cipollone thought that mr. meadows was indeed pushing this along with the president. >> and we understand, ms. hutchinson, that you also spoke to mr. cipollone on the morning of the sixth, as you were about to go to the rally on the ellipse. and mr. cipollone said something to you like, make sure the movement to be capitol does not happen. is that correct? >> that's correct. i saw mr. cipollone just before i walked out onto west exec that morning. and mr. cipollone said something to the effect of, please make sure we don't go up to the capitol, cassidy. keep in touch with me. we are going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> what do you mean we? we? we are going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen? we are going to get charged. mr. cipollone, what do you mean, we are going to get charged? what were you going to get charged with if donald trump went to the capitol on january 6th? >> in the days leading up to the sixth, we had convers

cipollone to testify on the record. leading experts saying there could be arests and opportunity for the committee. >> if i was counsel, there is no way he can testify. he has enormous exposure. on the other hand, he has leverage. with congress and even possible immunity. >> reporter: as more evidence is revealed, the pressure is increasing on the department of justice to act. members of the committee openly saying they believe trump committed a crime. >> there is no doubt in my mind that he was involved in criminal activity. >> reporter: the committee also accusing trump loyalists of putting pressure on potential witnesses, bordering on witness tampering. >> i think that is something that should be looked at by our committee and potentially by the department of justice. >> reporter: meanwhile, some republicans are pushing back, questioning hutchinson's credibility, trump, himself, clearly watching the hearing, claiming, quoted, i lardlhardly who this person is. mick mulvane saying, quote, i know her. i don't think she

pat cipollone, where are you? >> there's certainly an argument to be made that pat cipollone's conversations with president trump could be covered by executive privilege. right? >> yes, though he is the white house lawyer. he's the institution's lawyer, not the president's lawyer. now, there are certain conversations you're having about certain things just like mark meadows. the committee has not said he has no privilege. they just said you don't have blanket privilege and you don't have privilege if you're discussing a criminal act. you can't hide criminality. the committee is trying to build a pyramid of intent and corruption of trump. what did they so today? three different campaign lawyers said we're out of this. >> trump campaign lawyers. >> no, we're done. we're done. what you're doing now is illegal. we're done. they passed it off on the private lawyers. they have shown some of pat cipollone's deputies saying we think this is crazy. other lawyers in the white house counsel's market. today, they had mark mea

cipollone told mr. clark to stand down and he didn't. >> so a lawyer familiar with cipollone's thinking telling cnn that he'll probably agree to a transcribed interview but limited to specific topics to avoid privilege issues. okay, what does that exactly mean? we're going to answer that because i'm not sure what that means. i'm not sure elie honing who i'll have here in a minute knows what that means but we're going to ask him. this is just moments ago. this is liz cheney. she's speaking at the reagan library. watch. >> we have to choose because republicans cannot both be loyal to donald trump and loyal to the constitution. >> okay, so she said it out loud. and now a republican party that's knuckled under the former president even 18 months after he left washington in disgrace is quietly acknowledging what we have all seen and heard for ourselves, what we heard yesterday from cassidy hutchinson, her bombshell testimony. it's damning. one senior house republican i should say who didn't back impeachment

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> reporter: now, i can't overstate how significant this would be if pat cipollone were to come in to testify. he is of course one of the closest people to donald trump, mark meadows the chief of staff has not come in to testify with the house. of course, the house in the past has not had success getting someone like cipollone, the white house counsel, to testify with them. previously in the mueller investigation a criminal investigation don mccgahn the former white house counsel was willing to testify to mueller, with as not willing to testify to the house. the house fought for years to get him. if cipollone would come in now with political expediency this is a whole new ball game. >> katelyn polantz, thank you. >>> george conway, contributing columnist for the "washington post," george, thanks so much for being with us. you were serving as counsel to the

donald trump said this about pat cipollone when cipollone was preparing for trump's first impeachment trial. >> he's the strong, silent type. strong, he's very strong, silent. great job you've done. >> reporter: but a new account from former top white house aide cassidy hutchinson portrays cipollone as anything but silent as rioters attacked the capitol on january 6. hutchinson told the house panel investigating the insurrection that cipollone, then trump's white house counsel, tried repeatedly to get trump to stop the violence and to keep trump from going to the capitol, paraphrasing scipollone's warning. >> we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> reporter: the 56-year-old cipollone is in the middle of a classic washington political brawl as he negotiates with the house committee over how he will give testimony about his actions on and before january 6th. by all accounts he's always tried to avoid the spotlight, described in a "washington post" profile as a washington every man, always preferring to work the mechanisms of power behin

we have not heard cipollone on videotape to date. if he does participate, he's going to be able the kcorroborae or not a lot of what hutchin zone said this week. >> you guy, alex, you wrote extensively about what was going on in the final days of the trump white house. what do you think is the most important thing he could tell the committee? >> as jonathan just alluded to, if pat cipollone were to testify and corroborate the elements of cassidy hutchinson's testimony that she was described the legal warnings they had and the messages from the white house counsel to senior white house staff about very real legal jeopardy if they took this path or that path, that strikes me as hugely important to a possible criminal case against the former president. don, on the politics of this and in terms of the way the committee is shaping larger public about what was going on in those days, there's virtually nothing that the former white house counsel could not be valuable in discussing. we have reporting about him talking to one republican senat

you will not hear from pat cipollone. of the few people that have the privilege, the white house counsel has the privilege -- >> well -- >> i think it would be litigated long past this january 6 commission. >> sure. >> and pat cipollone would have to voluntarily come before the committee, which he's not going to do. liz cheney can talk about pat cipollone and all these great things he may or may not do and kind of hang it out there, but he's not going to show up. he's not going to testify. >> it's not like pat cipollone is a huge fan of the if tpresid at this point. we know he protected him in impeachment, but he whined at some point and cipollone was in these meetings with top justice officials and said, we'll quit. we'll leave. we're not going to stand for this. it would be important to hear from him. they know privately what he would say publicly, they do -- >> attorney general, i would guess. >> pat cipollone wouldn't want to come before the district attorney. >> we heard this campaign commercial from griden who is ru

how important is it to hear from pat cipollone, governor? >> well, he's a key person in all of the discussions, and cassidy hutchison yesterday certainly indicated that he was right in the middle of it. he understood what was going on. he cast warnings as to what would happen if the president encouraged people to go to the capitol. but i'm a lawyer. i've been a federal prosecutor. i've been in congress during impeachment trial, and i know how important that attorney/client privilege is, particularly when you're dealing with the chief executive of the united states of america. i would expect pat cipollone, who is highly respected, to respond to the subpoena. i would expect that he would want to have a court tell him that the privilege does not apply here or the public interest outweighs the claiming oh of the privilege. and so it's a very sensitive area that's important for all lawyers. it's important for me as governor and someone who is president to have confidence in that inner circle and the privileges that you can have those conversation

cipollone. mr. cipollone. mr. cipollone. mr. cipollone. i see pat cipollone barrels down the hallway. >> pat cipollone said, yeah, this is a murder/suicide pact. >> i called pat cipollone. >> mr. trump's former white house counsel pat cipollone. >> a former white house counsel, white house counsel at the time, is a big deal. they know a lot and they know what's legally right and wrong. and they're supposed to be advising the president. and everyone knows that. so, how would hearing directly from him have an impact or would it have an impact on those still supporting donald trump? >> so i think he's probably the most important testimony that could potentially still be gotten by the committee. and there's virtually no chance you're going to see him raise his hand before a camera the way cassidy hutchinson was brave enough to do. i trust cassidy hutchinson's testimony word for word. i know her, i served with her. the lines she quoted pat cipollone says, i can hear him saying that. i worked with him only about eight months, but

as for mark meadows and pat cipollone, nothing yet. remember the former president's so-called election defense fund that he said was set up to, quote, protect election integrity, the one we later learned didn't actually exist but still got people to donate around a quarter billion dollars that instead made its way to a trump fundraising pac. cnn has learned less than a month after the january 6th select committee, the trump pac made a million dollar donation to a group called the conservative partnership institute. and you might be curious to know who a senior partner in that group is. one mark meadows. yesterday, committee vice chair liz cheney detailed two instances of what appeared to be witness tampering through intimidation. if true, perhaps it's not the only way someone is trying to influence who said what during the january 6th committee. ryan nobles joins us now with more on the subpoena. what do we know about this? >> reporter: it seems pretty clear that the committee no longer wants to wait around for pat cipollone to volunta

cipollone's earlier informal engagement with our investigation, with the ball now squarely in cipollone's quote the new york times is out with some important reporting, quote, the subpoena of a white house counsel a rare step for a congressional committee sent a clear signal of the aggressive tactics the panel is willing to use to force the cooperation of the white house top lawyer who could likely invoke attorney-client privilege in response to many questions. the committee has at times used the leverage of a subpoena or the leverage it creates to force witnesses to negotiate a deal for their cooperation. discussions about the scope of a possible appearance are expected to begin soon. lawyer familiar with cipollone's deliberations who was not authorized to speak on the record said that the subpoena was needed for the former white house counsel could consider transcribed testimony before the committee and that cipollone would now evaluate matters of privilege as appropriate. as the times points out the subpoena of a white house lawyer is an extraordinary step for any investigation to take

cipollone was concerned with? >> and the days leading up to the six, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> hutchinson also testified about cipollone's efforts on january six to get the president to urge his supporters to end the violent. she described him, pleading with her boss, former white house chief of staff mark meadows, to intervene. >> i remember pat saying to him, something to the effect of the rioters have got into the capital capitol mark. we need to get down now. and mark said, he doesn't want to do anything, pat. and pat said something to the effect of, and very clearly, said this to mark -- something to the effect of, mark, something needs to be done, or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your effing hands. i remember pat saying something to the effect of, mark, we need to do something more. they are literally calling for the vice president to be effing hung. >> and mark had responded, something to the effect of, you hear

cipollone. mr. cipollone. mr. scipollone. he was barreling down the hallway. >> pat cipollone said it was a murder-suicide pakt. . >> former white house counsel pat cipollone. >> a source says that cipollone might agree to a limited interview but avoid some topics. but committee members say they could easily work out a solution. >> if you look at ms. hutchinson's testimony yesterday, there were quite a few things that he could tell the committee that would not be subject to privilege. >> he has a huge volume of relevant evidence and he was there at every level of each of these assaults on democracy and the rule of law. >> cnn's ryan nobles explains why cipollone's testimony is crucial to the january 6th investigation. >> reporter: after spending the last few weeks publicly calling on the former white house counsel pat cipollone to appear before the january 6 select committee, the committee is now getting serious taking the dramatic step of issuing a subpoena that would require him to cooperate with their investigation. now, c

cipollone. mr. cipollone. mr. cipollone. mr. cipollone. i see pat cipollone barrels down the hallway. >> pat cipollone said, yeah, this is a murder/suicide pact. >> i called pat cipollone. >> mr. trump's former white house counsel pat cipollone. >> a former white house counsel, white house counsel at the time, is a big deal. they know a lot and they know what's legally right and wrong. and they're supposed to be advising the president. and everyone knows that. so, how would hearing directly from him have an impact or would it have an impact on those still supporting donald trump? >> i think his is the most important testimony that could be gotten by the committee. there's no chance you're going to see him raise his hand before a camera the way cassidy hutchinson was brave enough to do. i trust cassidy hutchinson's testimony word for word. i know her, i served with her. the lines she quoted pat cipollone says, i can hear him saying that. i worked with him only about eight months, but it sounds like him. he is going to be able

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice, or defrauding the electoral count. >> i remember pat saying to him, something to the effect of the march to the capitol, we need to go to the president now. and mark was saying, he doesn't want to do anything, pat, and pat said something to the effect of, and very clearly, had said this to mark, something to the effect of mark, something needs to be done, or people are going to die and blood is going to be on your effing hands, this is getting out of control, i'm going down there. >> nbc news has reached out to cipollone for comment. >>> a lawyer familiar with the deliberations confirmed to nbc that the subpoena was required for any consideration of transcribed testimony before the committee, and cipollone would now look at matters of privilege as appropriate. >>> in a forceful speech last night house select committee chair liz cheney delivered a searing rebuke to former president trump.

cipollone to testify here. indeed, our evidence shows that he and his office tried to do what was right. they tried to stop a number of president trump's plans for january 6th. >> where -- what's the status with the committee vis-a-vis cipollone? have you extended a formal invitation to pat cipollone to testify? has he officially rejected that information? has he given any response? >> i'm not going to talk about the specifics of a witness we could hear from, but what i can tell you, and you've heard this time and time again, jake, a thousand interviews that we've conducted as part of our process. so, we've gathered information, we're piecing this together. we look forward to sharing the information that we can with the american public. but i think it's fair to say that we've talked to, you know, dozens of individuals in and around the white house at the time in the hearing that i led last week, we heard specifically testimony from individuals saying that pat cipollone told them that he knew the vice president

as a practical matter they are at pat cipollone's mercy because if cipollone says i'm out, not talking to you the committee does not have the time left to go into the courts, we saw how long that took with don mcgahn, they have six months left at most. they just don't have the time. maybe they're thinking something is better than nothing. >> because the dynamics with pat cipollone are so different than they are with cassidy hutchinson. if he's going to be wanting to claim privilege he's going to do it on did you tell donald trump that. >> right. no. exactly. that's really kind of the only standing that he has. i do think that it's interesting that they finally actually sent the subpoena, the reporting we got was basically he's not going to do it without a subpoena, we've seen that from a number of people close to the former president. in some ways it gives them political cover with the president. i'm not sure that that's what's going on in cipollone's case but i do think it's important. don't forget the public outside pressure here to your point that piece of this is very important bec

cipollone repeatedly raised concerned about president trump. the committee needs to hear from him on the record as other former white house counsels have done in other congressional investigations. your thoughts on this subpoena, paul? given all of the things that he was concerned about from the speech to walking to the capitol. he said they could be charged with every crime imaginable. >> joy, the house panel had to subpoena pat cipollone. but it's probably not going to work -- with a house investigation, he will do the trump thing of trying to beat the clock. he will probably be able to stall by making bogus objections until the midterm elections when the panel is likely to get neutralized or co-opted by republicans. the feds can still hold cipollone accountable. the fbi should have a nice sit down with him. or he needs to be hauled into a federal grand jury. he needs to be required to answer on the record why on january 3 he told trump he would face serious legal problems if he went to the rally, if he went to the capitol. cipollone is the c

cipollone. mr. cipollone. >> i see pat cipollone barreling down the hallway. >> pat cipollone said this is a murder-suicide pact. >> i called mr. cipollone. >> the former white house counsel pat cipollone. >> he sat for a closed door interview in april, but has resisted further corporation. daniella diaz has the latest. and cnn has some insight into cipollone's plans. what can you tell us? >> reporter: we know that cipollone will likely agree to a transcribed interview with the january 6 committee, probably limited to specific topics to avoid privilege issues. this according to a source familiar with his thinking. but look, whether any testimony would be live or taped remains to be seen. but he could be in-creditbly enlightening and shed more information on what happened in the days leading up to the insurrection and what happened that day with president trump, with then chief of staff mark meadows and of course this all comes after that bombshell testimony by that former white house aide cassidy hu

cipollone i think has a larger problem. he advised the president against doing these things because there were conspiracies involved, several of them. what's to say that he's ever declared he's not part of that conspiracy? if he's remaining silent he is certainly encouraging and enabling that done conspiracy, and he could get dragged in himself. i would think he'd want to be up there, don, not only for the sake of democracy but for his own sake. so this is all a little bit mysterious, his behavior. >> i think i heard you loud and clear but just for clarification just to make sure, would there be any executive issues with conversations he had with mark meadows or cassidy hutchinson? >> the only privilege he has would go to the president him himself. broadly speaking if they were to take a message for him to the president you might consider that priv l builege but that's reach. and particularly there's no privilege of any kind if it involves crime or fraud. >> john, we've been hearing a lot about pat cipollone in these hearin

i do also believe that cipollone needs to testify. he should know better than most that the way to assert executive privilege is to show up to the committee and assert it to questions, not just to not show up. >> then there's the issue about accusations of witness tampering. cheney shows two examples of witnesses sharing details of people trying to sway their testimony, could that change the justice department's approach? >> it should. again, i was reading that statute as well, as a federal crime to intimidate in an official proceeding including congressional hearings. that is something that the doj should be looking very carefully at in this case, it seemed that that too, if that is proven is a clear-cut reason to at least open an investigation, if not commune a grand jury. >> there's one more moment i want to play where the committee played part of the video testimony from michael flynn. this was congresswoman cheney questioning him. take a look. >> do you believe the violence on january 6th was justified morally? do you believe the

cipollone personal. he should appear before this committee, and we are working to secure his testimony. >> joined by cnn chief analyst jeffrey toobin, carl bernstein, author of "chasing history: a kid in the newsroom." a look around, can cipollone refuse to testify? is it entirely his decision or is it -- he was white house counsel. can he just say there was executive privilege? >> as a practical matter, it is his decision. he is not a private lawyer, so there is not attorney/client privilege the way there is for a private lawyer. executive privilege can be gotten around. but what i mean by as a practical matter is there's no time to litigate this. even if the committee wanted to subpoena him and then force him to testify, the clock would run out. so, this is really entirely up to cipollone. and it sounds like he's just not going to do it. >> carl, how realistic do you think it is that he would agree to testify even with this public showing by liz cheney? >> the committee knows from those closest to cipo

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the sixth, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> telling cnn the committee will seriously consider inviting cipollone for what he calls a transcribed interview. there are plenty of people who know what happened in the trump white house. who simply just aren't talking. liz cheney suggesting the committee has evidence of witness tampering. saying one unidentified witness has told them this. >> quote, what they said to me is as long as i continue to be a team player, they know i'm on the right team. i'm doing the right thing. i'm protecting who i need to protect. you know i'll continue to stay in good graces in trump world. and they reminded me a couple of times that trump does read transcripts. >> here to talk about all this, cnn dana bash. chief political correspondent. andrew mccabe former fbi deputy director. ellie koenig, alice stewart and david axlerod. we have it all covered for you. good eveni

cipollone personally. he should appear before the committee and we are looking to secure his testimony. >> this is someone who is trump eers former white house counsel. he's already sat for a private interchange with the committee. we have heard him come up during the committee testimony as you saw there with jared kushner in this exchange about how cipollone threatened to resign at various points. and he sort of feels like he did this behind the scenes interview. heat participated and this is a person who knows a lot. who was there in the white house. who saw a number of critical meetings. during this period in january 2021, where donald trump was looking at ousting the acting attorney general and replacing him with someone to try to overturn election results, cipollone was around for the president's thinking and around for various meetings. he was around when these officials were essentially saying, look, president trump, if you decide to oust rosen, we're going to resign in mass. it would be compelling

cipollone personally. ea he should appear before this committee. >> a source telling cnn cipollone believes he has cooperated enough with the committee. back with me, the panel. mr. honing, the committee clearly wants the former white house counsel, pat cipollone, to testify. he is a critical figure here. do you think he'll do it? >> i don't think so. first of all, pat cipollone believes he's already cooperated enough. well, excuse me. >> i've cooperated enough, sorry. >> i'm done with you, sorry. that's not how it works, right? liz cheney is exactly right. he could be a crucial witness. the problem is the committee is entirely at cipollone's mercy now because of where we are on the calendar. if cipollone were to say i'm out, i'm not testifying, the only remedy the committee would have would be to go to court. these hearings are going to be over soon, so it's based on his good will and i wouldn't back on that. >> >> why do you think it's important for the american people to hear from pat cipollone? >> all

pat cipollone said it best through hutchinson. that if they go down to the capitol, they will be charged with all sorts of crimes, including some of the ones that liz cheney has been speaking about. the idea of obstructing an official proceeding. trying to defraud the united states. all this comes down to the state of mind. what you knew when you knew it. for the president of the united states to be aware two to three minutes before going on stage that there was an armed crowd of people that had been riled up and believed the election had been stolen based on what he knew to be fraudulent information, his legal exposure is wide open. >> certainly is right now. i want you to watch liz cheney describe a message that a committee witness got from someone in trump's orbit. li listen to this. >> person let many know you have your deposition tomorrow. he wants me to let you know he's thinking about you. he knows you're loyal and you're going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition. >> textbook shall we say witness test t

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defaulting the electoral count. >> elliott? >> that is just devastating to hear and we have to hear from pat cipollone. here is the thing, one of the main argument he's making for -- and rightfully so for not testifying -- is that well, i was the white house counsel and i'm going to have some levels of attorney client or executive priv privilege. the problem for him is the things he's talking about, they aren't in the scope of his job as white house counsel. he's saying to a colleague, look, we might be charged with crimes. and so he could very narrowly tailor the things that he comes into testify about. it is number one, did you warn your colleagues that they could be charged with crimes. i don't see any real attorney client privilege based on his job as white house counsel there. he's got to come in, this is important for the american people. >> and he also has fifth amendment protect

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the sixth, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> so let me ask you. as a legal matter, first, the great advice by pat cipollone. >> those are words no white house counsel ever wants to have to say. that is the worst possible scenario for a white house counsel. >> we're going to be charged with crimes. >> we're going to be charged with every crime imaginable, according to cassidy hutchinson. >> my question is, does it matter on a legal level whether or not trump was inciting the crowd on capitol hill and he was present or whether he had just done all the work and they were running to the capitol anyway? >> it clearly mattered to pat cipollone. in his assessment, he knew sort of all the facts going on at the time, and so he obviously underwent some kind of legal analysis within -- what i'm presuming is they did a legal analysis and there was something about going up to the capitol physically that mad

cipollone personally. he should appear before this committee and we are working to secure his testimony. >> brianna, the white house is not blocking pat cipollone from testifying, as a matter of fact, he did testify behind closed doors to the committee and he's played a big role in this hearing, whether he's there or not. i mean, we've heard from jared kushner who has called him a whiner for threatening to quit over some of this stuff, we heard from another witness who apparently was in the room when cipollone told some of these characters that what they were trying to do was not legal. so pat cipollone and his words have certainly played a big role in the january 6 committee's hearings we just aren't going to hear from him. what i'm told is that simply he believes that he's given enough cooperation and, look, i think for people like him, you know, they think having a white house counsel, one of the closest aides to a president testify in a hearing like this, you know, brings back memories of john dean and

cipollone thought that mr. meadows was, indeed, pushing this along with the president. >> and we understand that you also spoke to mr. cipollone on the morning of the 6th, as you were about to go to the rally on the ellipse. and mr. cipollone said something to you like make sure the movement to the capitol does not happen. is that correct? >> that's correct. i saw mr. cipollone right before i walked out onto west exec that morning, and mr. cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the capitol. keep in touch with me. we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> and do you remember which crimes mr. cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> let's hear about some of those concerns that you mentioned earlier in one of your interviews with us. >> having a private conversation with pat late in the afternoon of the 3rd

so what else does cipollone know? i think he knows volumes. >> carl, you told anderson earlier that former white house aide kathy hutchinson helped paint a picture in her testimony of, quote, mad king. how important a witness do you think hutchinson was, and what stood out to you the most? >> what stood out is she is a hugely important witness along the lines of john dean, because she has given a coherent, con contextual picture of a president out of control with no regard for the constitution, for the orderly transfer of power who would stage a coup. we haven't had testimony from anyone else like that. but what is the most important thing that has come out today, that is, we now understand that this committee block by block is putting together the picture of a coup led by the president of the united states who would allow himself, knowing that there are people in the trees with arms, with lethal arms, people at his rally, and he's saying, it's okay that they're there. they like me. the assumption being, they'll shoot

the committee wants cipollone to testify next wednesday. his lawyer says he is weighing what he can say based on etch he can -- executive privilege. can he fight the represent? he doesn't represent president trump. he represents the office of the presidency of the united states. is the executive privilege claim limited to specific -- potentially specific questions? >> yes, i think there's room to negotiate here. my guess is that's what's going to happen. he does have legitimate claims of attorney/client privilege and executive privilege. as you say, it's important to distinguish who his client is. it's not donald trump. it's the office of the presidency. to the extent donald trump was trying to abuse that power or steal the presidency, then his loyalty lies with the office and not with the man. also, there are other areas that could create room for conversation. for example, if a third party was present, michael flynn or roger stone or anyone else who is not protected by the privileges, then there's no privilege. with regard to executive pr

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> so first of all, a plus lawyering by pat cipollone there, he is right on the potential crimes that they're committing, obstruction, conspiracy, things you and i have been talking about virtually every day on this program. it is remarkable to hear that the senior-most lawyer, the white house counsel, recognized while this was happening we are engaged in a crime spree. every crime on the books. and it raises this important question, who else did pat cipollone say that to? i think it's hard to believe that the only person he told was a then 24-year-old staffer. did cipollone say that to mark meadows? did he say it to donald trump? realistically the only way we will find that out is from pat cipollone but he pretty clearly is not going to be testifying in the committee, he doesn't want to. the committee doesn't seem to have the political will to try to forc

here's what cipollone said to hutchinson. >> and we understand, ms. hutchinson, that you also spoke to mr. cipollone on the morning of the 6th, as you were about to go tthe rally on the ellipse, and mr. cipollone said something to you like, make sure the movement to the capitol does not happen. is that correct? >> that is corct. i saw mr. cipollone right before i walked out onto the west exec that morning, and mr. cipollone said something to the effect of: please make sure we don't go up to the capitol cassidy, keep in touch with me, we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> that exchange that hutchinson recalled was new, we had never heard that before, and also the specific crimes that cipollone was talking about. he told hutchinson he thought they could face obstruction of proceeding charges as well as defrauding of electors charges him and still come the spot all of those warnings, the president wanted to go to the capitol and urged his staff to make it possible for him. judy: laura, cassidy hutchins

pat cipollone pulled her aside and said this. >> mr. cipollone said something to the effect of, please make sure he doesn't go to the capitol, cas difficult. keep in touch with me. we will get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> cipollone is a value and someone that understands the law, if you were him, would you testify? >> he is very, very valuable. his quote says it all. that's the opinion of the white house council providing that they're potentially engaged in criminal activity. if i was counsel, there is no way he would testify. he has got enormous exposure. but on the other hand, he has a lot of leverage to negotiate with congress, to negotiate with the justice department or even for a possible -- it's different than the john means situation. it's a different justice department. one more egregious situation floating around. more unknowns. so he has bargaining power. that can be bad as we saw on the ian contra. >> so legally, pat cipollone's testimony could be critical with the experience of the

cipollone right before i walked out onto the west exec that morning, and mr. cipollone said something to the effect of: "please make sure we don't go up to the capitol cassidy, keep in touch with me. we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen." >> that exchange that hutchinson recalled was new. he had never heard that before. also specific crimes to baloney was talking about -- pat cipollone he was talking about, he told hutchinson he thought they could face obstruction of proceeding charges as well as defrauding of electors charges. despite those warnings, the president wanted to go to the capitol and urged his staff to make it possible for him. judy: cassidy hutchinson testified about how she traveled in the president's motorcade to the rally that was taking place on the morning of january 6 and she also testified about the president's reaction when he learned a number of the people at that rally in that area were carrying weapons. >> that is right. the president was really upset his supporters were not being allow

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> what do you think had cipollone most worried there? >> are you asking me that? >> yes. >> sorry. >> that is okay. >> sorry. i think that he was worried about two things in particular. the conspiracy to obstruct the official proceeding and the incitement. i think those two things were foremost on cipollone's mind and with good reason because we saw both of those things occur. >> part of the issue here is that cipollone seems to be the one who is making a connection between all of the procedural wranglings, nonsense going on with the electoral count, fraudulent elector scheme and making a connection to the violence that apparently everyone including mark meadows who told hutchinson it could be a bad day, cassidy. >> well, so i think that if we back up a little bit, you have on january 2 giuliani speaking to cassidy saying to her that it will be great on

pat cipollone is to key. cassidy hutchinson gave them new roads to go down. i was talking to a source on the committee who said we always wanted to hear from pat cipollone, we know liz cheney was goading him publicly, now they it is urgent and important to have him corroborate what cassidy hutchinson is saying. pat cipollone was running around like chicken little the day of january 6th, warning people, if you go to there, there is going to be blood on your hands, there is going to be legal action. he was also so key in warning the president of the united states in a meeting in the oval office which we heard described by the department of justice people that if you do what jeffrey clark is saying, this is going to be a murder suicide pact. and people are going to quit. he has been an important figure here and as they try and connect the dots, and piece this all together, about what was going on, inside the white house, what donald trump knew, we knew -- we now know from cassidy hutchinson that over a period of time, just before january 6th, and on the day of j

josh, let's talk through cipollone here. a subpoena obviously now delivered to cipollone. we know obviously the way in which cassidy laid out some of the things that he said throughout that day on january 6th, one is if we actually go to the capitol, there are a lot of criminal charges we could be -- we could see in our future. we also know as the committee has said, he has sat for a quote/unquote informal engagement back in april, right. so why do you think now the committee believes it is so incredibly important to have him come in and give likely closed door testimony but on the record testimony? >> well, we know that pat cipollone was one of the most strident opponents of the stop-the-steal campaign and a lot of that outside advisers that were promulgated that information to the former president. we know he had concerns at many levels of what was happening and expressed those to others in the white house. the testimony indicated that. others said that, as well. the former president had quite a difficult vitriolic relationship within the time, he would often castigate h

cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th, we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> i remember pat saying to him, something to the effect of, if the rioters got to the capitol, we need to go down and see the president now. mark looked up and said, he doesn't want to do anything, pat. pat said something to the effect of, and very clearly, said this to mark, something to the effect of, mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your effing hands. this is getting out of control. i'm going down there. >> nbc news has reached out to cipollone for comment. a lawyer familiar with the deliberations confirmed to nbc news the subpoena was required for any consideration of transcribed testimony before the committee and that cipollone would now look at matters of privilege as appropriate. joe, we should remind people, pat cipollone, we heard testimony from other people doing the right thing in real

that's cipollone. this person knows who shot them, how they died, who did it and when the president found out about it. this is the person who knows everything. so she was able to with credibility testify to her direct boss mark meadows interest instead a presidential pardon let me play this for you, charlie. >> did rudy giuliani ever suggest that he was interested in receiving a presidential pardon related to january 6th? >> he did. >> and ms. hutchinson, did white house chief of staff mark meadows ever indicate that he was interested in receiving a presidential pardon related to january 6th? >> mr. meadows did seek that pardon, yes, ma'am. >> wow, charlie. we knew about rudy's interest in a presidential pardon but i don't know that i'd ever heard of meadows' interest in one. >> there were so many wow moments in this testimony, so many moments that were truly extraordinary. not only did she lay out evidence, she and liz cheney laid out evidence of, you know, criminal culpability by donald trump and hi

cipollones, at times, pivotal role. >> on january 3rd, mr. cipollone had approached me. mr. cipollone and i had a brief, private conversation where he said to me we need to make sure that this doesn't happen. this would be a legally terrible idea for us. mr. cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the capitol, cassidy. >> barreling down the hallway toward our office. pat was concerned it would look like we are obstructing justice. for obstructing the electoral college count. >> that last quote is what she says cipollone told her about two crimes he was worried that were in progress by trump officials. and that's what he told her. you may have heard this thing cropping up on the right where some folks who are sifrm thetic to trump will say some of this is hearsay. two points on that. one, as audio legal matter, some of this is hearsay. but this is not a criminal yet. if folks are indicted for those type of offenses, then you deal of the hearsay rules. two, the reason the cipollone' testimony is currently hearsay is because of one person --

the committee have already spoken to cipollone. they mentioned this in the subpoena, that they talked to him behind closed doors in april. and the reason they want him now again is because they have more questions. he's probably, if he decides to cooperate, going to testify again behind closed doors. our sources tell us that would just be a transcribed deposition. no less important though to the committee ultimately getting to the bottom line here, which is that cipollone was in many of these meetings that cassidy hutchinson was talking about, but also that those top former officials from the department of justice were talking absolutely about. cipollone can shed light on who said what in those meetings, but also his view as the white house's top lawyer there, the committee has gone to pain staking lengths to try to show the former president and his top allies were moving ahead, not just with these false elector strategies and attempts to overturn the election, but also what the white house was talking about during the insurrection