tim heaphy, let me -- only getting to do that now, finally.e says the first time i heard about this, in early december, i said i rejected it, refused to accept it. the very first time. and then the last time of course was 11:44 pm on january 6th. >> yeah, he did ask a lot of people after december if it was true. i think he was doing some diligence and calling people, he called dan quayle, he called paul ryan. he didn't talk to judge looted big luttig -- asked greg craig jacob, his lawyer to research the situation even before december. but what he said there in the clip in indiana today's consistent with what marc short and greg jacob told 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, a

three >> tim heaphy, we have all been doing our own readings at this indictment. the only name in is donald trump. others are described as coconspirator one and so forth. some are described as being lawyers or chief of staff, for example. mark meadows is referred to in their, at least one says chief of staff. you probably have a better reading than any of us about all of these characters in this indictment, who they are. so my question is, in my reading of it, i did not see a single democrat who would be called as a witness for the prosecution in this case. every witness for the prosecution that i can identify in this indictment is a republican. most of the republicans who worked for donald trump. >> lawrence, and that again, very common in our investigation. in a conspiracy, the people would not of the conspiracy are insiders, right? people in the room where things have been, who witnessed conversations with the president for relevant offense. everything that is alleged in that indictment took place in the justice department, in the white house, in state legislat

three >> tim heaphy, we have all been doing our own readings at this indictment. the only name in is donald trump. others are described as coconspirator one and so forth. some are described as being lawyers or chief of staff, for example. mark meadows is referred to in their, at least one says chief of staff. you probably have a better reading than any of us about all of these characters in this indictment, who they are. so my question is, in my reading of it, i did not see a single democrat who would be called as a witness for the prosecution in this case. every witness for the prosecution that i can identify in this indictment is a republican. most of the republicans who worked for donald trump. >> lawrence, and that again, very common in our investigation. in a conspiracy, the people would not of the conspiracy are insiders, right? people in the room where things have been, who witnessed conversations with the president for relevant offense. everything that is alleged in that indictment took place in the justice department, in the white house, in state legislat

we have more breaking news back with andrea ways meng, barbara mcquade and tim heaphy and john laureloe donald trump's criminal defense lawyer when another trump supporting television show. this tonight, this time on newsmax, and he said it again. he offered testimony from donald trump. he said on television tonight. at the and, he meaning trump asked mr. pence to pause the voting for ten days, allow the legislators to weigh in and then they can make a determination to audit or re-audit or recertify. so there he is saying again deliberately none, this is no slip, this is no accident. this was his decision to go on television tonight to say that at the end he asked mr. pence to pause the voting for ten days. andrew weissmann, as we have already pointed out, the lawyer who was advising them on this, in writing said, he believed it's against the law to do that. >> there is no advice of counsel for that reason, the white house deputy counsel told president trump at the time at john eastman actually said this theory does not work. by the way, the opening part of what john floral added whic

. >> do you think, tim heaphy, that jeffrey clark who sort of orchestrated the coup atop doj and markoverturning trump's defeat, do you think they'll be charged by fani willis today or tomorrow? >> i think they have exposure. absolutely. as our report indicated, i think arguably both jeff clark and mark meadows and a number of others participated participated very directly in the plot to overturn the georgia election and others. mark meadows, as you said, went to a recount place -- we actually had testimony that he wanted to bring challenge coins, right? these trinkets that people give out as sort of a white house swag. and it was cassidy hutchinson and some of his young staff that said that may be inappropriate. he was very directly manifesting intent to see this effort succeed. jeff clark, he authors that crazy letter that he wants to send to the georgia legislature saying factually there are serious concerns about the election when doj had already exhausted all investigations of alleged voter fraud in georgia and putting forth this legal theory that the state legislature can disreg

with former federal prosecutor and former lead investigator for the january 6th select committee, tim heaphym, thanks for being with us. one of the strengths of trying a rico case is that it puts pressure on lower-level co-defendants to potentially flip, right? to collaborate with prosecutors and provide evidence. is that what you would be aiming for if you were prosecuting this case? >> yeah. in a rico case all defendants are responsible for the acts of others as long as it's reasonably foreseeable to them. so people don't fully appreciate that they could be held legally responsible, charged with and sentenced for things that are done in furtherance of a goal that they shared but things they did not personally do. so it certainly creates a great deal of leverage on president trump's co-defendants, who are less culpable within the racketeering enterprise as charged, to cooperate, make a business exchange with the prosecutor to provide information in exchange for leniency. >> now, you've dealt with some of these names as part of your time on the january 6th committee, and that investigation.

i spoke to tim heaphy, the lead investigator to the house january 6th attack, about the way his worky's indictment. thank you so much forjoining us on bbc news. you are the top staff investigator for the house enquiry into the january six attacks. getting the charges brought by special reflect what you found? they do almost precisely. _ reflect what you found? they do almost precisely. read - reflect what you found? they do almost precisely. read the - almost precisely. read the indictment quickly this evening since has been issued and reads a lot like ourfinal since has been issued and reads a lot like our final report. since has been issued and reads a lot like ourfinal report. it outlines a multi— part intentional plan to disrupt the joint session on the transfer of power. the plan took many different forms which we laid out over the course of our work and the special council has now picked up on as well. a lot of things we knew before, still powerful to see it laid out in black and white in a criminal indictment.— black and white in a criminal indictment. . ,., indictment. the in

live now to tim heaphy, former lead investigator for the house january 6th select committee.hank you so much forjoining us. i think for people who perhaps haven't covered every twist and turn of the story, just explain to us why that january 6th select committee was so crucial to what we are seeing now? facts are what makes cases and determines outcomes, and the select committee uncovered the core facts here. congress created the select committee to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding the attack on the capitol, and that's what we did through a series of hearings and ultimately and 845 page report. the committee set forth the core allegations that remain allegations against mr trump, he and his co—conspirators specifically intended to prevent the transfer of power. so the indictment is built on a determination of fact by the select committee. find a determination of fact by the select committee.— a determination of fact by the select committee. and this was an extraordinary _ select committee. and this was an extraordinary committee, - select committee. and this

i spoke to tim heaphy, the lead investigator for that committee about this indictment.o much for joining us on bbc news. you are the top staff investigator for the house enquiry into the january 6 attacks. getting the charges brought by the special counsel reflect what you found? they do almost precisely. read the indictment quickly this evening since has been issued and reads a lot like our final report. it outlines a multi—part, intentional plan to disrupt the joint session and ultimately the transfer of power. the plan took many different forms which we laid out over the course of our work and the special counsel has now picked up on as well. a lot of things we knew before, still powerful to see it laid out in black and white in a criminal indictment. the indictment said the former president enlisted co—conspirators. what did you make of that? yeah, he did not act alone. the indictment actually describes their conduct. it's obvious that it is rudolph giuliani, john eastman, cindy powell, some of the lawyers that helped him devise this multipart plan to submit fake el

live now to tim heaphy, who served as the top investigator for the special house committee that scrutinisedry 6th riots. you are very familiar with the charges laid out in this indictment, leading the investigation into january sixth. how strong a case does jack smith make in the indictment in your opinion? the indictment _ indictment in your opinion? tue: indictment reads indictment in your opinion? tte: indictment reads very much like the select committee's report, and much of the information contained in the indictment was presented at the select committee hearings last summer. we reached a point, based on that evidence, of making criminal referrals, specifically the same two criminal statutes, two of the three that jack smith has used to charge. the case has only got stronger since then special counsel have some tools that we didn't have. he can immediately push through privilege assertions and get a judge to rule on them, he has used that to get vice president pence, some additional testimony from him and others, so the case has got stronger since we concluded our work, and we had alre

. >> we have interviewed a number of the members as well as tim heaphy, one of the lead counsel. for jack smith who came into this, not until november. do you agree with many of your colleagues that the trump federal court proceeding, should be televised, which would be a decision by the chief justice of the united states supreme court? >> i think that's really up to -- i've had conversations about this. i just don't know. i would leave that up to the justice department. i don't give them advice. i could make the argument either way. the letter is a very powerful one about why it should happen. i think we leave that up to the justice department. as you say, that would be the chief justice of the supreme court, beyond the justice department. i think the point is right now that we just have clarity and we have respect for the legal process. and that is one of the sins of donald trump is that he has disrespected the rule of law and the judicial process in our country. that's just not right. because that is a very important pillar of our foreign policy -- not our foreign policy. i sa

tim heaphy, former lead investigation for the investigation into january 6th.und technical and distance, but when you zero in on it, it's clear, and a little alarming. thanks for your time tonight, sir. >> thanks, rachel. >> we'll be right back. stay with us. steroid free allergy relief that starts working in 30 minutes, while other allergy sprays take hours. with astepro's unbeatably fast allergy relief you can astepro and go! detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults. no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking dofetilide. this can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. if you have a rash or allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help

tim heaphy, barbara mcquade and andrew weissmann thank you very much for staying with me during this breaking news. the 11th hour with stephanie ruhle is next. ie ruhle is next. live pictures of former president donald trump coming for his third arraignment informants. >> it's a bizarre thing. >> the trump gets arrested. >> well it is not the first indictment it is arguably the most important. >> donald trump has been taken into custody by the government he tried to overthrow. >> what we've been fighting for all along is accountability and justice. >> several trump supporters of being here with signs and flags. there are also a lot of people who've been carrying signs that say things like lock-up. >> we're getting realtime information from reporters that are in the medium. >> former president donald trump is standing facing the judge. he says not guilty. >> every bad thing they can get him convicted came out of his mouth. >> this is a very sad day for america. >> donald trump has never respected this country. he said this country was trash and garbage. >> the filth and the decay. >>

let's bring in tim heaphy. whether we were watching that, we were worried about that part of the proceedings. you described this as a potential pattern to mess with witnesses. in this case, he was admonished not to mess with jurors. i have to ask how that felt would youho knowing what you kn about the investigation at the congressional level. >> i appreciate the question. i had the same reaction. i was recalling some information we got from cassidy hutchinson where she said at some point during her cooperation with the committee sheer got a call from another staffer in the white house who said, just so you know, the big guy is reading transcripts. she was told directly. this was secondhand. president trump was following the progress of our investigation and presumably from defense lawyers from which he or his political action committee paid was accessing investigative material. we had a number of witnesses who did receive third party payment of legal fees. not inappropriate. it raises the question as to whether