i know these are incentivized deals, but does this not qualify as witness intimidation? this was one of the things the committee referred to the department of justice. we are very disturbed about the testimony. we didn t have any corroborating evidence. but there were a lot of the witnesses that appeared before the committee were paid for by trump world, that s their word, not just mine. it did cause concern. was that part of the same sort of situation that happened with miss hutchinson? was it influencing their testimony? was it keeping these witnesses under control? we were unable to find out, but it made us very suspicious, and we hope that the department of justice would look at it and be able to do more digging than we were able to do. we know that walt nauta and
representation for the witnesses, who might have important information as it concerns the former president, something the house january six committee explored at length after learning that cassidy hutchinson, a key witness, had been contacted by trump allies to make sure that she, cassidy hutchinson, remained loyal. remember that miss hutchinson s first lawyer, stephen passantino, was being paid by trump, and was coaching her to tell committee investigators that she did not recall certain critical information. joining us now is congresswoman zoe lofgren of california. she was of course a member of the january six committee, and as she wrote in a recent msnbc op-ed, special counsel jack smith is vindicating the committee s work. congresswoman lofgren, thank