you know, donald trump is 74 years old and my theory is he is going to be a defendant for the rest of his life. there are civil lawsuits out there now. there will be appeals, and there is eric swalwell, and that lawsuit is available to hundreds of members of congress who could each individually file one of those lawsuits against donald trump. there could be no end. >> the -- when benny thompson filed the first civil lawsuit against trump, and eric swalwell filed a different one what i thought was going to happen, is benny thompson would go first, and other members of the congress would decide they wanted to join in. i didn't realize, if anyone had slightly different approaches to the same problem, it could be a parade that lasts until the end of his life. >> i spend the day studying eric swalwell's lawsuit. we are going to be juned by the harvard constitutional law. fp he tells us this is a real lawsuit and it won't be dismissed. it will get to a jury. it will get to a washington, d.c., jury. that indicates it's going to be many, many, many more. >> yeah, and -- well, i know he is writing about it, and i can't wait for to you talk to him. >> we will do that. thank you. and one of the things to watch now, is who will be the first criminally charged attacker on the capitol. who turns on donald trump and fires a lawsuit against trump saying donald trump was negligent in telling people to go to the capitol and to fight. one of the counts in swalwell's lawsuit is that trump's language at the rally was negligent, at minimum, and it inspired people to attack the capitol. will jacob chansley sue trump, making him believe the election was stolen and he had to put on his horns and go fight? he was urging chansley and thousands of others to go to the capitol and fight. there are over 300 people whose lives have been disrupted because of what donald trump told them to do. what they did got them arrested by the rbi. this which one of them will be the first sue trump for damages? which one of them will sue trump to pay attorney fees in the criminal case? which one of them will sue trump to pay for lost income and punitive damages because of what trump told them to do? which one of them will be the first to tu trump for fraud? that might sound like a crazy lawsuit to them. but not to you. they are all crazy or stupid or both. and so far, the case is against every single person at the capitol. show them to be crazy, stupid or both. jacob chansley advertised his craziness in his outfit choice, and today in a 32-page opinion, judge royce lambert, appointed by ronde reagan, used jacob chansley's reason and insanity, before they let him out of jail. and according the authority to the require him to show up for a court date. the judge also quoted what chansley said when he was hitting in the vice president's chair in the senate chamber. quote, mike presence is an f'ing trader. the first conversation the day after, according to the judge, quote, he entered the capitol -- he entered the capitol by the grace of god and said he was glad he sat in the vice president's chair because vice president pence is a child-trafficking traitor. and the judge quoted what he said to nbc news. he quoted it the same day, the same day he first talked to the nba. this is what he said. the fact that we had a bunch of our traitors in office hunkers down, put on their gas masks and retreat in their under ground bunker, i consider that a win. jacob chansley voluntarily drove himself to the fbi meeld office to talk to the fbi thinking that he -- if he is so smart, can talk his way out of trouble. not knowing he already had bnl see cently charged. during that discussion with the fbi, with the field office in phoenix, defendant twice told law enforcement he 4 plans twice to drive to the arizona state capitol, corroborating the plans. law enforcement found the horned head dress, face paint, bull horn in his car that was parked outside of the fbi field office. the defendant was arrested at the phoenix fbi office. he went to the fbi field fis with the horns and the spear and the bull horn in his car. crazy? stupid? or both? you decide. one of the reasons that added weight to judge lambert's decision to keep jacob chansley in jail is that he carried a weapon with him in the capitol. a six-foot pole with an american flag zip tied to the shaft and a metal spearhead affixed to the top. the defense trying to argue that was just a flag, and federal buildings are filled with flags. the judge said, quote, whether or not an object is a dangerous weapon does not turn on it available within government buildings. by defendant's logic, knives would not be considered dangerous weapons due to their available in cafeterias. prosecutors want to take freddy klein in jail. he had a security clearance the day he invaded the cap 2078 because he was working in mike pompeo's state department. usualing he not be granted bail. he used violence, and his individual participation tightened the dangerousness of the day. he was captured on video saying, we just want a fair election. the prosecutors say klein stole a riot shield from an office and used it violently against other officers. the process cure -- prosecutors said that he was engaged in hand to hand combat. he was seen on video hingering an officer, to help another sfwhoer was dragged in the mob in the lower west terrace. his employment history shows he knew how seriously he violated the law. they cite his job in federal office. despite his oath to support and defend the constitution, klein demonstrated his contempt for that oath, the legitimate functions of the government, and for the constitution itself when he assaulted officers in an attempt to stop the certification of a lawful election. if klein is unwilling to obey orders in full view of law enforcement, or to conform to the behavior of the law, even when he disagrees with it, it's unlikely he will an adhere. freddy klein, crazy, stupid or both. freddy klein is an oath breaker. he broke his oath of office. some of his attackers of of the capitol call themselves oath keepers. they are lying. don't ever count on one of them to keep an oath. they are deranged people who are dangerous to themselves enter to others and the fbi is still looking for them. looking for deranged people who attacked the capitol. the fbi is still posting photographs on twitter asking for help. today the fbi said they are looking for these people, these two, for assaults on members of the media. these pictures keep coming up every day. and today the fbi released video of the person they say planted bombs outside of the democratic party's headquarters and the republican party headquarters in washington, d.c. the night before the attack on the capitol. the fbi is asking for help in identifying that person. also today, it was revealed that joshua james who is seen in photographs with roger stone on january 6th before the attack on the capitol has been arrested. the arrest made public the day of prosecutors reveal the they had charged fellow oath keeper security guard for entering the capitol is the latest evidence that prosecutors are honing in on the extremist group with key ties to the organizers of the pro trump stop the steal events. about a dozen oath keepers have bnl charged among the more than 250 capitol rioters. and leading us off is adam schiff of california. he is chairman of the house intelligence committee, and he was the lead prosecutors in donald trump's first impeachment trial. thanks for joining us. >> good be with you. >> i want to go to the last point we were covering here in tonight's reporting. and that is the connection between trump confidants like roger stone, the white house and invaders of the capitol. there's also telephone data that has been collected from the cell phone services indicating there were phone calls tracing -- marking every phone call from the capitol that day, and there is evidence of at least one call to the white house. >> well, i think this is a very important part of the investigation, and really at least a couple main components. the first is going out, the fbi fanning out. identifying those that were there, and carrying a spear or threatening the life of the speaker or the vice president. and they're tracking down and arresting them. and they are seeking protection, and the courts are ordering detention in some of these cases and the other aspect, who is involved in organizing, and financing this? cha ties between the insurrectionist and public officials, and members of congress, and the trump campaign or allies like roger stone. so it will be important for the fbi to get answers and it will be important for congress to get answers and part of that is to bring justice. to find people accountable, and also in terms of protecting the capitol going forward, we need to understand who was involved in this. who role did social media play in helping the qanon conspiracy theorists and others find each other. >> how important is it to have merrick garland confirmed and be in there overseeing the progress of this since it will be handed off to him? >> well, it's very important. you know, for right now, as they are tracking the people down, and making arrests. they might -- my while a come paint and have to make a situation about whether to bring greater charges and some of the decisions might get dumped up. but in terms of the broader investigation, that is really i think one of the most important reasons why you need the attorney general confirmed. big decisions about bigger cases with more -- far reaching repercussions. and if they bear responsible for for the violence, that will be a decision by the attorney general. so he does need to be infirmed and i think time is the essence. >> we have seen many times where the justice department is investigating something that according also wants to investigate and you have to choo your lanes and not cross over in the federal criminal investigation. have there been discussions in the house about how to do that? >> i haven't been part of the discussions yet. i think when we get to the point of bringing in certain witnesses, the conversations should take place. i can tell you, the russian investigation, we met with mueller with the porpts -- i don't think he was interested in trying to coordinate with us, and that is perfectly understandable. but we wanted to make sure that nothing we did would prohibit them from coming to justice. we wouldn't -- bringing immunity to a person. at some point, there may be a need for deconfliction, and we will make sure we are not treading too heavily in their lane. >> and thanks to georgia with two democratic senators, you find yourself in ha different dynamic. because you also have a democratic senate. when you were investigating donald trump and the house of representatives, there was no investigation in the republican-controlled senate because no committee would conduct a serious investigation there. now you have the possibility of coordinating with the senate. has there been any planning on that? >> you know, i think that probably both houses are going to be going about it separately. you're absolutely right. there is a force multiplier. you have a senate that is willing to take on the rough issues so you think you will see the actions and we will seen some of it already. the same time, it does under score why it's so important to have an independent commission that would have greater resources in the congress. because it will be utterly nonpartisan and carry great weight and credibility with the person people. and i think with the efforts, really makes sense if we want a body with a stature of the 9/11 commission to make recognitions for the future that we establish. >> chairman adam schiff, thank you very much for leading off our discussion tonight. >> thanks, lawrence. >> thank you. up next, harvard constitutional law professor lawrence tribe will join us for tonight's episode of defendant trump. so, subaru and our retailers are doing it again, donating an additional 100 million meals to help those in need. love. it's never been needed more than right now. subaru. more than a car company. (vo 2) to join us with a donation, go to subaru.com. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my a1c. because my body can still make its own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it, lowering my blood sugar from the first dose. once-weekly trulicity responds when my body needs it, 24/7. trulicity is for type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. it isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, changes in vision, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. side effects include indigestion, fatigue, belly pain, decreased appetite, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting which can lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. during photosynthesis, plants convert solar energy into chemical energy, cleaning the oxygen we breathe. plants clean the air. when applied to stained textiles, plant-based surfactants like the ones in seventh generation detergent trap stains at the molecular level and flush them away. plant-based detergents clean your clothes. it's just science! just... science. seventh generation. powered by plants. tackles stains. want to save hundreds on your wireless bill? with xfinity mobile, you can. how about saving hundreds on the new samsung galaxy s21 ultra 5g? you can do that too. all on the most reliable network? sure thing! and with fast, nationwide 5g included - at no extra cost? we've got you covered. so join the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction... ...and learn how much you can save at xfinitymobile.com/mysavings. >> donald trump is going to spend the rest of his life as a defendant. he avails himself of all of his rights with appeal in civil litigation. it will follow trump well into his 80s and there is much more litigation coming trump's way, including criminal cases in atlanta and manhattan, and he will appeal the outcomes of those cases for many, many years to come. there are now two major lawsuits filed against trump by two members of congress for inciting the insurrection after the capitol, and eric swalwell, names four dependents who spoke at the trump rally, urging people to go to the capitol and right. donald trump, donald trump jr., represent sif mo brooks and rudolph giuliani. the lawsuit quotes trump to fight like hell and walk down pennsylvania avenue to the capitol. swalwell is suing for conspiracy to civil rights. negative glent to prevent interference with sift rights. count three, negligence per se incitement to riot. negatively sense disorderly conduct. bias related crimes, inciting assault, inviting riot, and disorderly conduct and terrorism. negligent infliction of emotional distress. count eight. 5iding and abetting common law assault. count nine, negligence. if they can proceed a discovery, and proceed to trial, a jury will decide which each of the counts might be worth. and that decision could bankrupt donald trump, and what is worse for trump, every single member of congress would bring exactly the same lawsuit against trump and his son and rudy giuliani, and congressman mo brooks, and all of those defendants could bankrupt by all of those. joinings now, lawrence tribe. he has won 35 cases in the united states supreme court. professor tribe, thank you so much for joining us tonight, and i wang to bring the congressman swalwell lawsuit for to you tonight for your judgment. to find out if it will make ilts way to trial. >> thank you for having me, lawrence. it will survive a motion to dismiss. because it's extremely solid. i have studied it with great care. and when you list those counts, a lot of people might not realize they are a different variety. the first two are based on laws going back to 1871, which are focused not on incitement as much. which might have first amendment problems. they are focused on conspiracy to interfere with the operations of government, in this case, conspiracy to prevent the certification of the next president. that is count one, which is based on a 1871 law, and then count two involves knowing about the conspiracy, knowing that it is causing harm and then doing nothing about it. that's basically dereliction of duty. those two federal counts are extremely solid. then the other seven counts are based on specific provisions. not of national law, but of district of columbia law. for example, count five is based on a section of the d.c. code. section 22.3704 which involves the harm that people do when they organize attacks against others based on race, ethnicity or politics. their political affiliation, their political ideology. it makes clear those members of congress who are ready to certify the next president. when you look at the counts carefully, including the seven that are based on district of columbia law, they are legal to any challenge. they raise no constitutional problems. the factional allegations are specific and meet all of the requirements that would be applied. by someone who wanted to dismiss them. and not only, as you said, lawrence, every member of congress who would file similar suits but what about the survivors of the capitol police who were injured or killed. what about the people who with terrorized who were calling home to say good-bye to their loved ones? this is a very series serious lawsuit and it's going to be an important way for accountability to take place. even if for various political or other reasons the criminal prosecutions do not land trump in an orange jump suit. these lawsuits are going to provide financial compensation and punitive damages to the many people who were terribly hit by the insurrection. the people of the united states will not be fully compensated for sure. but the people who were at the capitol who were the direct victims of this attack will i think receive a measure of justice. >> as you read the lawsuit, i was focused, professor, on the negligence claims. that is a common civil tort. you did something in a negligent way that created a certain effect. and you don't have to prove that you deliberately intended for me to fall down the stairs. it's just because you didn't repair them, i fell down the stairs. and that piece of the lawsuit seems available to literally thousands of people, including congressional staffers, capitol police officers. so many people that can make the claims against donald trump. >> right. part of what he did with negligence, part reckless, part intentional. and all of it that caused the harms that delayed the operations of government, although in the end, thanks to members of congress, they got together and certified joe biden as the next president. but all of those things involve putting things in motion, that as a president, could have pulled back when he saw the harm that is being done rather than delighting in it, and expressing surprise about other people around him not being equally delighted. and he could have moved more quickly. he could have told the mop the home. he waited. he waited and he egged them on, and that was a combination of negligent activity, reckless activity, intentional activity, violating the laws of the district of columbia as well as the united states. >> i am expecting someone arrested in the capitol will turn around and sue donald trump. what would happen in that case? >> it would depend on the lawsuit. i don't want to comment on an complaint t