welcome to "the beat." i'm ari melber. we are tracking a lot of news, including what everybody has their eye on, the january 6th committee's primetime hearing, their final hearing expected to detail trump's inaction during the insurrection and comes hour after president biden got a diagnosis today. white house saying it's mild symptoms, he's taking medication and is double boosted. you see the video where he says he's doing well. any update we'll tell you. the chairman bennie thompson has contracted covid also this week, so he'll participate virtually. the focus is on what donald

trump failed to do and what that says about his mind set. was this a ray yacht that got out of control or something he welcomed, which why, according to many, he did not try to stop it. specifically 187 minutes that went as this insurrection raged, as people were hurt, as officers were beaten on camera, and trump sat in the white house and would not take action, would not intervene, would not do things that really mattered like immediately use his power to activate the national guard, nor use his indirect power, what is sometimes called the soft power. the people listened to you, there they're because of and you have a mega phone, in an instant, in one minute, they could have tweeted or gone out to the lectern and said, i didn't mean this. don't do. that calm it down. we all know he never did any a that. committee member adam kinzinger releasing some new video testimony about all of this today. >> to the best of my recollection he was always in the dining room.

>> what did they say, mr. meadow s or the president? >> i think everyone was watching the tv. >> it's my understanding he was watching television. >> when you were in the dining room in these discussions was the capitol visible on the screen on the television? >> yes. >> yes. parts of this hearing will involve the duh portion of events. you had so many nights and so many hearings that have had new revelations. some of this is what america lived through. indeed, people who wanted to hold a nice opinion of donald trump felt surprised that day when he did nothing. let me tell you something, many, many other people were not surprised, because they viewed the intentional violence that calls to authoritarian fascism as of a piece to what he had been doing five years. the committee will highlight the

next day's actions, which we probably know less about, including outtakes that were obtained of recorded remarks when he balked. quote, over the course of hour he resisted holding the rioters to account, which again goes to his mind set. was this something that was out of control, an unfortunate cascaing event, or planned all along? aides pressured the president by telling him he might be kicked out of office early. the live witnesses tonight with sarah matthews, a former publicist press secretary, and matthew pottinger. they did resign, unlike so many other trump aides who stayed to the end. and another sign of the heat, former chief of staff mark meadows where he was barraged. >> have you heard from the department of justice since the -- >> i don't comment on anything -- >> did you ask for a pardon? >> i don't comment on anything.

>> seeing these hearings does it change your mind about what you went through with president trump? >> do you watch the hearings? >> i don't comment on anything on january 6th. >> even in the no comment you get a little peek of revelation. it's not that he doesn't comment on anything. it's not that he has some policy. by the way, there are officials who have big jobs and say they don't do walk and talk officials. no, no, he actually made a mistake there. he doesn't comment on january 6th. something about that is too hot for him. let's get into it on this big night for america and the hearings. vi nick akerman and "new york times" editorial member mara gabe on set with us on the big night. welcome to you both. >> thank you. >> thanks for having me. >> we look at that two hours or 18. minutes, it matters to the public. it matters to the anyone who would want a president who defends the country. does any of it matter legally as the doj told us they're watching these hearings? >> of course it matters legally, because i think what he was

doing -- they talk about his inaction, but his whole plan was inaction. he wanted those rioters to get into the capital to stop the count of the electoral college vote and probably also to get vice president pence out of there and whisked away by the secret service who have since destroyed their texts that probably relate to this. but that was the plan was to keep that violence on. so it wasn't just inaction. it was also a part of a plan to stop the vote. >> yeah, i mean, i think what we're going to see tonight is there's the legal case, and then there's also the political and moral case, and i do anticipate that we'll see a strengthening of that case. the point here is that this is really about the president's intentionality and not just his mind set, but his continued mind set throughout those 187 minutes. so you can't say, oh, it was a single mistake. maybe i said the wrong thing on twitter or i went too far. no, you see the violence. you see police officers and

others being beaten to defend american democracy, and those who practice it, and if you're the president of the united states, you think that's a good time to either join them, according to previous testimony, or sit down and watch some tv, it seems. and so that tells us a lot about how he was using the violence politically. that's really what's important here. this is not something that just got out of control. this was essentially his plan "b," so if he couldn't get the electors to switch sides and put him into the white house, even though he didn't win the election, then maybe if you use some violence, you know, you can kind of persuade people who otherwise wouldn't have been persua persuadable. it's an insult to democracy and americans. >> congresswoman loria who's on the committee saying this late today. let's take a look. >> if you were president, wouldn't you just jump into action? wouldn't you call everyone in your administration, your cabinet who could come in and

help quell this and monitor the situation carefully? he really sat in relative isolation and didn't take action, even at very strong urging of the people around him. >> nick, this is really striking because it's what everyone lived through that day, but it made less sense, as i alluded to in our introduction to people who wanted a benign view. now that we know more it makes sense. there may have been peel in government who thought it wasn't that bad and thought, well, now he'll do something. what do you think will come through as they present this tonight? if it was a trial presentation or trial lawyer, how do you take something the jury might say, okay, i know this now. how do you enliven it or show the import? >> i think the biggest piece of evidence will be when the committee first subpoenaed president trump's presidential paper, the outtakes on his statement that he ultimately made.

if you listen to that again, which i did today, i mean, that in itself is pretty outrageous. he lies about the fact that he won by a landslide, he won the election, and that basically it was stolen from his supporters. all of that's a lie, and he basically wishes them well. but i don't know what's on these other outtakes. they're got to be a lot worse. i mean, this must wind up being a complete confession of some sort once you put all these together, and that's what i'm going to be watching for tonight. i'm going to be standing by and standing on waiting for that to come out, to paraphrase donald trump, and see exactly what this evidence shows, because i think it's going to be a blockbuster. >> it always does seem to be a blockbuster, right? it seems worse every time, every hearing, than we would possibly have imagined. i also just -- i think that the

people who are willing to come forward has been a source of hope, i think, for many americans. the things that happened that day were horrific. i think trump's willingness to use violence was a new line that he broke that day, and so i do think there are americans who looked at that and were disappointed or shocked, i guess, to your point, though many of us were not. but i am heartened every time i see more witnesses come forward, people who left the trump white house, we'll hear from tonight, and i do think that gives them some credibility, because they left at the time seeing that violence, realizing that was not the right thing some we're going to hear from some people who did the right thing. and that's always heartening. you hear from one good public servant after the other, people who are risking their reputations, and in some cases, their privacy, if not safety to

come forward, and it's high stakes. and even though the production value i think is high and certainly it's shocking, it's great tv, it's also just a really sad story about the night and the day that our democracy was under attack. >> yeah, the other big news, nick, has been the secret service. it's now a criminal probe into how evidence was destroyed. dhs doing that watchdog work. what do you make of this? as a watergate prosecutor you're no stranger to the fact there can be the bad guys inside government, even at high levels. in fairness, many secret service agents are out there daily risking their lives. they will take a bullet, and a lot of americans appreciate that. on the other hand, it's the dhs itself, their bosses -- it's not me saying this -- it's the dhs saying it looks like there might be crimes inside the secret service. why might they go that far? >> the big issue as i alluded to before, if the ultimate goal was to stop the electoral college

count to get vice president pence out of the capitol, get him as far away as possible so the count couldn't go on that night, that is what the secret service would want to cover up big time, if that's what happened. and we do know there's a guy tony ornato who was a secret service agent who trump basically put in a political position in the white house it was right in the middle of what was going on that day. >> right, so it's sort of -- to make a rough and nerdy analogy, it's like when you hear about a trump guy clark at doj trying to break rules to help him, and you hear about another trump guy ornato in service, they got in there. the president can install all sorts of people, but they may not represent the whole secret service core. if you want to secret service to do its job honestly, bravely, and fairly, you got to get any bad apple out of there. i got to take a break. thank you nick akerman and mara gay for kicking us off on a special night. then we turn to something else.

steve bannon. actually owning steve bannon. i'm going to explain what happened in court today. my break when we're back after our shortest break, in 60 seconds. r shortest break, in 60 r shortest break, in 60 seconds.i. inside a panini. egging, maining, siding, plain-ing. debunk the inglorious. one shape's victorious. kraft singles. square it. alright, limu, give me a socket wrench, pliers, and a phone open to libertymutual.com they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need...

and a blowtorch. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ of any person in the trump administration, steven k. bannon testified 30 mule hours in front of the mueller commission, 20 hours in schiff committee. every time ends the exact way, executive privilege, a lawyer was engaged. they worked it out. >> steve bannon discussing his last testimony on the court step after a rough day for him at this criminal trial. the judges rejected the efforts to try to delay the trial or bring in some new defenses, after prosecutors need bold move -- this is the garland doj -- those prosecutors just rested their case yesterday after calling just two witnesses, a show of confidence.

it puts pressure on bannon's team to respond with their own case or witnesses. and remember, mr. bannon vowed to seize on this very case to go after speaker pelosi and put democrats through hell and go on offense. >> i'm telling you right now, this is going to be the misdemeanor from hell for america garland, nancy pelosi, and joe biden. we're going to go on the offense. we're tire offend playing defense. we're going to go on the offense and stand by. >> okay, stand by. that was the threat. that was the vow. and maybe some bannon or maga supporters believed it then or even believe it now. but today shows none of that was true. bannon has the right to mount a defense at trial or not and to present relevant witnesses so he can provide evidence that helps him, try to go on offense to some degree legally by mounting a defense but today shows none

of that happened. it was all talk. while the doj's case was short, bannon's it turns out, is zero. no defense. today his lawyers actually made it official. they are folding. they will not all any witnesses or mount any legal defense, and that means bannon's lawyers rested, which sparks the judge confirming that directly with mr. bannon, the defendant, that he is waving the option and right to testify in his own defense. bannon responding, yes, your. now, there is a strategy here. in court, the burden is on the prosecutors to prove their case them must come up with enough evidence. the defendants don't have a burden in this system to prove anything or provide witnesses or evidence, so this has become this week a kind of legal game of chicken. the doj prosecutors confidently conveying to the jury they're basically arguing bannon's guilt is so obvious it could be proven in two days with two witnesses -- simple.

now, bannon's defense is rebutting that by trying to convey to the jury that they think there's actually nothing to debate here, no details to discuss, because they argue it's not about facts. the whole trial is just political persecution. and they are basically, as a legal strategy, hunting for one sympathetic juror who may share that doubt, and bannon is presumed innocent and the jury will have the last word as always. but let's be clear. for a man who spent months huffing and puffing about going on offense, not defense, well, today, the fact is he did neither. declining to even play defense. >> we're going the go on the offense. we're tire offend playing defense. offense. we're tire offend playing we're tire offend playing defense.ou have technology that's easier to control...

that can scale across all your clouds... we got that right? [whistling]

as a main street bank, pnc has helped over 7 million kids develop their passion for learning. and now we're providing 88 billion dollars to support underserved communities... ...helping us all move forward financially. pnc bank: see how we can make a difference for you. millions have made the switch from the big three to xfinity mobile. that means millions are saving hundreds a year on their wireless bill. and all of those millions are on the nation's most reliable 5g network, with the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction. that's a whole lot of happy campers out there. and it's never too late to join them. get unlimited data with 5g included for just $30 a line per month when you get 4 lines. switch to xfinity mobile today. wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community

centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities. . the final insurrection hearing is of course tonight. it's the capstone of a congressional process that's actually done something rare, captivate an often polarized and exhausted nation. considering while news broadcasts have a couple million viewers, there are ten of millions of viewers we have seen tune in time and time again for these hearings. million of viewers in discussion goes online. here's google showing the search spike for january 6th. each of them were flat for most of this year until the hearings

began, and then you can see the most common -- first of all, you can see on the right the huge spike. that's when the hearings began. and the most common questions are, when is the next hearing? suggesting people are looking to tune in and get more evidence. highest in montana, iowa, and wyoming, the home of vase chair liz cheney. breaking on the coasts and among conservatives. many americans reacting to their communities and online. we've highlighted some of the voices sounding out of online and on tiktok. may suggest for the references to watergate there is a national reckoning here. the watergate process is deemed to have worked with congressional hearings playing a key role along with prosecutors, following the evidence that revealed a criminal president trying to kneecap the very justice department within which they served. and that makes it pretty

interesting. we want to note this tonight. take those veterans like the one i mentioned, ben venesto is speaking out. he said this attorney general must follow the fact bus decide soon and once and for all whether or not to indict trump. he does not have forever. he also has experience as another probe, the 9/11 commission. as we go into hearing coverage, he is our special guest on this big news night. welcome, sir. >> great to be here, ari. >> how much time does the attorney general have to make this decision? >> well, there is no specific time requirement, but i suggest in the piece you mentioned that he ought to be able to make a decision about whether there's enough evidence to indict donald trump in six months' time. >> why six months?

>> just on the basis of what he has to do, what's already been accomplished. look, he's not starting from a dead stop. he has been monitoring his department of justice prosecuted any number of individual who is took place -- who took part in the january 6th melee for their violent activities. some of them have cooperated. he's working his way up the chain. and i think within six months he should have enough to decide. >> that's what you lay out given our extensive experience. here's what the attorney general just said. >> no person is above the law in this country. i can't say it any more clearly until that. there's nothing in the principles of prosecution, in any other factors which prevent us from investigating anyone --

anyone who is criminally responsible for an attempt to undo a democratic election. >> in your view, if the evidence does tie all the way back to donald trump at a criminal level, would it be dangerous to leave that uncharged or not dealt with because of nonlegal reasons like, well, how it would look or that he may be running for office again? >> it would not be within the remit of the attorney general to make that decision. he ought to make that decision based on the facts, based on the evidence, based on the determination of whether he can present the case in court that will convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that donald trump is guilty of criminal activities. >> hmm. and we mentioned some of the interest in this. much has changed in the nation since watergate, especially in how people can get information.

>> sure. >> as we go into the final hearing tonight, how do you compare the way these hearings have met the moment or tried to break through with the public, which is part of what congress' job is when you have oversight and investigatei hearings, as compared to your extensive experience during watergate? >> i think there's a direct analogy. the senate committee in watergate did a phenomenal job. they got john dean to talk extensively. they got alexander butterfield to reveal the existence of the secret white house tapes. they provide a foundation upon which we built, as prosecutors, putting any number of individuals in jail for their crimes. we were at the point after nixon had left office, had resigned in

disgrace the presidency, the first to do so, and then we would decide what would become of now citizen nixon. so, in that sense, we had the same question before us. and we were united in our view on the staff of the special prosecutor's office that richard nixon should be prosecuted. now, donald trump is in a different posture obviously, but our view was that if the facts supported it, it was our obligation to move forward. president ford took that decision away with his pardon of richard nixon, and he paid a price for it. the wisdom of his decision is still something that hitorians

will debate. but we don't have that situation with donald trump. there is no pardon in the offing as a preliminary matter, a decision must be made by the attorney general. if there is evidence to present to a grand jury requesting an indictment, then probably a grand jury will follow that advice. and then it will be up to the process to reveal the facts, because a grand jury's activities will be secret, as they must be. and i have confidence that merrick garland is a very capable person. he's a very honest person.

and those who are clambering for an immediate decision i think may be somewhat shortsighted, that garland needs time to use the tools of a prosecutor in moving the case forward, and building a case if there's one to build. >> yeah. no, it makes sense. >> congress has limited capabilities. the committee, the january 6th committee, has done a phenomenal job in putting that evidence together and putting it before the public. >> right, and coming from you -- >> it's so compelling. >> that's something going into tonight that you feel that way having serves, again, in that chief role in the watergate prosecution and 9/11. and we will see what other evidence they come forward with tonight. thank you so much. >> well, thank you. >> appreciate it. turning to a point on programming -- in a report on prisons and criminal justice

last night, i incorrectly said that 22-year-old kalif prouder died at rikers prison. he attempted suicide while incarcerated at rikers but actually took his own life after leaving rikers. it's important to correct the record, and i regret the error. wanted to tell you that. let me tell you what else is coming up tonight. we have a special report on how these hearings unearthed far more damning evidence than the impeachment trials. we're going explain that. it's going to bring it into the coverage tonight and puts trump at the center of the plots. we also have a report on the hearings moving. many republicans and even some republican doj veterans say, what we were just discussing with that watergate prosecutor, when is it time to indict a former president? s it time to i former president wealth is shutting down the office for mike's retirement party.

worth is giving the employee who spent half his life with you, the party of a lifetime. worth is watching your employees grow with it. ♪ ♪ (dad) we have to tell ever that we just switched to verizon's new worth is watching your employees grow with it. welcome unlimited plan, for just $30. (daughter) i've already told everyone! (nurse) wait... did you say verizon for just $30? (mom) it's their best unlimited price ever. (cool guy) $30...that's awesome. (dad) yeah, and it's from the most reliable 5g network in america. (woman) for $30 a line, i'm switching now! (mom) yeah, it's easy, you can keep your phone, and verizon helps you with the costs to switch. (geek) wow... i've got to let my buddies know. (geek friend) we're already here! (vo) the network you want. the price you love. only from verizon.

your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire what happens to your body language when you use dove dry spray? [laughing] it shows. try dove dry spray. our weightless formula with 1/4 moisturizers is effective and kind to skin. leaving you feeling instantly dry and confident. 1/4 moisturizers is effective and kind to skin. finding my way forward with node-positive breast cancer felt overwhelming at times. but i never just found my way, i made it. so when i finished active therapy, i kept moving forward and did everything

i could to protect myself from recurrence. verzenio is the first treatment in over 15 years to reduce the risk of recurrence for adults with hr-positive, her2-negative, node-positive, early breast cancer with a high chance of returning, as determined by your doctor when added to hormone therapy. hormone therapy works outside the cell while verzenio works inside to help stop the growth of cancer cells. diarrhea is common, may be severe, or cause dehydration or infection. at the first sign, call your doctor, start an antidiarrheal, and drink fluids. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor about any fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. life-threatening lung inflammation can occur. tell your doctor about any new or worsening trouble breathing, cough, or chest pain. serious liver problems can happen. symptoms include fatigue, appetite loss, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising. blood clots that can lead to death have occurred. tell your doctor if you have pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain, and rapid breathing or heart rate, or if you are nursing, pregnant, or plan to be. i'm making my way forward, my way with verzenio.

ask your doctor about everyday verzenio. ["only wanna be with you" by hootie & the blowfish] discover is accepted at 99% of places in the u.s. ["only wanna be with you" by hootie & the blowfish] seen this ad? discover is accepted at 99% of places in the u.s. it's not paid for by california tribes. it's paid for by the out of state gambling corporations that wrote prop 27. it doesn't tell you 90% of the profits go to the out of state corporations. a tiny share goes to the homeless, and even less to tribes. and a big loophole says, costs to promote betting reduce money for the tribes, so they get less. hidden agendas. fine print. loopholes. prop 27. they didn't write it for the tribes or the homeless. they wrote it for themselves.

donald trump has clearly been placed at the center of a plot for a coup that would benefit, which seems pretty straight forward. here's what's not straight forward, america. top officials saying some evidence is damning and people need to deal with the facts, including lawyers who spend their careers on this. that includes george w. bush's former attorney general, alberto gonzalez, and some of the people that fox news relies on to gave their viewers and an course expert legal advice. we've even seen some of this get

for bit more direct over time as the hearings have put mr. trump on blast. >> i think one might make the argument that there's certainly the beginnings of a case for seditious conspiracy, obstruction of congress. i have to believe that folks from trump world are very concerned and nervous right now. >> the testimony in and of itself is really, really powerful. >> sandra, can you still hear? >> indeed, yes, i am here. >> all of these details should disturb everyone. >> this just seems to make donald trump look awful. >> do you expect we're going to see president trump prosecuted by the justice department on any of these charges? >> i do now, yeah. >> that last voice is a former reagan prosecutor who has been on fox news for years, mr. mccarthy. so at the end of the day, you see something that has happened over and over in washington as

well as america. sometimes what would seem impossible becomes very possible and then quite probable, at least according to mr. mccarthy. it's a measure of how these hearings are breaking through. now, after the break i'm going to show you right now, i promise you it is worth saying, because we all know this is a big night for america, for the congress and these hearings, and we have been working on something about why this is breaking through, why this matters, and the mounting evidence. it's our special report for you as we ramp up to primetime hearing night, and it's next. ue ue hearing night, and it's next along with significantly clearer skin, skyrizi helps me move with less joint pain, stiffness, swelling, and fatigue. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year after two starter doses. that can lead to skin and joint symptoms. with skyrizi, 90% clearer skin

and less joint pain is possible. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. with skyrizi, there's nothing like the feeling of improving my skin and joints... ...and that means everything. now's the time to talk to your doctor about how skyrizi can help treat your psoriatic arthritis- so you can get going. learn how abbvie can help you save. meltin', breadin', bakin', shreddin'. slicin', dicin', spicin', ricin'. if you're swissing it, then you're missing it. fryin', flyin', savorin', favorin'. over rotini. inside a panini. egging, maining, siding, plain-ing. debunk the inglorious. one shape's victorious. kraft singles. square it.

we got the house! krayou did!es. pods handles the driving. pack at your pace. store your things until you're ready. then we deliver to your new home - across town or across the country. pods, your personal moving and storage team.

here we go. this final insurrection hearing begins in about an hour. it caps an investigation that's taken testimony from over 1,000 witnesses, many of them more than once. some of them live. because that trump fueled insurrection was a historical rarity, some of this process, the whole thing, is unusual as well. let me tell you what i mean -- example, this -- all of this is an investigation of conduct that a president was already impeached for on the very precise charge of incitement of insurrection. these hearings have gone on to unearth more damning evidence than that impeachment. which brings us to our special report for you right now that.

quick trial marked the first impeachment of a president after leaving office as well. and that's a damning distinction for donald trump, because by definition, virtually any impeachment of a losing president for trying to overthrow their losing election will run up against the time that he or she is out of office. in this case, because he lost, so he had to go, and then the accountability process continued after he was out of government. it's easy to lose sight of just how fast that process went compared to any other impeachments, let alone a criminal trial for sedition, which can go on for a year. that senate trial finished -- it was 31 days. super fast. evidence gather in the that time, some of it public,

focusing often on the most public things, like how donald trump publicly said, tweeted, and then assembled and enflamed that crowd on january 6th. >> on january 6th, we know who lit the fuse. >> the evidence will show you that he assembled, enflamed and incited his followers to descend upon the capitol. >> we are going to the capitol, where our problems are. >> the truth is usually seen and rarely heard. truth is truth whether denied or not. >> the argument focused on trump's words on january 6th, which meant the senate and then the nation was presented with a somewhat narrow case that fixated on trump's speech and whether it rose to the legal level of incitement. and trump defenders were actually sometimes eager to jump on that to try to narrow the whole discussion, debate, or legal analysis into one of rhetoric or speech criticism.

>> donald trump surrendered his role as commander in chief and became the inciter in chief. that issue is, did the 45th president engage in incitement of -- they can't to say -- insurrection. >> now, some have said that president trump's remarks, his speech on january 6th was just a speech. this was not just a speech. >> the whole story line that donald trump caused this by his speech has fallen apart. >> president trump whipped the crowd into a frenzy, exhorting followers, if you don't fight like hell -- >> speech, just a speech. was it a speech? was it legal invitement? our coverage asked if it was legal incitement. different than obstructing a proceeding or whether you were pursuing a coup. so just as the first impeachment

was cast as a phone call debate, the second was limited to this speech debate. the house democrats and their lawyers also stressed the wider legal constitutional obligations of a president. take the acclaimed attorney barely burke who was council for both trump impeachments. >> it is a requirement that the president be a person who does not risk national security of this nation and the integrity of our elections in order to further his own re-election prospects. >> that was all the way back in 2019. the accruing evidence shows trump did both of those things, attacking election security and national integrity and did both through this plotting to try to stay in office. a second impeachment drew the

most bipartisan in history. but these hearings tonight that hit their crescendo tonight, they've gone further from the evidence of those in the meantime impeachments because they have the evidence that goes beyond speech to incitement to an actual multimonth attempted coup, trump leading a multistronged conspiracy, as prosecutor andrew weissman has put it, orchestrated by trump and his allies. long before the speech tough fraudulent electors, voter fraud, doj, the wider effort leading up to the 6th that was supposed to crescendo in mike pence breaking the law. these hearings have been effective by featuring to wider context of trump officials turning on their colleagues, phoning in the evidence, showing up at depositions, with trump now accused by his own aides of

making demands that took efforts from all these other individuals like roger stone and michael flynn at that military coup meeting, and rudy giuliani, now under new subpoenas, and jeffrey clark at doj and john eastman the lawyer. let's just focus on the two of them. you have eastman, the coup lawyer, who found himself recently searched. agents seizes his phone, hands on his head. forced to give up the phone due to a lawful search warrant that he was shown. or that lawyer clark hit with a search warrant at his own home early in the morning because a judge also found there was reasonable suspicion of criminal evidence in the home, sadly of a person who was supposed to enforce the law, not hide criminal evidence. or you have steve bannon declined today to offer any

defense in that trial. he faces prison in convicted. or peter navarro, arrested, searched and cuffed, which he has complained about vociferously after discussing his role in what he called a sweep but looked luke a coup, including on msnbc. you take it together and you have the revelations, the evidence, the wider corroboration, and it is more than a speech at. it is way more than what donald trump said, however bad it may have been on that date, and it is all backed by people in the room who were otherwise completely committed to trump's ideological and governing goals. >> the stuff that his people were shoveling out to the public is [ bleep ]. >> i don't want to hear any other words coming out of your mouth other than orderly transition. >> he delivered to the president he was going to lose in blunt terms. >> we're going to get charged with every time imaginable. >> the president's mind was made

up. >> they're not here to hurt me. take the mags away. >> i didn't understand how they had gotten in. the first thing i did, i walked in, looked at him and said, who are you? >> there's ketchup dripping down the a shattered porcelain plate on the floor. >> just about everything you heard was backed ten fold by the witness deposition, the report we're going to ultimately get. it is striking everyone said, didn't we know that, wasn't that bad, this is all new and all well beyond those first two damning impeachments of this president who has had so many legal problems. given the afore mentioned mr. burke, here on hearing night, barry burke is a nationally renowned trial lawyer. welcome back. >> thanks, ari, great to be

here. >> speak to the larger point that however hard you worked and whatever efficacy you had in the second trial of donald trump, had more bipartisan rebuke than any president in history. it seems you were working with less evidence than now. what do you think these hearings, this probe has up earthed. >> i think these hearings have been really extraordinary in terms of how they have built on what we did in the past. part of it is they have subpoenas that are enforceable which plague both impeachments and the investigation. there's now an independent department of justice that was prepared to hold people like steve bannon in contempt or prosecute him for a crime of contempt. >> let's pause on that and you'll continue. if you had worked with a doj that was actually enforcing subpoenas with jail time, you think you would have gotten a lot more evidence, huh?

>> 100%. people go to jail and they show up and tell the truth or they could be prosecuted. what they have gotten is building on what they did in impeachment. you quoted me saying this is someone who put their own personal and political interests over that of the country. that could be an opening statement in the criminal prosecution of donald j. trump. it would tie together everything that happened, telling brad raffensperger 11,000 votes i need. say it's fraud, leave the rest to me. acts that don't turn on whether there's a dispute about the election. there's no defense to that kind of conduct. we think of an over arching scheme to tie together all the evidence, it shows someone who is prepared to put their own interests above that of the country, democracy, ultimately the safety of their vice president, members of the congress, the police defending them and everyone else. that is a powerful narrative and

there are many criminal statutes that are prosecuted every single day. i've said this and i've said this to you, i've had clients prosecuted on a fraction of this evidence. is the question, did he commit a crime? i would think there is overwhelming evidence. could he be prosecuted? i think the answer is absolutely yes. then the question is, should he be prosecuted. i would come back to the through line. he got away with it in the first impeachment. the day after muller testified he called the ukrainian president and then engaged in this conduct. not only specific deterrence. because of this conduct you have people running for election based on the promise they're going to interfere with future elections. you have to send the message if you interfere with an election, our most sacred rights, the right to free and fair

elections, the winner will be the candidate that had the most votes, you have to prosecute people that interfere with that regardless whether they are public officials. >> you have about 45 seconds. if you put inciting the violence to the side, do you still see provable crimes. >> interfering with an official proceeding. congress was certifying a vote on january 6th and you saw steps every step of the way that he took to interfere with that. he became more and more desperate when he seventy out the text to come to washington. every step of the way is part of the scheme to do that. i think the evidence is overwhelming. >> you lay it out. how late are you working tonight? >> i was waiting for you. i get to go home and see the family. >> we appreciate that.

i know you were working which is why we have you on remote. mr. barry burke walking us through this tonight. thank you. with rachel maddow taking over at 7 p.m. eastern. we're going to fit in a break and we'll be right back. in a b in a b and we'll be right back. like they were when i was much younger. since taking prevagen, my memory has gotten better and it's like the puzzle pieces have all been [whistling] when you have technology that's easier to control... that can scale across all your clouds... we got that right? yeah, we got that. it's easier to be an innovator.

so you can do more incredible things. [whistling] ♪ you ain't seen nothin' yet ♪ ♪ b-b-baby, you just ain't seen n-n-nothin' yet ♪ ♪ here's something, ♪ ♪ here's something you're never gonna fff-forget, baby ♪ get a dozen shrimp for only one dollar with any steak entrée. only at applebee's. the day of the heart attack, i was scared. with any steak entrée. i didn't know what to do. learning that my daughter had a heart attack really shook me. it brings home how important it is to hold on to the people we love and the things that matter to us. aspirin helps reduce the chance of another heart attack by 31%. your heart isn't just yours. aspirin is not appropriate for everyone, so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. kids, one year they want all dinosaurs stuff the next, camels. - llamas. - llamas.

so save money shopping back to school on amazon. you sure that's not a camel? yeah. whatever you say. meet three sisters. the drummer, the dribbler, and the day-dreamer... the dribbler's getting hands-on practice with her chase first banking debit card... the drummer's making savings simple with a tap... ...round of applause. and this dreamer, well, she's still learning how to budget, so mom keeps her alerts on full volume. hey! what? it's true! and that's all thanks to chase first banking. freedom for kids. control for parents. one bank with tools for both, all with no monthly service fee. chase. make more of what's yours. ♪ limu emu ♪ and doug. [power-drill noises] alright, limu, give me a socket wrench, pliers, and a phone open to libertymutual.com they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need... and you could even save $652 when you switch. ok, i need a crowbar. and a blowtorch. [teddy bear squeaks] [doug sighs]

limu, call a mechanic. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

one of my staff brought me a printout of a tweet by the president, and the tweet said something to the effect that mike pence, the vice president, didn't have the courage to do what he -- what should have been done. i -- i read that tweet and made a decision at that moment to resign. that's where i knew that i was leaving that day, once i read that tweet. >> that's why he resigned, not because it was a tweet, but because it was, in his view, this witness we'll hear from, another call to overthro

elections. tonight our special program begins by rachel maddow and our whole team. we hand it over to rachel for the january 6th primetime hearing. the january 6th investigation. the eighth hearing. tonight in primetime. the focus tonight, the former president, what he did and didn't do once his supporters had broken in and started to attack capitol, members of congress and the vice president still inside. >> something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your f'ing hands. >> we need the doors of the capitol. >> they're literally calling for the vice