luttig. for all the retroactive reputation brandishing, that many of the people around trump attempted to do in their depositions. luttig is one person who's fully deserves accolades for standing up when it counted most. luttig was a star -- for many years, he worked in department of justice, where according to npr he served as the behind the same maestro for the burbs administration during the controversial cleric's time it's confirmation hearing in 1991. he then went on to be named a federal judge, public and president in the short list for supreme court g8. many conservative lawyers throughout the years clerked for a, and he was called a feeder judge, his clerk would go on to the supreme court and on to greatness. and that includes senator ted cruz, and the aforementioned john eastman author of the coup medal, he clerked for luttig, before clarence thomas. according to luttig, a day before the election the vice president outside cancel, as luttig to, probably skate pence could not reject e

according to luttig, a day before the election the vice president outside cancel, as luttig to, probablyce could not reject electoral votes. meaning luttig to quote, the constitution does not empower the vice president to alter in any way the votes that have been cast, either of them rejecting certain or otherwise. there's real reason to believe wet luttig road wet push pants over the top. so, i cannot wait to hear what he has to say tomorrow. george conway's himself a conservative lawyer and former republican, he joins me now. george, let's start with the role that luttig has played in his testimony tomorrow. i find myself watching bill barr, and some of these people and almost giving myself eye strain from how hard i'm rolling my eyes. and now they tell us, luttig is in a different category, he was called upon to do this. what do you anticipate will hear from him? >> well, i agree with you, chris, i really want to hear this testimony. i think it's gonna be a blockbuster moment. these hearings. and the reason is, that mike luttig, was a conservative judicial icon, he was leading the peo

key republicans, pence's former white house counsel, greg jacob, and former federal judge, michael luttig, their testimony focused on trump's lawyer, john eastman and his scheme to defy the electoral count act and reverse joe biden's victory. trump was apparently 100% behind eastman's plan, despite being informed over and over that the plan was illegal. greg jacob went on to testify that even eastman himself admitted the plot was against the law. >> when i pressed him on the point, i said, john, if the vice president did what you are asking him to do, we would lose 9-0 in the supreme court, wouldn't we? and he initially started, well, i think we would lose only 7 to 2. but after some further discussion, he acknowledged, yeah, you are right, we would lose 9 to nothing. >> dr. eastman admit in front of the president that his proposal would violate the electoral count act? >> mr. eastman acknowledge that that was the case, even if he knew the more politically palatable option would violate several provisions. but he thought we could do so because in his view, the electoral count act was unco

judge luttig had this sort of story career. he had worked at the supreme court before he went to law school. he left and went to the white house. he worked in the justice department. he became the youngest federal judge in the country. and when he speaks, people in federalist society and conservative legal circles, they listen. he has a brilliant mind and a forceful way of articulating his analysis. and he is highly influential. the hope here has to be that his testimony can breakthrough to those people, the people who will be listening to him. those people will be influential, when their own communities, and the hope has to be that this is one way to reach republicans. maybe not quickly, maybe not immediately, but as word of his testimony, and his argument reaches out into communities, you know, just this one simple legal idea, the notion that the founding fathers could not have intended that one man, the outgoing vice president, determined the outcome of our elections, that can't be what the 12th amendment means. that's a pow

michael luttig, who was set to testify at the january 6th hearing this afternoon. now, as you noted, he's expected to condition democrat trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election, and paint a clear picture of democracy on the brink. in a statement to the committee, obtained by jamie gangel, he says it is breathtaking that these arguments even were conceived, let alone entertained by the president of the united states at that perilous moment in history. he goes on to say, had the vice president of the united states obeyed the president of the united states, america would immediately have been plunged into what would have been tantamount to a revolution within a paralyzing constitutional crisis. and as you noted, john eastman was actually a clerk, a former clerk of michael luttig. i also want to note also testifying today, mike pence's chief legal counsel greg jacob who witnessed behind the scene efforts, he sent an email blaming him for the violence. back to you. >> pam brown, thank you so much. big day. we know you'll be watching closely. this morning "the new

eastman was once a clerk for luttig and on january 5th, 2021, after pence's lawyer asked for help luttigweeted out that pence didn't have the power to overturn the election. brianna? >> pamela, thank you for that. >>> joining me now cnn's senior legal analyst and former state and federal prosecutor ellie honing. i want to talk about what we're going to see in a few hours as this next round of hearings gets under way. they will focus on mike pence and what he did and didn't do that donald trump wanted him to do on january 6. where does this fit in the larger picture that the committee is trying to paint? >> so, john, this is the last second hail mary pass, this is donald trump's last desperate effort to hold on to power. now, it is december 2020, all the lawsuits are over, donald trump has lost. all the states have certified their votes. the only thing left to be done is the formal counting of electoral votes in congress on january 6. now, the law tells us that the vice president presides over that and he has two jobs, two jobs, to open the electoral votes and to announce the vote. that's

do you know whether luttig's information got to the president of the united states? >> that's something i hope we'll find out today. but judge luttig has in the past been very emphatic about the idea that there was no basis whatsoever for the claim that the vice president has the unilateral power in our constitutional order essentially to declare who will be president and who will not. if you think about it, that would be most ridiculous person for the founders of our constitution to place in charge of appointing a president. but, of course, the founders were not interested in any single individual appointing the president of the united states, and we have a system that ultimately relies on the will of the people, in the states as expressed through the electoral college. but what they were purporting to do was to come up with the scheme where they could nullify the electoral college votes that have been sent in by the governors and their certificates of ascertainment of who actually won in the states and then just allow donald trump to win by vanquishing dozens and d

judge luttig said revolution. we were as frank putts it 40 feet away from a situation in which the vice president of the united states and the speaker of the house, the two people in line for presidency after trump could have been torn limb from limb. that is like -- that makes the french reign of terror look like a nice game of tennis. it was -- i think you're seeing everyone's stunned reaction to it. as we learned monday that there was ever an iota of any legitimacy and learned today and it was dry to some was that this wasn't just a farfetched theory. it was intellectually contemptible made up out of whole cloth and trump embraced it and the more harrowing consequences almost ensued. i find myself still breathless in the wake of this hearing. >> it was and again i think some of the separation from taking us to law school in that first hour and then showing us almost an staccato bit of testimony from the senior aides to trump and pence with two such different feelings but in the substance it was the most devasta

and this goes back to the luttig testimony.son the first eyewitness to -- say pence, if you followed an order from his president, would have started a revolution. the other people around that revolution where the insurrectionists, where the extremist groups who had testified. short rose was the first one, i think, you said they were waiting for the -- insurrection act. >> and for you, our, they [inaudible] were willing to murder him had they gotten him or nancy pelosi. there's a reason he wants that pardon. he understands he actually stood on the ellipse and help ramp up that crowd, that he maybe knew was the backstop for the coup leaders, who were doing all the recon. could he be in that kind of criminal exposure for threatening pence's life for potentially putting pence in mortal danger. like, what can he be up for. ? >> there is a sedition conspiracy case, and the question is, how high does it go? and prosecutors aggressively charge conspiracy all the time, like in rico, where you are part of it. it doesn't mean you did ever

they were both clerks to judge luttig when he was on the bench. him testifying tomorrow about his role in stopping this plot is going to be kind of a heavyweight moment. again, particularly, for people on the right, because he holds such sway there. but also -- i said we have a lot to get to, boy, it has been a day -- today, on the eve of that next hearing tomorrow, which should be very dramatic, we had just a head snapping revelation from the january 6th investigation. and it was about basically, the other people. the other lawmakers besides mike pence, who were specifically being hunted by the pro trump mob during the attack. >> [inaudible] nancy! oh, nancy! nancy -- where are you, nancy? >> that is some of that weirdest and most harrowing, unnerving footage from the attack, to this day. and there is a bunch of it. that's one example of it but we've got a lot of it. there is guys walking through the halls of congress, banging on doors, yelling, nancy, nancy! that would before nancy pelosi. what do you think they were going to do if they found he

nbc confirms this afternoon that expected witness, judge michael luttig, will be another live witnessised mike pence and his team in the days before january 6th not to take john eastman's advice and follow the eastman plan. this is where we begin the hour today. jonathan carl is here, the chief washington correspondent for abc news and the author of "betrayal: the final act of the trump show." mike schmidt is here, "new york times" washington correspondent, and with us at the table, joyce vance, former u.s. attorney, now law professor at the university of alabama. mike and joyce are both msnbc contributors. john carl, we start with you. i flipped through "betrayal" again. you write about a lot of what the focus will be on thursday. just remind us sort of, it is perhaps the most dramatic standoff between trump and eastman on one side and pence and those who advised him and worked for him on the other. >> it was incredible intense and had been building up, nicole, for weeks before january 6th. donald trump getting this idea from eastman and others that pence, as he presided over that co

luttig was not counsel the pants they tell me anyway, luttig never spoke to pentz. i'm told he volunteered quote a unquote. his analysis by submitting it unsolicited to the vice president's office. you didn'tt get any of that today. and yet if there is somebody to question it, maybe we wouldl have learned about that . you i'll give you another one , delbar. now as things celebrate, remember they hated him. they wanted to impeach him. they wanted to hang him from a telephone pole like mussolini. now they love him becauseteusso he's useful. well, i have a letter here . it's public from former us attorney in philadelphia, william mcswain, june nine .ad 2020 one he says in part ion election day and afterwards our office received various allegations of voter fraud on election irregularities. this is the u.s. attorney ecin philly as part of my responsibility as a u.s. attorney, i wanted to be transparent with the public and of course investigate fully any allegations. attorney general barr, however, instructed me not to make anyut public statements or put out any press re

judge luttig thank you for being here. issued an important statement earlier today which i urge all americans to read. i'd like to ask you about one of the sentences in your statement and ask if you could explain to us the significance of it. you say had the vice president of the united states obeyed the president of the united states, america would immediately have been plunged into what would have been tantment to a revolution within a paralyzing constitutional crisis. would you elaborate on that for us, judge. >> thank you. that passage in my statement this morning referenced the most foundational concept in america which is the rule of law as i interpret your question, you're asking about that foundational truth of neez united states which we call america. it's the rule of law. that foundational truth is for the united states of america, the profound truth. it's not merely the profound truth. for the united states. it's also the simple truth, the simple foundational truth of the american republic. the hearing is being

from two key advisers, one of them greg jacob, a former counsel to the vice president and michael luttig, retired federal judge and served as an informal adviser of sorts to mike pence. we've gotten a copy of his testimony in which he raised serious alarms if donald trump's pressure campaign succeeded, the implications that could happen for american democracy. he went on to say in his testimony he'll deliver later today the final fateful day calling january 6th the final fateful day for the execution of a well-developed plan by the former president to overturn the 2020 presidential election at any cost." so we expect this to kick off later this afternoon and then this will be the end of this week's hearings as they move on to further hearings next week to lay out what they're calling a seven-part effort by donald trump, a conspiracy they're willinging were interest trmp's ef donald trump's efforts to overturn the election leading to what happened january 6th, 2021. >> manu raju, thank you so much. >>> the january 6th committee is also released new information about the republican congres

witnesses testifying on thursday included the retired conservative judge michael luttig. we will bring you highlights of the hearing and we will stay on at the capitol to speak with poor people's campaign leaders liz theoharis and bishop william barber about this saturday's massive moral march on washington. we are not trying to get back to normal. normal is not what we need. transformation is what we need. we already know truth and love and justice win. our job is to run all the way to the finish line. amy: at first, the u.k. home secretary has approved the extradition of wikileaks founder julian assange to the united states, he faces up to 175 years in prison if convicted of violating the espionage act for publishing classified documents exposing u.s. war crimes in iraq and afghanistan. we'll get an update from julian assange's brother. all that and more, coming up. welcome to democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. u.k. home secretary priti patel has approved the extradition of wikileaks founder julianssange to the united states. as

federal judge michael luttig both who said that trump could not overt the election. >> and luttig depends to provide a sharp condemnation of trump saying in part, quote, no american ought to turn away from january 6 2021 until all of america comes to grips of what be befell yoour country. and we'll have more on that in a moment. plus new details surrounding emails from between john eastma ginni thomas. justices got into a eitither heated fight over to whether to take over the case on the 2020 election. >> and let's begin with manu, he is on capitol hill. talk to us more about what will happen today in this hearing. >> reporter: it will all focus on the pressure on mike pence to take that unconstitutional action on january 6, 2021 to overturn the electoral certified votes of the states here on january 6, something of course that he rejected doing. but going to the genesis of how this theory first came about. looking at the trump attorney john eastman who is a prominent supporter of this and directly tie donald trump's words to the violence that occurred on january 6 as words about mike pen

well, the retired judge j michael luttig gave evidence to the committee today.e is what he had to say about former president donald trump. >> donald trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present danger to erican democracy. >> let's turn to ron christie, friend of the program, who worked in the white house of president george w. bush. ron, when you see those images of mike pence sheltering in a secure underground location and you hear that president trump called him a wimp on the morning of january 6, what's your reaction? >> laura, good evening. my reaction is one of anger. for having wked for the vice president of the united states, dick cheney, and subsequently, the president, the one thing i can tell you is you have to have a constitutional separation of powers. the vice president here in america is also the president of the u.s. senate. so, when you look at what mr. bentz -- what mike pence had to do to certify the election at day, the president of the u.s. and in the executive branch was asking him to do something that simply in my opinion was

judge luttig, mr. jacob, our nation owes you a great debt for your knowledge, integrity, and your loyalty to our constitution. you and vice president pence are exactly the people our nation needed at a critical time. you had the courage to do what was right. in the weeks leading up to january 6th, many people failed this test when they had to choose between their oath to the country or their demands of donald trump. there were others who, like you, stood tall in the face of intimidation. and put our democracy first. they include the judges -- the bogus claims of the election fraud, the senior justice department officials who stood up to donald trump. and the state officials who we will hear from in our next hearing. we're deeply grateful to your courage and your devotion to our country. there are some who think the danger has passed. that even though there were violence and a corrupt attempt to overturn the presidential election, the system worked. i look at it another way. a system nearly failed, and

he asked people like michael luttig. he asked dan quayle. he asked just to be sure. his council asked, no, you need to stick with this. the president of the senate shall, in the presence of the senate and house of the representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted. that's the job. his persistence, maya, is what's mind boggling here, right up until the day of the insurrection he himself gets on at the podium and still starts spouting this demand to mike pence. what do you make of all of this? >> look, i make of all of this what was already largely in the public eye but that these hearings are making crystal clear with additional new and powerful evidence, which is everybody, including those close to donald trump, appointed by donald trump, that donald trump chose to take before senate confirmation, that he relied upon to defend him in impeachment and brought into the white house council's office, these are his close supporters all saying the same thing behind closed doors, which is, no, this is insanity. this is crazy. a judge luttig, t

i'm incomplete agreement with judge luttig. it's unambiguous the vice president does not have the authority to reject electors. no suggestion of any kind that it does. there is no mention of rejecting or objecting to electors anywhere in the 12th amendment. and so the notion that the vice president could do that certainly is not in the text. but the problem that we had and that john eastman raised in our discussions was we had all seen that in congress in 2000, in 2004, in 2016, there had been objections raised to various states. and those had even been debated in 2004. and so here you have an amendment that says nothing about objecting or rejecting and yet we did have some recent practice of that happening within the terms of the electoral conduct. so we started with that text and i recall in my discussion with the vice president he said i can't wait to go to heaven and meet the framers and tell them the work that you did in putting together our constitution is a work of genius. thank you, it was divinely inspired. there is on

judge luttig, mr. jacob, our nation owes you a great debt for your knowledge, integrity, and your loyalty to our constitution. you and vice president pence are exactly the people our nation needed at a critical time. you had the courage to do what was right. in the weeks leading up to january 6th, many people failed this test when they had to choose between their oath to the country or their demands of donald trump. there were others who, like you, stood tall in the face of intimidation. and put our democracy first. they include the judges -- the bogus claims of the election fraud, the senior justice department officials who stood up to donald trump. and the state officials who we will hear from in our next hearing. we're deeply grateful to your courage and your devotion to our country. there are some who think the danger has passed. that even though there were violence and a corrupt attempt to overturn the presidential election, the system worked. i look at it another way. a system nearly failed, and

cbs news has learned one of today's star witnesses, retired conservative federal judge michael luttig, is expected to testify before the house panel investigating january 6th, 2021, that america's democracy was almost stolen during president trump's efforts to remain in office. before the deadly capitol attack, luttig is said to have urged vice president pence and his aides to resist mr. trump's pressure campaign to delay or block the congressional certification of joe biden's victory. in the panel's first two hearings, the house select committee began its effort to directly connect the former president to the insurrection. >> will tell the story of how donald trump lost an election and knew he lost an election, and as a result of his loss decided to wage an attack on our democracy. >> reporter: on the eve of thursday's hearing, the select committee released video of a tour led by georgia republican congressman barry loudermilk the day before the capitol attack with some of the guests documenting locations like staircases, security checkpoints, and hallways. the panel says the footage

eastman was a clerk of luttig.h of them testified that eastman's theory was not legal, not constitutional, and that it also had no historical precedent. despite all of that, eastman continued to push this theory that, and hislan, that pence could overturn the election results by simply rejecting the slate of electors sent to congress by the stes. what we heard from jacob today in testimony was that in his conversations with eastman, eastman acknowledged either tacitly or directly that his plan was not legal. let's watch. >> he said, absolutely. al gore did not have the basis to do it in 2000, kamala harris should not be able to do it in 2024. but i think you should do it today. when i pressed him on the point, i said, john, if the vice president did what you are asking him to do, we will loon 9-0 in the -- lose 9-0 in the supreme court. he initially started saying, i think you would only lose 7-2. after further discussion, acknowledged well, you are right, we would lose 9-0. laura: despite all of those acknowledgme

michael luttig. luttig is one of the most widely respected conservative legal scholars in the country. today, he laid out the stakes of this attempted coup: >> the foundational truth is the rule of law. that foundational truth is, for the united states of america, the profound truth. but it's not merely the profound truth for the united states. it's also the simple truth. the simple, foundational truth of the american republic. (applause) >> stephen: agh! is anyone in jail yet? no? okay. judge luttig was unequivocal about eastman's plan. >> i would have laid my body across the road, before i would have let the vice president overturn the 2020 election, on the basis of that historical precedent. >> stephen: brave words. but based on his energy level, i'm pretty sure he'd have laid his body down way before he got to the road. first patch of grass he saw. then the committee moved on to the second part of their argument, that, despite pence's refusal to go along with the plot, the former president kept p

so when you call judge luttig distinguished, that under south and. for conservatives he's like the equivalent of president reagan for judges. there is no one more respected, when i was in law school, for the next 20 years than judge luttig among conservatives, and indeed, among liberals. we follow with them all the time. but he was brilliant. this is a guy who was number two on the shortlist of the supreme court, justice alito ultimately get got that seat. but this is as respected in this die hard conservative, and then as you will find, and who is he saying that about about the crazy advice, his own former law clerk, john eastman. so, i guess congratulations for ted cruz today, because he's no longer judge luttig's -- but you know, i think what it really showed me is what i think american constitutional law is all about. what's our constitution is all about, it's not about putting your guys in power, or anything like that, it's about dividing power, but transitions of power, and the like. and john eastman ultimately embodies the jurisprudence that t

i am an incomplete agreement with judge luttig.t is an ambiguous that the vice president does not have the authority to reject electors. there is no suggestion of any kind that it does. there is no mention of rejecting or objecting to electors anywhere in the 12th amendment. so, the notion that the vice president could do that certainly is not in the text. the problem that we had and that john eastman raised in our discussions was we had all seen that in congress in 2000, in 2004, in 2016 there had been objections raised to various states. and those had even been debated in 2004. and so here you have an amendment that says nothing about objecting or rejecting and yet we did have some recent practice of that happening within the terms of the electoral count act. we started with that text. i recall in my discussion with the vice president. he said, i can't wait to go to heaven and meet the framers and tell them, the work that you did in putting together our constitution is a work of genius. thank you. it was divinely inspired. there

for that matter, i know craig jacob and mike luttig. they're all friends of mine.nk ginni thomas was involved in any effort to overturn the election. i think she's exercising her first amendment rights. i think she's forwarding emails, which i think were unwise and say crazy things. we should also realize that john eastman clerked for justice thomas so, ginni thomas might well have asked him something. but i can't believe she was involved in an effort to actually overturn the election. the other thing i would think is i would bet when greg jason testifies tomorrow, when mike luttig testifies tomorrow, they're not going to think ginni thomas was intimately involved with an ever effort to overturn the election. i think she's one of those many americans who believed was president trump was saying. i think it was erroneous. i don't think the election was stolen and i don't think the united states was defrauded. i don't think there was a stolen election. but i think maybe ginni thomas was worried and concerned and expressing her views. but i don't think she actually did

former federal judge michael luttig didn't mince words about threats to the electoral system. donald trump. and his. allies and supporters are a clear and present danger. to american democracy. trump confidant john eastman engineered a scheme which hinged on vice president pence, rejecting slates of electoral ballots as he presided over certification of the electoral college on january 6th . but pence's counsel testified that eastman apparently wanted two sets of rules. one for everyone else and a special set for former president trump, he said. absolutely al gore did not have a basis to do it in 2000. kamala harris shouldn't be able to do it in 2024. but i think you should do it today warned that an effort by pence to tilt the scale toward mr trump would pl a revolution. the 16 committee hearings are consuming summertime viewing hours reminiscent of the watergate hearings in the summer of 1973. and iran contra hearings in the summer of 1987 were definitely trending there or more doing this for the historical record that when we look back the way we look back at watergate, um

and i thought that was, luttig, as you described, very dramatic.e chose his words so carefully, that they lead it with a gut punch. he was advising pence. he had pence, who told him to do it. it was trump, and he's the first live witness to testify to trump, being atop the chain of command for the coup plot. congresswoman elaine luria, on the select committee, said to me today, the method of the committee is to go through each of the topics, and show this sort of cacophony of voices putting the same thing beyond a reasonable doubt. i think we'll get to the end. there won't be a debate of whether or not there's criminality. the first date was about proving beyond reasonable doubt that trump knew it. second, it was about proving beyond a reasonable doubt that eastman had this plot, and knew it was illegal. and to your point today, it was proving beyond any doubt that they knew there will be violence, and that mike pence was threatened, and that went all the way to trump, and he agreed on it. >> and the dramatic testimony that we've got today, the dra

judge luttig is right.lear and present danger. he somehow overlooked the fact that this so-called simple protest led to police officers just having the hell beaten out of them. one going home and dying of a stroke the next day. others committing suicide because of what they saw that day. he somehow forgot that his own party members, his own allies were calling, screaming, begging him to call off the mob. the people were going to get hurt, the people were going to die. and the contempt -- this is what, you know, the people clapping out there, i would love to know what ralph reed thinks of the people clapping out of there when donald trump just said that mike pence could have just snapped his fingers and completely upended the constitution. because what donald trump showed in that meeting place was absolute contempt for the constitution. absolute contempt for what conservatives used to talk about as far as law and order. absolute contempt for our men and women in blue, many of them just beaten senseless. >> t

judge luttig, i have the incredible honor of serving as when we are locklear.did was john eastman. and you've written that doctor eastman's theory that the vice president can determine who the next president of the united states is, isn't your words, incorrect adam term. could you explain briefly your analysis. >> it was my honor, mr. wood, to have you serve as my locklear. i could answer that question perfectly if i had at my disposal either mr. eastman's tweet or my own analytical tweet of september 21st. but i don't. but that said, let me try to remember the analysis of mr. eastman's analysis. >> and judge, i can read to you into the audience, i think it was a really key passage from your very insightful analysis. when you wrote, i believe that professor eastman was incorrect at every turn of the analysis in his january 2nd memorandum. beginning with his claim that there were legitimate competing slates of electors present in from seven states. you've already addressed that issue. but your next sentence said continuing to his conclusion that the vice preside

>> well, judge luttig laid it out. he presents a clear and present danger.ou have the headwinds, as michael said, against the democrats here. but i do see -- these hearings are much, much more effective than i thought they were going to be. >> how so? >> well, it's, first of all, it's produced incredibly well. everything's done very clearly. we are getting one shocking, except not i'm shocked by any of it, you know. i'm not. but i think -- you know i wouldn't be shocked in the next hearing, if we find out that trump is the one who designed the gallows. i mean, there is nothing that shocks me, but i think the american people who are watching this, and i've seen some polling, it's not a huge increase -- >> a lot of people are watching. >> a lot of people are watching, and the number of americans, the percentage of americans who want to see him prosecuted has increased. and listen, a number of people have said this now, but i've been saying the only thing worse than prosecuting him is not prosecuting him. and we have to. this guy led a conspiracy to overturn a

to hear from key pence advisors -- his former counsel greg jacob and retired federal judge michael luttig. their reports of closed door testimony from marc short, pence's one-time chief of staff, will also be included. earlier tonight, short talked about trump's actions that led to the riot. >> i've shared that i think the president was poorly advised by a lot of the people around him at that time. i think ultimately the buck stops with the president. he has responsibility to listen to advice or to discard advice. >> as the house committee hold these hearings, the investigation continues, the washington post reporting on a new revelation about ginni thomas. she, of course, is the wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas. the paper says the panel now has emails between ginni thomas herself and lawyer john eastman, who once clerked for clarence thomas and who played a very big part in trump's plot to stay in power. the committee is also intensifying its focus on republican congressman barry loudermilk. let's say his name again barry loudermilk -- do not forget it. this guy gave a tour

luttig today declared if pence had done what trump wanted him to do, the consequences would have been dire. >> that declaration of donald trump as the next president would have plunged america into what i believe would have been tantamount to a revolution within a constitutional crisis in america. >> jon karl with us live from capitol hill tonight. jon, you were on the air with us today, all day long, and i know abc news has learned that donald trump and mike pence haven't talked since last summer? >> reporter: it's been a year, almost a year since they last talked, but pence has said publicly and bluntl he believes donald trump was wrong and, quote, there's almost no idea more un-american than the notion that any one person could choose the president. >> and jon, we learned today that after it became clear that the election would not be overturned, the night of january 6th, that lawyer that president trump had teamed up with on this scheme to halt the vert if i case, john eastman that that lawyer asked to be included on the list of possible por dons? >> reporter: he was looking for a

i am an incomplete agreement with judge luttig. it is an ambiguous that the vice president does not have the authority to reject electors. there is no suggestion of any kind that it does. there is no mention of rejecting or objecting to electors anywhere in the 12th amendment. so, the notion that the vice president could do that certainly is not in the text. the problem that we had and that john eastman raised in our discussions was we had all seen that in congress in 2000, in 2004, in 2016 there had been objections raised to various states. and those had even been debated in 2004. and so here you have an amendment that says nothing about objecting or rejecting and yet we did have some recent practice of that happening within the terms of the electoral count act. we started with that text. i recall in my discussion with the vice president. he said, i can't wait to go to heaven and meet the framers and tell them, the work that you did in putting together our constitution is a work of genius. thank you. it was divinely inspired. ther