire the kind of bipartisanship that greg jacob was talking about?course it would have implications for future vacancyd i contacted the archives at the university of indiana and try to reach the senator who unfortunately at that stage of his life was not in a position to remember that part of his life and had been suffering. they did very nicely recommend that i speak with jay who i think is on this panel, on resume today and he was very graciously having lunch with me at the center club in new york city. we talked about this phrase party opposite appeared i found more information that albert did not want to take a partisan advantage to become president. he diday not know about this pln to resign. but jay told me he recalled a memo advising carl albert about this, that and the other. he said, in the carl albert archives. so i looked in the carl albert archives and i found a 19 page memo that ted sorensen, who of course was president kennedy's alter ego and before we had chief of staff's in the white house he was essentially his chief of staff and the

according to reporting from the "washington post," one of the vice president's aides, greg jacob, whosenate floor. >> he said in the email, we're now under siege. >> eastman fired back, blaming the riots on the vice president and his staff. >> they broke through. >> john eastman responded by saying it was actually the vice president's fault and mr. jacobs' fault for the quote, unquote siege. he said if you had done what neds to be done, you would have had a debate, if you would have gone forward like we asked you to go, it wouldn't be happening to you right now. >> he's got a gun! >> the conversation you had with your wife, you've been off to war before, having conversations with loved ones. was it like that? >> this was different. i never really had a sense that i might not survive this. there was a real sense that if they're in the capitol complex, and they've already overrun two or three line of police barricades, there is nothing to stop them from the rest of the complex. it was an emotional conversation. it was nothing i've ever had before. i hope to never have that conversation