tv The Story With Martha Mac Callum FOX News October 13, 2022 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
when you talked to him on january 6? >> it's my understanding he was watching television. >> when you were in the dining room, was the violence at the capitol visible on the screen, on the television? >> yes. >> the president watched the bloody attack unfold on fox news from his dining room. members of congress and other government officials stepped in to the gigantic leadership void created by the president's chilling and steadied passivity that day. what you're about to see is unseen footage of congressional leaders, republicans and democrats as they were taken to a secure location during the riot. you'll see how everyone involved was working actively to stop the violence to get federal law enforcement deployed to the scene to put down the violence and secure the capitol complex.
not just democrats like speaker nancy pelosi and steny hoyer, but republicans like vice president pence, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell, majority whip john thune and countless other appointees across the administration. all of them did what president trump was not doing, what he simply refused to do. take a listen. >> they're taking the north front, staff only. we're not going to be able to hold. >> the door has been breached. people are gaining access into the capitol. >> senator schumer is at a secure location.
they're locked down in the senate. >> there has to be some way we can maintain the sense that people have, that there's some security, some confidence that government can function and that we can elect the president of the united states. did we go back into session? >> did go back into session. but now apparently everybody on the floor is putting on gas masks to prepare for a breach. >> they're putting on tear gas masks? >> we need an area for the house members. they're all walking through the tunnels. >> i'm going to call up the f-ing secretary of dod.
we have senators in hide-away. can you get the maryland national guard to come too? >> i have something to say, mr. secretary. i'm going to call the mayor of washington d.c. right now and see what other outreach he has as steny hoyer has mentioned. >> hi, governor. this is nancy. governor, i don't know if you have been approached about the virginia national guard. mr. hoyer was spoking to governor hogan. but i still think you probably need the okay of the federal government in order to come in to another jurisdiction? thank you. oh, my gosh, they're breaking
windows. all kinds of -- something -- they said something was shot. it's just horrendous. all at the instigation of the president of the united states. okay, thank you, governor. i appreciate what you're doing. if you don't mind, i'd like to stay in touch. thank you. >> virginia guard has been called in. >> i just talked to governor northam. they sent 200 state police and a unit of the national guard. they're breaking windows and going in obviously ransacking our offices and all the rest of that. that is nothing. the concern we have about personal harm -- >> safety. >> personal safety is to just transcends everything. the fact is on any given day, they're breaking the law in many different ways. quite frankly much of it at the
instigation of the president of the united states. if he could at least -- >> why don't you get the president to tell them to leave the capitol, mr. attorney general? a public statement that they should all leave. >> [chanting usa]. >> this cannot be they're waiting for so and so. we need them now, whoever you got. >> this is steny hoyer. we have troops at andrews air force base, other military bases. we need active duty national guard. >> how soon in the future can you have the place evacuated, cleaned out? >> i don't want to speak for the leadership for execution of the operation. i'm not going to say that. they're on the ground and --
>> just pretend for a moment -- some other entity that was under siege. let me say you can get people there as you make the plan. >> how can we get this job done today? we talked to mitch about it earlier. he's not in the room right now. he was with us earlier. he said we want to expedite this and hopefully they can confine it to one complaint, arizona and we can vote and that would be -- just move forward with the rest of the state. overriding wish is to do it at the capitol. what we're being told very directly is it's going to take days for the capitol to be okay again. we've gotten a very bad record
about the condition of the house floor. defecation and all that kind of thing as well. i don't think that that is hard to clean up. but i do think it is more from a security standpoint of making sure that everybody is out of the building and how long will that take. >> i just got off with the vice president. >> i got off with the vice president-elect. >> okay. we left the conversation -- he said he had the impression from mitch that mitch wants to get everybody back to do it there. i said we're getting a counter point that is -- it could take time to clean up the poo-poo that they're making all over -- literally and figuratively in the capitol and may take days to get back. >> i'm at the capitol building. i'm standing with the u.s. capitol police.
he just informed me what you'll hear through official channels, your sergeant at arms, will inform you that their misinformation is that they believe that the house and the senate will be able to meet in an hour. >> good news. >> the sergeant in arms will be in touch about the process for getting members back in the building. >> thanks very much. good news. >> this video, you just saw senator chuck schumer urging acting attorney general jeff rosen to get president trump to call off the rioters. of course, acting a.g. rosen did make moves. but congressional leadership recognized on a bipartisan basis that president trump was the only person that could get the mob to end their violent siege
of the congress, leave the capitol and go home. here's senator mcconnell speaking after january 6th about how president trump abandoned his duties and failed to do his job. >> it was obvious. only president trump could end this. he was the only one who could. former aides publicly begged him to do so. loyal allies, frantically called the administration. the president did not act swiftly. he did not do his job. he didn't take steps so federal law could be faithfully executed and order restored. no. >> in the midst of this violent chaos, kevin mccarthy implored
donald trump to tell his supporters to leave the capitol. when that didn't work, mccarthy called trump's adult children to try to get them to intercede with trump to call off the insurrectionary violence. we showed you a description of what mccarthy told jamie herrera butler with his conversation about trump. another witness, mick mulvaney has also come forward and corroborated her shocking account.
>> i had a conversation at some point in the day or week after the riot with kevin mccarthy. it was similar to what jamie had, the conversation she retold ant how he called and asked the president to get them to stop. the president said something along the lines of kevin, maybe these people are more angry about this than you are. i had a conversation similar to that with kevin in the days and week after the riot. >> we know how kevin mccarthy
described president trump's conduct in public and in private. >> the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. he should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. these facts require immediate action by president trump. accept his share of responsibility, coil the brewing unrest and ensure president-elect biden is able to successfully begin his term. let me be very clear to all of you and i have been very clear to the president. he bears responsibilities for his words and actions. no ifs, ands or buts. i asked him personally today does he hold responsibility for what happened. does he feel bad about what happened. he told me he does have some responsibility for what happened. he needed to acknowledge that. >> 2:24 p.m. knowing the deadly
riot was bearing down on his own vice president, president trump composed and sent a tweet attacking vice president pence accusing him of cowardess for not rejecting electoral college votes for biden and handing trump the presidency. the impact of that tweet was foreseeable and predictable. it inflamed the mob which was chanting hang mike pence and provoked them to greater violence. this deliberate decision to further enrage the mob against vice president pence cannot be justified by anything that president trump might have thought about the election. the tweet came precisely at the time pence's secret service detail was most seriously concerned for the vice president's physical safety. we've obtained new documents from the secret service, real-time chats that underscore the threat that they knew the vice president would be facing
because of the president's escalating incitement of the mob. after trump's tweet, one agent in the secret service's intelligence division warned potus just tweeted about pence, probably not going to be good for pence. another agent reported the dramatic impact of trump's anti-pence tweet on his followers. potus said he lacked courage over 24,000 likes in under two minutes. employees at twitter were nervously monitoring the situation. they knew certain people were rioting the capitol and tweeting about it at the same time. as the afternoon progressed, the company detected a surge in violent hashtags and including lines like execute mike pence. listen to this former twitter employee. anika navorli has agreed to be
named because she wants to speak out about the magnitude of the threats facing our people. >> you were also seeing content at the time that was threatening towards the vice president, #executemikepence? >> they were calling for his execution. >> and after this tweet. >> and in response to the tweet. many of donald trump's tweets did, it fanned the flames and it was individuals that were constructing gallos, who were already willing, able and wanting to execute someone and looking for someone to be killed. now the individual was called upon to begin this coup, is now pointing the finger at another individual while they were getting ready to do this. >> here's a small sample of the
reacts that president trump's fan the flame tweets provoked capitol rioters in real time. >> what percentage of the crowd has gone to the capitol? >> 100%. it's spread like wild fire. pence has betrayed us and everybody is marching on the capitol. all million of us. it's insane. >> between 2:30 and 2:35 within ten minutes of president trump's tweet, thousands of rioters overran the line that they were holding on the west side of the capitol. this is the first time in the
history of the metropolitan police department that a security line like that had ever been broken. president trump's conduct that day was so shameful and so outrageous it prompted numerous members of the white house staff and other trump appointees to resign. you've heard adviser matt pat enger and sarah matthews explain why they felt compelled to resign on that day. since then, we've spoken to more high ranking officials like the envoy in northern ireland and mick mulvaney and trans important take secretary elaine chao who resigned in protest of trump's misconduct and to dissociate themselves from his role in the violence. take a listen to what they had to say. >> i was stunned by the violence. i was stunned by the president's apparent indifference to the violence. now is the time for him to be
presidential. he failed the duty. he failed at a critical time to be the sort of leader that the nation needed. >> i think the events at the capitol, however they occurred, were shocking. it was something that as i mention in my statement, that i could not put aside. at a particular point, the events were such that it was impossible for me to continue given my personal values and my philosophy. i came as an immigrant to this country. i believe in this country. i believe in a peaceful transfer of power. i believe in democracy. so it was a decision that i made on my own. >> when security began to arrive at the capitol and the tide turned against the inner is -- insurrection gave his speech.
after multiple hours of rioting and injuries suffered by our law enforcement officers, the crowd finally began to disburse. listen to what they said as they decided to leave the capitol. >> finally, at 6:01, president trump tweeted again, not to condemn the mass violence in any way but rather to excuse and glorify it. he said these are the things and events that happened when a sacred landslide victory is
stripped away from great patriots who have been badly unfairly treated for so long. these are the things that happened, he said, giving the whole game away. trump was telling us that the vice president, the congress and all of the injured and wounded cops, some of whom are with us today got what was coming to us. according to trump, january 6 should not be a day that lives in shame and infamy in our history but rather in glory. remember this day forever, he wrote proudly. as if he were talking about d-day or the battle of yorktown. trump did nothing to stop the deadly violence for obvious reasons. he thought it was all justified. he incited it and he supported it. >> would it be possible at any moment for the president to walk down to the podium and the briefing room and talk to the nation any time between when you first gave him that advice and
4:17 with a video statement? would have it been possible? >> would it have been possible? >> yes. >> the president wanted to make a statement and address the american people. he could have been on camera almost instantly. conversely, the white house press corps has offices that are located directly behind the briefing room. so if he had wanted to make an address from the oval office, we could have assembled the white house press corps in a matter of minutes in the oval to do an on-camera address. >> mr. chairman, nothing in law or fact could justify the president's failure to act. >> and i assume you also would agree the president has a particular obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed? >> that is one of the president's obligations, correct. >> mr. chairman, in numerous places our constitution strongly
opposes insurrection and rebellion. article 1 gives congress the power to call forth the malitia to suppress insurrections. section 3 of the 14th amendment disqualified from holding federal and state office anyone who has sworn and oath to defend the constitution but engaging a rebellion. it was president lincoln at the start of the civil war in 1861 that best explained why democracy rejects insurrections. american democracy belongs to all the people, not a single man. thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. during this committee's first hearing in july of last year, our witnesses were four police officers who helped repel the
riots of january 6. we asked them what they hoped to see the committee accomplish. over the course of our investigation. officer gannel wanted to know why the rioters were made to believe that the election process was rigged. another officer asked us to look into the actions and activities that resulted in the day's events. officer hodges was concerned about whether anyone in power had a role. officer dunn put it simply, get to the bottom of what happened. we've worked for more than a year to get those answers. we've conducted more than 1,000 interviews and depositions. we received and reviewed hundreds of thousands of pages of documents. thanks to the tireless work of our members and investigators, we've left -- we have left no
doubt, none, that donald trump led an effort to up-end american democracy that directly resulted in the violence of january 6. he tried to take away the voice of the american people in choosing their president and replace the will of the voters with his will to remain in power. he is the one person at the center of the story of what happened on january 6. so we want to hear from him. the committee needs to do everything in our power to tell the most complete story possible and provide recommendations to help ensure nothing like january 6 ever happens again. we need to be fair and thorough and gain a full context for the evidence we've obtained. but the need for this committee to hear from donald trump goes beyond our fact finding. this is a question about
accountability to the american people. he must be accountable. he's required to answer for his actions, he's required to answer to those police officers who put their lives and bodies on the line to defend our democracy. he's required to answer to those millions of americans who votes he wanted to throw out as part of his scheme to remain in power. whatever is underway to ensure this accountability on the law, this committee will demand a full accounting to every american person of the events of january 6. so it is our obligation to seek donald trump's testimony. there's precedent in american history of congress to compel the testimony of a president. it also precedent for presidents
to provide testimony and documentary evidence to congressional investigators. we also recognize that a subpoena to a former president is a serious and extraordinary action. that's why we want to take this step in full view of the american people, especially because the subject matter at issue is so important to the american people and the stakes are so high for our future and our democracy. so i recognize the vice chair, mrs. cheney of wyoming to offer a motion. >> mr. chairman, pursuant to today's notice, i send to the desk a committee resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. >> the clerk will report the resolution. >> committee resolution 1 resowed that the chairman be and is hereby directed to subpoena donald j. trump for documents and testimony in connection with
the january 6 attack on the united states capitol pursuant to section 5 c 4 of house resolution 503 and clause 2 m of rule 11 of the rules of the house representatives. >> the gentle woman from wyoming can recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. our committee now has sufficient information to answer many of the critical questions posed by congress at the outset. we have sufficient information to consideration criminal referrals for multiple individuals. and to recommend a range of legislative proposals to guard against another january 6. but a key task remains. we must seek the testimony understood oath of january 6th central player. more than 30 witnesses in our investigation have invoked their fifth amendment right against
self-incrimination. several of those did so specifically in response to questions about their dealings with donald trump directly. here are a few examples. this is roger stone with oath keepers at the willard hotel on the morning of january 6. here's mr. stone testifying before our committee. >> did you speak to president trump on his private cell phone on january 5 or 6? >> once again, by advice of council, i will decline to answer your question on the fifth amendment. >> this is general michael flynn walking with oath keepers on december 12, 2020. here's general flynn's testimony before our committee. >> did you general flynn talk to president trump at any point on january 6, 2021? >> the fifth.
>> here's john eastman, fraud leaptly instructing tens of thousands of angry protesters that the vice president could change the election outcome on january 6. later on this same day, dr. eastman acknowledged in writing that donald trump knew what he was attempting was illegal. here is john eastman testifying before our committee. >> did president trump authorize you to discussion publicly your january 4, 2021 conversation with him? >> fifth. >> is it your position that you can discuss conversations that you had with the president of the united states but you will not discussion those same conversations with this committee? >> fifth. >> here's jeff clark who conspired with donald trump to corrupt the department of justice. president trump wanted to appoint jeff clark as acting attorney general. as you can see in this call log we obtained from the national
archives, he did so. here's mr. clark testifying before our committee. >> mr. clark, when did you first talk directly with president trump? >> fifth. >> mr. clark, did you discuss with president trump allegations of fraud in the 2020 election? >> fifth. >> other witnesses have also gone to enormous lengths to avoid testifying about their dealings with donald trump. steve bannon has been tried and convicted by a jury of his peers for contempt of congress. he is scheduled to be sentenced for this crime later this month. criminal proceedings regarding peter navarro continue. mark meadows, donald trump's former chief of staff has refused to testify based on executive privilege. the committee's litigation with him continues. mr. chairman, at some point, the department of justice may well unearth facts that these and
other witnesses are currently concealing. our duty today is to our country and our children and our constitution. we are obligated to seek answers directly from the man who set this all in motion. every american is entitled to those answers. so we can act now to protect our republic. so this afternoon i am offering this resolution that the committee direct the chairman to issue a subpoena for relevant documents and testimony under oath from donald john trump in connection with the january 6th attack on the united states capitol. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> gentle lady yields back. if there's no further debate, the question is on agreeing to the resolution. those in favor will say aye. >> aye. >> those opposed no.
in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. >> i request a recorded vote. >> the clerk will call the roll. >> mrs. cheney? >> aye. >> mrs. lofgrin? >> aye. >> mr. schiff? >> aye. >> mr. aguillar? >> aye. >> mrs. murphy? >> aye. >> mr. raskin? >> aye. >> aye. mrs. luria? >> aye. >> mr. kinzinger? >> aye. >> mr. chairman. >> aye. >> mr. chairman aye. >> the clerk will report the vote. >> mr. chairman, on this vote, there are nine ayes and zero nos. >> the resolution is agreed to. without objection a motion to
reconsider is laid on the table. the chair requests that those in hearing room remain seated until the capitol police have escorted members from the room. without objection, the committee stands adjoined. >> martha: all right. with that we bring you back to our continuing special coverage of this, the final january 6th committee proceeding. at least until after the election. the players we know will change because liz cheney lost her seat in wyoming, her congressional seat and adam kinzinger has said he won't run again. he's retiring from congress. so we just witnessed the vote which was a bit of a surprise today. they changed this to a business meeting rather than a hearing so that they could conduct the business of issuing a subpoena for the former president, donald trump, to testify and turn over
documents in the january 6th situation. so they just took that vote. it was unanimous. it was ayes all across the board, which is not a surprise given the way we have watched all of this play out. so i want to bring in our panel to get their thoughts on what we witnessed today. we bring in former federal prosecutor, andy mccarthy, byron york for "the washington examiner" and mark theisen. andy, let's start with you. you have observations about this unexpected subpoena. as we heard, there's been several people that have been subpoenaed, several who have already taken the fifth and refused to engage in this process thus far. your thoughts on this surprise vote for a subpoena for the former president, donald trump. >> i just think, martha, they needed something to end with because this is the end. there's no way trump is ever
actually going to testify. he can tie them up in court for a while. they talked about subpoenaing not only his testimony but documents. they already subpoenaed documents from him. they had a big litigation about that at the beginning of this whole exercise. and i just think, if this were a normal legal fair proceeding, the first question you'd ask is liz cheney just marshalled the evidence to say that trump committed crimes. if they made up their mind, why is his testimony necessary? i point that out because it's a problem of separation of powers for a congressional committee to call even a former president as a witness. it's not something that ought to be done as theater. i say this as somebody that was critical of what. trump did january 6 and thought he should have been impeached over it. this is show biz. this is not really a hearing. >> martha: andy, stay with you.
one more question for you on this round. whether this is a question of being held in regular contempt for president trump, former president trump and what is the connection between that and a referral to the department of justice? where does that stand? is this a criminal referral? >> well, it's not a criminal referral yet. they want to do the testimony part first and then he will tell them basically to pound sand. and then they'll try to go into court. he will at least try to go to court and litigate that. what i'd like to make clear, martha, about the referral is that the department of justice couldn't care less whether the congress makes a criminal referral or not. the justice department has been looking at january 6th for almost two years. they have measures to explore to get information about it that are superior to the committee's. their professional prosecutors that do this for a living and they will make up their own mind about whether that is a case or
not. i would point out again, we heard a lot about seditious conspiracy today. there's a trial right now going on a few blocks away from the hearing room where the oath keepers are on trial for seditious conspiracy. they have not even named trump answer unundieted co conspirator because they don't have evidence that he wanted force to be inflicted against the congress. so the committee is trying to say that trump is the center of everything and without him there wouldn't have been this violent attack. down the street the justice department in a trial is basically staying a million miles away from trump. if trump is the center of the universe, they cannot prove seditious conspiracy, which is a conspiracy to make war against the government. you don't want to give the defense a defense if they were acting at the head of the government, the president. >> martha: well-said. byron, your thoughts on what we watched today. >> you know, the committee very
famously hired a former president of abc news to kind of craft their hearings into an exciting series. each one had kind of a beginning, a climax and a tease for the next episode. they all did that. this is -- the subpoena of the president is entirely theatrical. the biggest reason being, it's 26 days before the election. it appears that republicans are going to win control of the house. the committee is gone. they have no authority to do anything more. so shortly before the election, it's absolute theater. by the way, they have had a year in which they could have done this. it doesn't mean that we didn't see new stuff in this hearing. indeed we did. they had a lot of dramatic video of the leaders of the house and the senate in their secret safe place during the capitol riot. we saw a lot there. but the basics of the story did
not change today. the story being basically that this mob did attack the capitol. most people were horrified, tried to get it to stop. president trump liked it. he thought they were fighting on his behalf. we saw more evidence about that today. but nothing to change the basic outline of the story. >> yeah, it interesting that they had video of roger stone with members of the oath keepers and michael flynn with member of the oath keepers. that was the tangent that they drew. they don't have that with regard to the former president. as was mentioned before, it seems as though subpoenaing the president, the former president, would have been where you would want to start this whole process. not end this process. marc thiessen, your thoughts on what we watched today. >> yeah, so like everybody else on this panel, i was appalled by what happened january 6. i spent seven years working in
the senate. it was a privilege to walk out on the senate floor. every time i see video of what we saw today, my blood boils. but as i watch that video, i have this feeling that my emotions were being manipulated, that was being churned up to get angry about this all over again. that's the purpose of what this hearing was. as you said, if they were going to subpoena trump, they could have done it a year ago if they really wanted to do it. felt like political theater. i don't think it's a coincidence that they scheduled -- rescheduled this hearing nor the day the inflation numbers came out because, you know, we just found out that the record inflation continues and we got numbers on the consumer price index and they want everybody to be talking about january 6 instead of that. so i feel like it's not just political theater. it's political manipulation. i don't think it will work. i don't think that most americans are looking at in today and thinking, i'm going to change my vote in november because of that.
but we're a month a way from a historical election. we have a situation if the democrats were to hold on to the house and gain two more seats in the senate, they would get rid of the filibuster, pack the supreme court, pack their radical agenda with 50 votes. we're two votes away from a one-part state in this country. they're desperately trying to prevent the republicans from stopping that. and this hearing -- i thought it was fascinating. bennie thompson said there would be no more debate. there was no debate. there was nobody on the other side there it was a presentation, not a hearing. i feel personally manipulated. >> martha: yeah, well, as we said before, if they had wanted to present this in a way that would maybe hold more weight with the entire country, they could have easily allowed people in of a different perspective on
it that could have easily challenged some of these witnesses and some of the testimony that we saw. if they feel so strongly that they have this whole scenario right, that would have prevailed. but that's -- i'm watching right now another camera while members of the panel are getting their pictures taken with people in the crowd. there was an element of theater i think as both byron and andy said. stand by, if you would, gentlemen. i want to bring in chad pergram. chad, great to have you with us this afternoon. really the new thing here today, the only perhaps really new thing here today was the video that we saw of house speaker nancy pelosi and senate leader chuck schumer talking -- then the minority leader talking about all of this as it was happening and calling for security help for reserves, calling the governor of maryland, calling leadership in
virginia as well. what was your reaction to seeing that today? >> that was pretty dramatic. we didn't know about that. we knew that those figures had been squirrelled away here, taken to safe locations as the riot unfolded here. but to hear some of those telephone calls was pretty chilling. nancy pelosi saying oh, my gosh, they're breaking windows at the capitol. having information that they thought it would take days to get the capitol back in shape to even meet because they wanted to certified the electoral college that night. they did not want this to go on for days and have more uncertainty about the future of who the president of the united states was going to be. it's very important to them as soon as they could get the building secure to bring people back in to session and have the house and senate vote to ratify the results of the electoral college. the other thing here, the big bomb shell was the announcement of this subpoena. this vote that they took here. that is pretty rare. no congressional committee has even entertained this prospect since this 1950s.
that was the committee on un-american activities with form president truman. wanted him to testify. then you have to go back to presidents john quincy adams and tyler. this is in the mid 1850s where there was a congressional committee that wanted john tyler and john quincy adams to testify. that was rare. this is the process, this is where this will get interesting when we start the lame duck congress. it's very unlikely the former president would comply with this subpoena. the full house would have a vote to compel somebody to testify or hold them in contempt of congress that is turf that we've never gotten to. to hold a former president in contempt of congress. if you do so, what you're doing is you are sending a criminal referral to the department of justice and it is then up to merrick garland and the doj to indict that person like what they've done with steve bannon and others that did not supply with those subpoenas.
there's been some instances here where they said we won't prosecute former trump administration officials. they did with steve bannon. there's one wrinkle. you don't have to send this to the doj. this is rare. there's something called inherent contempt. inherent contempt is where congress executes this on its own. they haven't done this since the early 18th century, the very beginning of the republic. the most recent case was the 1930s. there was an air mail scandal and they went and arrested the congress did, an official from the commerce department and locked him up in a hotel in downtown washington, the willard, for about ten days until he complied with the information. there's an option for congress to act. that's why this is one more big thing to do during the lame duck congress. >> martha: that's why we love chad.
he provides the great context. stand by if you would. on top of the subpoena, the committee could send a criminal referral as we just discussed about -- with regard to the former president, donald trump, to the justice department. with that we want to bring in our justice correspondent, david spunt with the back story on that. hi, david. >> hi, martha. chad was just taking about inherent contempt looking back through the pages of history that hasn't happened much but has happened. i can tell you the department of justice will be ready to hear the criminal referral. we have spoken to people close to merrick garland over the past several months. they say that he watches each one of these hearings, these january 6th hearings whether or not he does it live or may record it and watch them later. you have to know the justice department as we have also reported extensively is doing a separate look at january 6. we get updates periodically. we got a 12-month update and
18-month update. we got a 21-month update from the u.s. attorney's office in d.c. a week ago today. i'm reading, it says more than 880 defendants have been arrested approximately 412 individuals have pleaded guilty to charges.when you add the numbers up, it's not even giving you a huge percentage of the people thought to be outside of the capitol on january 6 meaning the department of justice, yes, while they may be focusing on potentially former president donald trump and some other big ticket names, those doj officials are still going through the lower level people that not only breacheded the capitol but outside of the capitol. right now we see two or three a week that are still being arrested. we're coming up on two years this january. so doj has a major task ahead of them. it's interesting to point out, over the summer dorge source told me there was a sense of frustration with the january 6th committee because the january
6th committee was not providing all of the records requested by the department of justice. somebody said, well, we're requesting records, but chairman thompson and others with the committee said we're not going to share this stuff with the department of justice right away. so as the january 6th committee sunsets, the question has to be asked, will all of that information directly go to doj, will we she a formal referral to doj and how that will look. we know the attorney general watching all of this incredibly closely, martha. >> martha: he's got a lot on his plate. that's for sure. thanks very much. david spunt at the department of justice. let's go back to our panel. andy mccarthy, byron york and marc thiessen. great to have you with us. andy, on the question of the doj's separate set of investigations which is a number of arrests, 800 is the number that david spunt used, 412 guilty verdicts.
there's been about 60 in that neighborhood people that have been sentenced. the nature of most of these as far as i can tell, i mean there's some serious offenders that have received several-year sentences, most of them i believe are trespassing charges, correct? >> yeah, the vast majority -- maybe vast overstates it. the majority of the cases are lower level offenses where people were in places where they shouldn't have been. i'd have to say though listening to david run through the numbers and this whole idea of the criminal referral, in the more serious cases that you referred to, a lot of the defendants came into court and they wanted to make their defense former president trump. they basically wanted to come in and defend themselves on the theory that they thought that they were acting at the be-hess of the president of the united states or hoping that he would invoke the insurrection act and
consider themselves the malitia for what have you. the justice department fought hard to beat those defenses back and make some of them at least not admissible at trial. can you imagine how complicated it would be for the justice department if after having taken that position in connection with hundreds of cases, they are now coming in and say, gee, we've changed our mind. he is the center of everything. i mean, it would just be so immensely complicated nor the cases that they already brought. yes, they'll do a referral because politically that's the thing to do but i don't think it will make a difference to the justice department. >> martha: it's very interesting. maybe that's why you've not seen a lot of cooperation. the justice department is trying to bring cases that they can prove in court. with that, they separated the former president from the case. in congress, they're doing the opposite and make sure that they have trump at the center of
every motivation of all of these people in everything that happened that day. let's broaden it out, byron, with a question of the impact if there is continuing impact or not on the future for president -- the former president, donald trump, as he considers another run. is there an impact on conservatives, on republicans when they look towards 2024 or not? >> well, there's an impact in the sense that this is one of a lot of investigations into donald trump now. we have at least a couple of investigations going on in the justice department. the classified documents investigation, the january 6th investigation. there may be another department of justice investigation in to trump's fund-raising. we have this lawsuit from the state of new york. we have the january 6th committee. we've been watching, we have the state of georgia, fulton county, georgia, going after the
president. this is an enormous gang-up going on right now. i think the january 6th committee has made its point. they made its point all summer. the point being that so many of the rioters of the capitol came there at the behest of donald trump. they thought they were doing what trump wanted them to do and trump approved of what they did. so it's been pretty clear what the story is. one last thing on the subpoena though. andy pointed out a lot of the procedural defenses that trump would have. but look at how this committee has used witnesses. they have never put anybody on live when they didn't know exactly what was going to happen. they call witnesses, they do video taped depositions with them. in very few cases, they have called a witness before a live hearing to repeat to the committee a few excerpts of what they already said on tape.
the idea of a live witness is foreign. it's not part of this committee's show. i wouldn't imagine if the committee stayed in existence after the election. >> martha: a good point. marc, your thoughts on that and on the future for the former president. >> look, the future of the former president is not decided by this committee. it's going to be decided by republican voters in the republican primaries if he decides to run. they're not going to be persuaded by this committee. even if they don't want donald trump to be the nominee, they think trump was treated unfairly with the russian collusion conspiracy theory and the wrist of it. they're sympathetic to trump and they like trump's policies. they're tired of the chaos. there's a process in the republican party of deciding whether they want to move on from donald trump or whether they want to go with donald trump again and bring him back or move on from donald trump and have someone who is going to
carry on donald trump's policies without the political baggage.january 6th committee is not a factor in those decisions. it's who can win the election and whether there's somebody else that can pick up that mantel. that is a conversation for another day. we are one month away from an election where congress is being decided. we're going to find out whether or not there's any check on the reckless spending and all of the other radical policies that are happening. we just found out today that grocery prices went up 18%, gas line prices have gone up 50%. natural gal prices are up. cars are up, furniture is up. the worst inflation in four decades, the worst crime wave since the 90s, the worst border crisis in american history. most americans say i don't care about donald trump. i care about what is happening in my life.
i care about the fact that i have to choose between gas and food. i have to choose between paying my rent and heating my home this winter. this is irrelevant. should be completely irrelevant. we can have that conversation starting november 9. right now this is not what we should be talking about as a country and as conservatives. we should talk about how we stop this reckless spending and disastrous inflation that is ruining people lives. >> martha: final thoughts, byron and andy. >> i agree with what marc says about that. these investigations are going to continue because democrats have seen -- they believe there's some potential political power in them. what is remarkable though is we've had companies look at the ads that are being put on in congressional races around the country. almost none of them involve january 6. >> martha: i have to jump in. there's some reports that the former president has been
watching this and that he was unphased by this subpoena. not a big surprise with the stance that he's taken through this all along. so more coverage as we continue today. see you back here tomorrow on "the story." we'll be back with more. so to help you remember that liberty mutual customizes your home insurance, here's a pool party. ♪ good times. insurance! ♪ only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
>> martha: that wraps up our special coverage of the final january 6 committee proceedings. see you back here tomorrow at 3:00 for more of "the story." "your world" begins now. >> neil: what doesn't belong and why? they were tied at the hip today and people were big in to the buy. take a look at the left side of the screen. the dow jones industrial sprinting ahead 827 points. back over 30,000. here's the thing. it came despite that number that you see on the right. consumer prices in the latest month of september rocketing 8.2%. more than thought. and yet stocks went up. fully convinced that inflation is real, that none of the