investigation as the testimony, of course, of them, themselves, as well, giving evidence about the coordination of trump s plans leading up to and on the day of the riot, about who spoke to the president that day, who also was in the when things were happening and what the president may have told them. maybe communications about what exactly was happening inside of the white house over those nearly 187 minutes. well over three hours. filling in the gaps. gaps between when donald trump told his supporters to go to the capitol and when he tweeted a video to the rioters telling them that he loved them and to go home. now, we know that s the very focus of thursday s primetime hearing and we have someone tonight who knows the people who were in the white house with then-president trump during those three hours and he knows them quite well. trump s former active chief of staff nick mulvaney, he knows matthew pottinger, one of trump s deputy national security advisors scheduled to t
of of. then again, the past six to eight years, it s been quite unprecedented. donald trump often entered unchartered waters. he was the first u.s. president to be impeached twice and the first president to, well, incite as they say an attack on the u.s. capitol. perspective from barry burke, the chief counsel for trump s second impeachment trial that was the result of january 6th. barry, good to see you here. curious about your perspective in particular because of the fact that some have been critical of the hearing, of the committee in general. they view it as a second bite of the apple, a failed attempt at the impeachment number two. now this is the new avenue to do this. curious what your take has been about what the committee has been able to produce, specifically are there things that you wish you could have known or had for the impeachment involving january 6th?
well, trump s former deputy press secretary, sarah matthews, is also going to testify on thursday. remember, she already testified to this. the situation was already bad. and so it felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire by tweeting that. and matthew pottinger, that former deputy national security advisor, he testified that he resigned because of that tweet. that s where i knew that i was leaving that day, once i read that tweet. i am wondering what other holes pottinger might be able to fill in now that we don t have access by thursday, secret service text messages. what else can you tell us about what was happening in the rooms, in the hallways? maybe you can speak to trump s alleged failure to call up the national guard. this is from jonathan karl s book the trail where he says pottinger could see trump wasn t there. he was still in his private dining room watching television
office hearing cants of hang mike pence, to cassidy hutchinson retelling a conversation about trump s reaction to it. responded something to the effect of, you heard that he thinks mike deserves it, he doesn t think they are doing anything wrong. deserved what exactly? i mean, keep in mind there were gallows being built outside and chants of hanging the person who was the next in line of succession. and lest you think trump wasn t aware at all of the violence at the capitol at that moment as we were watching it unfold, listen to this. the testimony further establishes that mr. meadows quickly informed the president and that he did so before the president issued his 2:24 p.m. tweet criticizing vice president pence. mark meadows, chief of staff mark meadows.
lost the olyelection in 2020. nancy pelosi rejecting some of kevin mccarthy s republicans, that turned off half the country. everybody would have benefitted from watching this testimony. jonathan karl reported that matthew pottinger rushed to the outer oval office before 3:00 p.m. on january 6th and had interaction of some kind with mark meadows asking him about the national guard in particular and he drafted a resignation e after that interaction and seeing trump s tweet about mike pence, lack of courage, et cetera. does that square with the matthew pottinger you know? it does. matt is a very credible guy, honest guy. i think matt had not been one of the most pro-trump people going into 2016. but that describes a lot of republicans. if they worked for another republican during the 2016 election. so he wouldn t be hardcore trump to me but he certainly supported the president, worked for the