Ari Melber — The January 6 Report - with John P. Flannery — at Sixth & I

Hello everyone, thanks for waiting, it will be worth it. I'm Heather Moran, I'm the CEO here at Sixth and I, and whether you're here with us in person or watching us virtually from home on behalf of Sixth, myself and our political partners. and prose thank you so much for being here with us tonight and for continuing to support nonprofits and independent bookstores. Now, how many of you are here for the first time? Raise your hand. Oh, welcome, that's so kind. Well, I'll share. a little bit about this very special place if I may, as if you had a choice, after it opened in 1908, this building was a synagogue for 45 years and then it was an African Methodist Episcopal church for the next 50.

I know. Just when the church moved in and put the building up for sale in the early 2000s, the highest bid was from someone who wanted to turn this place into a nightclub that surely would have been fantastic, but within 24 hours three developers local real estate agents saved the building Paving the way for Sixth and I to become a hub for arts entertainment and Jewish living ideas for oh thank you and for the past 18 years our mission has been to inspire more meaningful and fulfilling lives through a combination of experiences that encompass the multifaceted identities of those we serve on January 6, 2021 our country came dangerously close to losing its democracy just six blocks from where you are sitting tonight a mob violently attacked the Capitol building in an attempt to disrupt the certification of the presidential election and prevent the peaceful transfer of power, an act of domestic terrorism unparalleled in American history, supports one of those historic moments when you always remember where you were when you heard the news.

I will remember walking into this building two days later and having to show my ID at a tank armed checkpoint around the corner at 600 and Massachusetts Avenue we came to remove our Torah Scrolls from the building to make sure they remained safe in a resolution that six months later, the House of Representatives established a special committee to investigate how and why the attack occurred and as you know, the findings of their investigation were released later last month tonight. We're so proud to welcome Emmy Award-winning journalist Ari Melber to the 6th, and I'm here to present his analysis of the January 6 Congress.

The Wood Report and the Wider Conspiracy to Overthrow the 2020 Election. The print edition of the

report

with a foreword written by Ari quickly became the number one nonfiction book in the country, surpassing editions of The New York Times

report

and New Yorker. Thank you. Before becoming msnbc's chief legal correspondent and host of The Beat with Ari Melber, Ari practiced First Amendment law and served as a legislative assistant in the U.S. Senate, his deep knowledge of the law and The inner workings of Congress distinguish its reports and expand our understanding of the critical issues of the day, but as rapper Drake says, you can't listen to me talk and go tell my story, so I'll leave it to attorney John P Flannery, who We are delighted to have you with us tonight.

Mr. Flannery is a former federal prosecutor and a frequent guest commentator on television and radio, he served as special counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate labor committee later in the program. We'd love to hear your questions and invite you to get in line. at the standing microphones in any of the hallways and then after the event, many of them will have signed books for sale in the main lobby and we will also have a meet and greet on stage, so please keep the tickets you got when They entered. If you want to participate, thank you all for being here and at home for being with us.

Ari Melber will be starting tonight, so join me in giving him a warm welcome to 6ni, open him up. I open it saying them. He attempted a coup d'état, that is the most important fact of what happened and to some people that sounds obvious and to some it may seem that that does not happen in other places not here and that I think is the most important thing that the nation digests and that the Department of Justice has to deal with because, by arresting, prosecuting and now convicting people like Mr. Barnett, it is important and obviously needs to happen, if you only go after those people, then you are treating it more like a crime scene of a day, a riot, as some called it, violence. that we saw all serious crimes deployed against the police but none of those things by themselves when private citizens do them in a disjointed manner constitute an attempted coup d'état and when I say that it is an attempted coup d'état I am not talking about adjectives criticism opinion I'm not talking about whether you don't like Donald Trump, which many people do for many reasons.

I'm talking about who Donald Trump was before this, which is a series of conversations and then what it means when someone in the government in power tries to steal your democracy and your vote and what it means if they are allowed close to power again, so I think that underpins all of this. What I want to do then is say, "Okay, if we're in this room and you're here and you're listening." to me and you're saying that sounds logical, it sounds simple, don't objective people agree on this or isn't it, isn't it obvious or at least say the people who are maybe more inclined to hold Trump responsible, let's say Democrats right?

We all agree on this. I would remind them not to. I would remind you that even though the Democratic Congress rushed through the impeachment and the fastest reaction in history to something that many people believe was deserved, that impeachment and the Senate trial were largely carried out measured at that time by a speech and I bet I can tell they are here. I bet many of you followed him. From now on I quote one of the final arguments of that trial where one of the impeachment managers said that Trump took the stage on January 6. He knew how combustible the situation was, the crowd was ready to engage in violence, he targeted them at the Capitol, that's the final argument and it was presented then basically, I'm simplifying, as I do sometimes in my job, but I condemn Trump because he rose to the stage and gave a speech and exhorted the people to storm the capital and they did, and that, compared to what we have learned in these two years with the research and other material, that is nothing, almost an afterthought if you had a Trump lawyer right now. and in the federal court or in the Georgia case, talking about the speech would be a defense argument that would be minimizing it, so even if some things might seem obvious if they weren't obvious to the Democratic managers who were running it at the time, because? that and that's going to I think why this report is important, why I chose to participate in my own way in the project, which is what we have learned from the evidence, not because people have feelings towards Donald Trump, based on From the evidence, that this was a highly organized multi-month debate, so if so, then in a nation of laws you have to go far beyond the Barnetts and the people storming the capital, who also They should be held accountable, I guess, because I'm a lawyer, a journalist, and a bit of a nerd.

You know, I always go back to the documents. John is going to come here, he does the same thing, so if you look at the January 6th committee authorization resolution, which has already completed its work, you say, oh God, we have to do it. I have to talk about the authorization resolution I thought tonight was going to be something conversational the authorization of the Committee to do its job was to quote investigate the January 6 attack evaluate the evidence about it and develop other investigations quote avoiding unnecessary duplication go investigate what happened That day I would argue with you tonight based on the evidence that was also too limited, but that is why a fair investigation is needed.

They had Republicans like Liz Cheney. They had a lot more Democrats because of the nature of our politics, but they followed the evidence and found that this went far beyond their original report because it wasn't just a one-day attack or a couple days of preparation for a one-day attack. , so I think that's the most important conceptual framework that we were able to get into tonight and I'm going to go over a couple of plots right now in a very short time and then I'll mention John, but if you remember anything from tonight or bring take home this tablet, this talmud, so to speak, and you don't end up reading.

That's what I want you to remember because, as a society, the conception we have in a democracy of what this was and how it has grown matters, and what comes next matters. You saw it in the midterms, all these experts and people telling you what's going to happen. what will happen next, they don't know, but what we do matters, so in the plots I count eight plots, um again because I don't want to be too redundant in showing how many people know about when we go through these eight plots in the beat. or in the future, so less than half as good because for those of you again I'm sorry, but I want to use this platform to really make sure we get this point across.

I count eight plots that were designed to change the outcome of the election. and I count that seven of them were unconstitutional or illegal in the end and one was completely legal, even if it was a blatant effort to overturn the election, so they are in my count and, as with any count, people could object. I count the lawsuits for electoral fraud. have the states overturn the votes, have Congress overturn the votes, have Pence overturn the votes, have the Department of Justice interfere to overturn the votes, have the military join in a coup d'état, and then the actual sabotage of the certification of the January 6th that happened and that we lived so long.

Of those eight I'm going to very quickly go over some of these lawsuits that by definition tend to be legal, even frivolous lawsuits that are punishable are legal and we don't want to live in a society where people are punished for doing what they could. They are considered outlandish or out-of-bounds lawsuits, meaning it is not a crime to file a lawsuit, even one that attempts to overturn an election. Electors made. It is okay to create plans to have alternative electors before the end and can signal close elections. No, this 2020 was not close, but you can point to close elections in which, because they expected a recount or a lawsuit to change the result, they had established electors according to my legal analysis, the initial effort to have some Trump electors and States that Biden was initially supposed to win were probably legal, they became clearly illegal after the Electoral College, under the Constitution and the law, certified the electors on December 14, and these people were running around for several more weeks committing voter fraud.

The Justice Department has not charged anyone with elective fraud, perhaps a prosecutor with that much experience. As Mr. Flannery can explain why, I don't know why and again, that's not an effort to go after Donald Trump, I mean he can have enough denial to not sign anything or do anything about it that might not be the right thing to do. that is achieved. him, but there are people in prison right now, many of them poor, black and brown, for cases of voter fraud of a single voter, that is the alleged or convicted voter fraud of a single person, voter fraud, what they were dealing with to do all six o'clock morning is far from the most serious thing is the state's annulled votes, the third plot is something that was carried out in a way that was not known or covered at the time, but actually came to fruition. a very high level and was trying to convince the states to simply return the results of their own voters.

It didn't work very well because even very partisan Republicans saw that as career suicide. Now you can say he's cynical. The founders took that kind of cynicism into account and wanted to take advantage of it, as we have always been told in schools, separate powers. that one didn't work very well Congress nullified the votes it went too far many many House Republicans are still trying to execute that plot after the attack on their own workplace and the savagery of the right against the police who risked their lives to defend them they came back I think which most of you are familiar with.

Pence is a plot that has received a lot of attention. I would call it unconstitutional, not illegal, and I point it out in the report again, whether we like it or not, but there are a lot of things that the government could try to do that are unconstitutional and that are not a crime, so I think everyone remembers the ban on travel, which was quickly declared unconstitutional and stopped. I think that if Pence had tried to go ahead with that banana plan, he would have been stopped, but in my opinion, doing that would not in itself constitute a crime, it would simply constitute something that would be prevented.

Interfering with getting votes was something that I think the committeeHe explained it in a fascinating way. We learned about these really extreme plots. a complete Saturday night massacre Trump talked about it not because it was illegal or wrong, but because they said the headline won't be about Georgia, the headline will be about you and guy knows the headlines go to the last two, we learned that he pressed. that the military joined a coup and failed at that and one of the interesting lessons here that separates our system of government from other countries is that, because of the nature of the independence of the military, the permanence of some of those positions and other legal issues that we can get into, it's a little bit harder to get those people to agree, in fact, they were holding meetings to decide what not to do and unfortunately, I would say tragically they are concerned about Trump's possible effort to abuse the armed or national forces.

Protecting themselves from people in this city was one of the things that made them reluctant to have the military show up on the

sixth

, so you know, life is complicated. I think what was actually a fair motivation ended up complicating what needed to be an immediate response that isn't. the only reason we can enter into each other and finally into what we experienced through the parasabotage plot on January 6, so what I write in this preview and what I want to do now is to move forward with our evening, watch those plots, look at culpability and then ask why the justice department is primarily focused on muscle and the physical assault on the capital and not those other plots and again at the risk of being annoyingly repetitive but again I'm in a synagogue if I were giving a I don't want to traffic in any stereotypes, I'll just say in the name of I sometimes repeat myself I'm not saying that's how I was raised, at the risk of being repetitive, that's the most important issue for plotting and planning, regardless of what What happens to Donald Trump, an impartial prosecutor could look at all this and say he has so much experience in criminal planning and thugs that he really reduced the evidence and it could be difficult to charge and you have to charge based on evidence, not on feelings, but on the idea that the people who committed the electoral fraud and who met to annul the elections and who also planned the sabotage of the six that occurred, the certification was delayed, the government meeting was interfered with and was prevented from using the language of the law federal, but Mr.

Eastman and Mr. Meadows and these individuals have not been held accountable for that to date. in D.C., not in the federal government, not in Georgia, that seems like a big problem to me, and again, I always try to make it very clear with you, it seems to me to be a problem of deeply ingrained bias at the top of the justice department, specifically the lawyer. General Garland and the tone he's setting and a bias that has to do with elitism with making excuses for lawyers with a revolving door of elite government officials and the bias means you can find it on your own side, you can find it in people with the ones you agree if you only think about people who are really different from you you are biased you might be biased so Mr.

Eastman for example has Sterling legal credentials. I mean, when I came out of law school I couldn't have won a Supreme Court clerkship, there's a process so I wasn't at that level, I got the Supreme Court clerkship, that's the kind of thing that impresses people. judges and lawyers, but it should not be a get out of jail free card or a passport to overthrow our government, something is wrong if there is that level and therefore it is not my job to prejudge and pre-indict everyone, but when you can see that level of disparity if you see it based on access power career path, when you see that at the data level, not at the individual level, we have a problem and that's part of the problem, that's why I really wanted to expose this in the future.

I'm glad people are apparently reading it. I'm glad people are buying it. I always mention the full report. I know people are listening in the virtual hearing also the full report can be downloaded for free so you can get the full report if that's a better way for you you don't have to buy it it's important that this lives on as a historical document and it depends What we're going to do tonight is listen to a kind of miniature opening statement from a very talented prosecutor who has worked in United States attorney's offices and who has been a consultant on three congressional investigations into who we rely on for our coverage and then we're going to have a convo and answer some of your questions so please join me in welcoming Councilor John Flannery very well done very well thank you.

I was really enjoying Ari. I forgot he was supposed to get me up and talk. He had me overpowered before we came here when um. one of the first times I appeared on his show he was in New York uh and uh after we shook hands he faced the camera alone and said something nice about me and then he said and uh, he's the Robert Redford of the Beltway and then and then he said, I told him to say that and I told him off camera, no, he didn't say it, well, no, he didn't say that we have a problem with the prosecutors, uh, they talk about junkyard dogs and that kind of thing. , and this is the issue we'll get to and my review of what Ari was talking about and I want to talk about Ari too, but I want to get to this point.

When I left law school I wanted to be a prosecutor after being a secretary because I wanted to eliminate corruption in politics and Whitney North Seymour was a Republican, she was a federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York and she accused her boss John Mitchell and they tried him. while I was clerk and I went down and saw John Dean testify at Judge Galliardi's invitation now, after I heard him testify I thought I had never heard anyone more persuasive and more truthful than this man and I got into the elevator with Mrs. Galliardi who was also there and we went up in the judge's elevator and she asked me what I thought and I hadn't decided how to say it and I said something interesting and she said she didn't believe a word of it, he didn't say much either, but when he talked to his assistant federal prosecutors and they got Flack because of what he had done and he said look, if you want people to love you, forget about getting a Cocker Spaniel, we don't have enough people who have that notion of service and I was lucky because we were all paralegals and so I already thought that we told the judge what had to happen so he didn't know why they didn't listen to us now Ari is a man who seems to me to be a person who has character and dedication above all to the truth and to his learning and to the standards and only applying those things we can say that we are on the right path, the right path, there is an exchange between Sir Thomas More and his brother-in-law about the law and his brother-in-law says why they could kill him because he will not join the new church that Henry VII has created, his son-in-law He's telling him, oh, tear down all the laws, pass them, tear down, you know, go after the devil and Sir Thomas.

More answers sure tear down all the laws and you are the right person to do it and when you have torn down all the laws and there is nothing left and these are man's laws, not God's law, could you stand in the wind that would blow when Ari started his summary of what the January 6 report was about what was happening in the United States. He started with the point of whether this is more important than another crime and said, well, it's democracy versus autocracy. Do we want an authoritarian leading our government and if we have an authoritarian leading our government, what are we going to have?

We will vote? And he suggested no, and then the question further becomes: Does our Constitution mean anything? And if it means nothing, can we resist the wind? would explode and I think not and I think there is evidence of that and there is evidence that prosecutors have done nothing in the two years that have passed that holding people accountable would put us in a better position, we may not have The speaker we have who speaks like him would not limit the role of people in government and this is not imagination this is true look at the people who go without jackets Jordan is going to head the Judiciary Committee what are we going to do?

Speaking of now, let's take a couple of words that are in our summary Trump on September 23 there will be no transfer there will be a continuation Does that sound like an authoritarian Steve Bannon said in the fall before the election. He's not going to say that he's a winner, he's just going to say that he's winning Rudy Giuliani drunk. I know it's always like this. By the way, I sold them my apartment in Manhattan, um, I did it with Rudy, oh, now you think I'm a congressman from Long Island, eh, Rudy. Julian, the best ones are the ones you don't plan, I guess Rudy Giuliani on election night, well I guess his son was leading him, maybe he wasn't drunk, he walked up to the president to say four words, we're just saying. he won and that's what they did and that's what he went out and did now.

I've heard over the last few days experts comment on how they process and eat and prompt and do this and that and the other thing the fact that you have eight paths to deal with, you have to have a standard for figuring out how to use those eight paths. and Ari has published it in a summer summary, in fact, his summary is like a tenth of the entire report and if you read and I I mean, read it, spend time thinking about each sentence and I mean it. In my opinion, you will know everything you need to know about where we are at risk of losing democracy and what we can do to change that.

Normally in a conspiracy and I'll explain in a moment why the conspiracy is important and I'll do it in five minutes and the importance of a conspiracy is that everyone in the conspiracy when they say something to further the conspiracy, this guy said it here and Trump conspiracy on that one and infects him, but normally one of the reasons you have a conspiracy on the worst person in this case, Trump, is because you can't get to him, he is protected and protected as Ari says in his report, but here There is something very strange: Trump is out.

There, openly, there was a case where Trump, uh, Tremonti, quite interesting, close, Tremonti, uh, from the Genovese family, a nice family once you get to know them, and he said, uh, Tremonti, just cringed shoulders in a meeting and that was enough for him to participate in the conspiracy, but one time we have a guy in the White House who meets with everyone and to be brief about this what I'm working on, I consider them to be the following pressure points that Today I prepared that Garland was no longer included and decided to appoint someone who would actually prosecute a case with the evidence they had instead of taunting America by saying that someday, somehow, Blackjack Smith will finally do what everyone They know what must be done first.

Pressure point voters uh are creating fake documents to create fraud in the government and who is involved Trump himself has involved Eastman involved Giuliani involved Trump spoke to about 300 Republican state legislators evidence another pressure point December 18, 2020 after of the election before January Sidney Powell is being considered to deal with how to overturn the election. Shall we invoke martial law? Do we take advantage of voting machines? Mark Meadows is the president Pat Sipoloni is the president Chief of Staff and of the Council. That's a pressure point. Trump is there and you have witnesses he can use. another pressure point Trump is pressuring the Secretary of State on January 2nd to, oh you know, do me a favor, find those extra votes that I need and who's involved in that Meadows Navara Eastman Rudy G Rogue Rudy uh I mean , your defense should be uh you should Arrest me for impersonating a lawyer and then the last one that I really like and I think I would build a conspiracy around these four and someone says that something is not a crime, as you said, you can use overt acts that involve innocent acts. that advance the conspiracy, that's why prosecutors love conspiracy law because all you have to do is once you're in it, you're in it for everything, even things you don't know until it's too much late and here we have Jeffrey Clark who wanted to jump on what was going on with Raffensberger in Georgia and do it by replacing himself since Jeffrey Clark was going to become the acting attorney general and force Georgia to do what everyone wanted to do and just that was threatening Saturday night, uh uh, the event was going to happen. uh stop that finally and the last thing I'll say and I have no idea how close it is to five minutes so I apologize if I went over uh I'm a pennant you know the Irish have a lot of chances you know?

Well, this is the most important thing in America, if we the people do not do our part and inform the courage and backbone of some of our useless leaders, we may not have another election after 2024. And that is everything that is at stake, our constitution, our individual freedoms. and rights I want to thank you for your patience, thank you, you won't, you go, can you hear me? Okay, you see why we used John Flannery, eh, he's great. Our colleagues told me at six and I gain 11 minutes. yes that's fine,I won't speak for five. I really appreciate what you said, John, I really want to interact with everyone, so I think what John and I could do now is just make two or three points, sure, and then we move on to the questions, where?

I want to start with you, it's something that has gotten less attention, which is the real end game and now you can see I like to do the hands so that when television evolves with this technology or the metaverse and we can all participate in the rhythm. It's going to get more annoying, it's going to be like a taxi advisor every night, but I can't do this on air, but I'll show you how many people like you know or think you know what the real ending of the game was on day six if in They actually assaulted the capital but then finished the job.

I'm curious. The question is that we know that they attacked the capital. What was the real ending of the game? Do you know what would happen if this continued to work? What was the so someone said martial law, say hands, what was the election, but how cool, okay, this is good, I like this, I'm delaying, delaying, delaying, so I'm hearing different things and the report has this and I think it's very complicated, so I understand why they didn't continue with it, but I don't know about you, John. I thought it was almost buried in the report.

I'm going to give my version of the answer and then I want you to tell us what you think. They think it's cool, and it was thought up by Eastman Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon. Beyond the assault on the capital or the delay, which was one step, the end game was to create enough chaos and confusion or the pretext for this is now questioned to argue that it was no longer a validly resolved election and resort to a legal provision Rather arcane but existing saying that if there is a truly contested election (as you know there was not), then there can be a separate vote in the House of Representatives that resolves a truly contested election of hands is that familiar.

I'm curious like I'm very curious so yeah a lot of people know about this and then no you could say well then what's the vote on that vote not being resolved by majority vote in the chamber under the rules that it delegations make. Now there may be Republicans who said they don't agree with that right. Liz Cheney would have been the vote for Wyoming, but their plan and what they reasoned was that by that count there would have been 27 Republican delegations and it's one vote per state delegation and if you're thinking this sounds crazy, it is crazy, so really It is the Electoral College.

I work on this, as you know, like many people here tonight I care about this, I understand why this hasn't gotten a lot of attention, but I also think that sometimes people in the country underestimate how serious this was because they also look at it even if It was delayed a day or more. two then it would have been resolved, what do you think of all that? What do you say to Republicans who would argue well if they went that far and helped that chamber vote well? That's in the rules. What about all that as a risk to In the future, since we've now seen how far they'll go, nothing improves your aim like having a Target Aristotle as a target and he had nothing to do with the assault on the castle, his target was seize power in any way possible and his The theory was an incorrect legal theory.

It was admitted that it was not legal and the facts on which it was based were lying voters. Now, if those things were true, then 27 people in the chamber could have solved it that way, but they're hoping to sleight of hand on us. and the trench game would have resulted in Trump becoming president and it could have been the last election in the United States, so it looks like an outcome that with a few different ingredients it was possible, it was possible that we would be so close to lose. our democracy, but we think we're okay now, you know, that ball missed my head, but they're still there and you think?

And this is a legal theory that we don't always do in the national news because we're in the weeds. They're right, if they held that kind of vote and said they got 26, but based on this set of facts, then there are, let's say, 11, 12 left. days until the 20th, do you think the Supreme Court would take that case, intervene and overrule the chamber or just stay? Outside of this, do you remember who was appointed to the Supreme Court, so do you think they would let him? Hey, look, if you can nullify 50 years because you're a political politician and you got there and that was your contract and we have the people.

Who does that? What do you say, John, to the people who look at this and see the big picture, a bad trend line, and say they'll try it, but it looks like things are going downhill for democracy in America and maybe they'll just do it. ? focus on protecting your own family or investing abroad or some people talk about other things, what do you say to people who are pessimistic about the rule of law in America? Well, I tell you that. I actually tell you what Moore's quote is which is that when you take away the rules you get violence, you get chaos, you get anarchy and if you choose to use the chapter about how we choose a speaker from people who you think agreed they just won the house and they can't agree. and we can see that in the future we will see paralysis and a failure to govern and to have an eternal campaign and they are just going to push for that end zone, so what I tell you is the rights and freedoms that we take for granted that you will lose. the people who don't believe in them, who don't want a court to decide that you, a black person, have this value or that you, a woman, have control over your body, or that we can teach you these things about our history so that you understand how to perhaps repair it and perfect the American government.

The other thing I want to ask you about because we're here and then we're going to get into questions because that's why some of you are probably here is that I don't do much with God and religion on the air for a variety of reasons and it's above my pay grade, but like I mentioned, we're here at this synagogue and I grew up going to synagogue and I might hit it a little bit, but I'm pretty sure you know that in the bema it says something: the leaf name effect raw, not who you are facing and the basic concept of many religions, many Western religions, not everything.

I guess it's that people could be better or treat each other better if they have some higher calling any idea that there's an ethical or other dimension and people interpret it in different ways and again I'm not here to figure it out um and the law Western, when it works, has a similar idea, not that we will all automatically be good all the time, but if some basic principles are applied, we could end up treating each other better and have a better world. Does it matter then and how do you view what I described as this double standard that some people are learning to whom? they stand firm because they are being investigated and prosecuted and many others seem to be evading this double standard in a modern American rule of law.

How do you see it as dangerous if this department of justice continues in the form I described and is changeable? without falling into that, they used to be called witch hunts because they were hunting real witches that weren't witches, not Donald Trump, it's not a trump hunt, so it ruined the word, but it's true if you go all the way back to Salem. We don't want real witch hunts that don't exist We don't want mob justice It's not my job to bring those cases What does that look like and how is it solved without also falling into mob justice? is the Other Extreme you have to appreciate that there are people who are evil who have no values ​​the uh there is a statement attributed to Jesus which is that who was a Jew and and a hundred yes and no like Saints like totally Jewish but that is a Jew Jew Jew that I knew there would be so many Jewish jokes tonight a little bit of the same time in Luke Jesus is reported to have said that he cursed lawyers how appropriate it was to impose a burden on people without lifting a finger to lighten the load, say it I again impose a burden on people without lifting a finger to lighten the load, so if I eliminate Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, child support, etc., what kind of person am I capable of conceiving someone who has nothing? a relationship with children and so on, now I think Trump is the model of evil in this sense, in this sense, he only cares psychologically about getting what he wants in any way he can, how many people who had the values ​​that we have and Say things on the evening news like how could he say it must have been a mistake?

Everyone has been prepared for a long time to believe that this is somehow an honorable man hiding here, he is just waiting to get out and he is none, he is not. even roughly that and who you choose as an example, I could go out and shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and I would do it, so I don't know what Billy the Kid is in New York, but that's our problem, the problem is We can't, we can't functionally believing that person is evil enough to do what they are doing and calling it that and calling it that.

How do people make these inconsistent statements between the attack on the Capitol, McCarthy says, and then the next day? oh, okay, there's a moment and his soul sees it and then he had to express this, so you may have studied the talmud. I was exposed to the Jesuits and they teach you how to use your mind and then they are terrified when you do it amazingly. Well, as promised, I would like to continue moving forward. I appreciate what you're bringing up for us to think about. I would invite people to come up to the microphones. We're going to answer your questions at least two or more at a time, so Q in. top I'm going to start with one of the virtual questions while people are waiting in line.

I'll tell you because I've done this before. What I would ask is that you can introduce yourself if you want. I would ask that you have questions that are 30 seconds or less if you prefer to use your 30 seconds to make a comment okay it doesn't have to be a question but I think it has to be concise so that we have time for everyone uh I really appreciate how many people are here and participate attentively, it's wonderful to be together, here we are and to start with, I know that there are also many people that we can't see tonight, people who for some reason wanted to join us virtually and did, and some of them. sending questions uh so all six of them and asked me to make sure to include them.

I'm going to make them in one of those. Great question from Sarah in Rockville, Maryland. I like the question for you, John, and I'll answer it. Also, briefly, what was the most impactful thing you learned from the report? I'll let you think for a second since I just read it. My response is quick. There were people in the report who were not convicted of crimes and who we had never heard of. about signing the coup plans and that surprised me. I don't know why they didn't include that in the hearings, either as evidence, it came later or they wanted to stay focused, but you know, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich came on board.

In White House planning sessions on some of these plots, I mentioned that the committee is not saying that he crossed the line into a crime, but that he was helping someone who runs a very influential media company. He is accused of this, he came out and denied it. which I want to mention To be fair, but Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy identified himself with evidence and accused him of that, and if Mr. Gingrich had been the speaker at the time, we know that Mitch McConnell, regardless of what Whatever they think of him, he did something very minor.

I think the bar is low, but it goes against this around six and just recently in December, what if Mr. Gingrich was still in office? What if Chris Ruddy had the influence that Murdoch has Murdoch also someone who has signed on to a lot of things that we have withheld from him? responsible on the air, but he wasn't on the

sixth

and seventh trying to get him home and I found that answering Sarah's question chilling to think about these other powerful people behind the scenes who without this investigation we would never have known were even involved um, that's my answer, yours and then we'll get out here.

Well, I would adopt everything you said, but what caught my attention was how tense it seemed that they were being manipulated into leaving the hill under the cover of the Secret Service and Then, since then we have learned additional things about the secret service, including the deterioration of certain information that would tell people exactly what they were doing and when and where, so this infiltration of the country's secure forces was almost like what we have seen in history. some dictators who were co-opted, turned people into True Believers to betray their oaths, which is widespread throughout the hill and then of course the number of members who participated continued to fight to have this false certification of substitute electors in to continue stealing even after they were put at risk ask Hawley running cool those are two of our answers we'll start here uh yeah my name is Timothy Decker and I have a question about Donald Trump and the media um whatWhat I have noticed is that when Donald Trump first came down the escalator and talked about Mexicans and then being rapists and everything and everything after that, what we have seen in the media and including you too, Mari, is the base that in the beginning everyone keeps saying it's the base even now they say it's the base but when they did it Mitch McConnell didn't say anything when the second in charge of the senate or the house did it he didn't say anything it's not the base but every Every time I look, even today, it's the base, how do you think that's affecting what people think, especially people who need to stop what's happening right now?

So we say it's only 30, but it's not the entire Republican Party. thank you and we'll also see to it that it was Timothy, yes Timothy, thank you Timothy, yes, hello, um, to John, first of all, give my heart out for your pin and Holly, and I'm so glad you're all doing good with that. my heart um you mentioned something about electors and I don't have much information, but you have electors which I guess is a whole issue that has to do with the electoral college of the Electoral College and nothing else, and then you have alternative electors. that can be nominated, so where and that thing in the Supreme Court that could come saying, you know, that is the body that reigns in the elections, which is scary, but what is the police authority between assigning alternative electors and electors fake?

What is that distinction because? That seems really important given the Supreme Court case. Great, thank you, thank you, why don't you answer that and I'll take the media question. Do it, okay, I could do it. I was expecting an easier question. Well, here's the thing. that's really annoying, the FBI has been investigating this for I don't know how long about these fake voters and no one has been charged and the answer is you charge them. It's very interesting how the southern district could process that complicated cryptocurrency issue in two weeks and we can't figure out the various states where people are making fake electors and holding fake meetings and planning their own competition.

I think December 14 is the date on which the electors, the true electors, would be chosen, and they, in a way, did it there, they do everything there. It's, uh, it's worse than the three-card Monty. It was so obvious, but the short answer is that if you prosecute the crime, it actually deters people because a lot of people don't want to spend five to twenty years in custody. Yes, I think that's fair and it's a bit of legal jargon, but the bottom line is the voters. They're only supposed to carry out what the state votes on and if they don't or if other people impersonate them, that's a type of fraud, it's like someone can show up in front of your house waving a fraudulent deed, that is a crime if entering your house, that is a second crime, but paperwork fraud is already quite established.

Timothy's question was about the media. I think the short answer is like other groups, the media can definitely get involved and they heard the group mentality and certain things could be overcome. again, I think it's certainly true that there was a period of time where we could call traditional analysis where you say politically, oh, this is, you know you're going to the right in the primaries when you talk to the center and this is the basis When you're dealing with what Trump did both ideologically, politically and against democracy, no, I think those kinds of heuristics or those clichés don't hold up.

I think we also have to be precise because whether people like to hear it or not, I go in. Sometimes there are places and people say, "Oh, they're all fascists, no, they're not, or are they?" Mitch McConnell always found ways to support all of Trump's domestic political goals, so I think you're right and it's not just about citing the base. for the elites it is also true that in December Mitch McConnell mainly helped a democratic coalition with Schumer break a filibuster to pass those reforms to the electoral counting law to try to cool parts of the test if that gets less attention or people say no, McConnell is also a fascist.

I don't think that's accurate, I think it's actually not only not accurate, but it's also quite interesting that Mitch McConnell has only made common cause with Schumer to break a handful of filibusters and that was one, so I think we have to be precise, but I think Timothy raises a fair point. I see we have a lot of people. I want to continue with the question and make sure you speak into the microphone if you can. Hello, my name is Rita when you came in, I said she looks like Robert. Redford to my friend just so you know, so there is a consensus, thank you, I always thought that's how it is.

I live in the District of Columbia, like taxes without representation, right, yeah, cheers for knowing my vote, yeah, so January 2 January 3 January 4 On January 5, my friends and I were texting and We were saying, take down your Biden Harris signs, take down your black lives matter signs, close your doors, don't send your kids to camp or any school or whatever you could, it was during Covid, my kids. They were in school, they could go. I kept them at home. Those Traders were sitting at the Days Inn three blocks from my house on Connecticut Avenue. They were outside smoking cigarettes in camouflage and drinking beers and it was just us, we literally kept our kids away. from the windows because we were afraid of them, so how is it possible that everyone next door knew they were violent and we were afraid of them, but the Capitol Police didn't know and Nancy Pelosi didn't know that Rep.

Braskin just lost his son the week before and then brought his daughter and son-in-law. I almost called it like Jamie, what are you doing? But he had just lost his son, so I didn't want to bother him, but they came in and it's. like no one knew, but everyone on the ground knew it was going to be dangerous. I don't know where the disconnect is. Thanks thanks. Hello, my name is Malcolm. I'm going to the Supreme Court, so it seems like I've mentioned this several times tonight and all roads or at least many roads lead to the Supreme Court and until January 6th almost to the extreme to make some decision about what could have been happened that night, so we have problems with the Supreme Court.

This is probably more than just a microphone question, but we obviously have to fix the two solutions that are always talked about: term limits for justices and a larger Court. I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether it's valid, or if not, what? It would be great and let's do one more because I see the line, first of all, I'm so glad you finally got to meet me in person. Congratulations to me too and uh, I really came to meet John, we're neighbors. Ashburn Virginia strong and we have been friends on Facebook for years it was finally so good to see you.

I can't really see you so I'm a retired firefighter but a member of the union for 33 years. I grew up in Beckley West. Virginia, I'm what you'd probably affectionately call a liberal redneck, so it's my opinion and we're all here by default. We can assume that we are intellectuals, whether formally or informally, because we are seeking knowledge. My question for both of you. How do you take someone who is part of an organization that is generally anti-intellectual? Donald Trump made them want to be like that because he told them that he was fine, he told them that we make fun of them because they are stupid or they are ignorant or they are in the woods.

I do not feel like it. I speak fluently, redneck and vulgar. I can communicate effectively, but how do you get people to like me? These are complicated issues I have. Google all the time after watching your show, how do you make people want to understand it? Because that's what has to happen for this to mean something or change, love, the question in your story, how do you say Robert Redford in Bulgarian vulgarity? He said no, how do you say Robert Redford in Bulgaria? I don't know, do you say you speak Bulgarian or vulgarity, vulgarity, oh, don't answer, that's why I was looking at you?

I thought you were a Bulgarian firefighter, you know it's a big room and Thanks to everyone who helped us with that, so why don't you answer some of those questions? Well, he struck a chord with me. He was joking around in the South Bronx and I thought he was an Irish Catholic. The dilemma was to find another Irishman who was intelligent and I quickly discovered that there were many things. I was just in that isolated group, but I became very interested in what Hofstadter and Arthur Schlesinger said about the anti-intellectualism that they suffered in the '20s and '40s. and that's why it's been a problem in America from the beginning until now and the only answer is to fight it and when I say fight I mean you have to follow Lincoln's notion that someone makes an accusation that you have to deal with it somehow and deal with it as fully and completely as possible, even if that means making confessions about classified documents, you have to deal with that.

My partner at a law firm in New York was 30 years old. years older than me, he said in every case and in life there is this huge dead animal in the middle of the room and everyone walks around it, no one takes care of it, we have to deal with anti-intellectuals in this country and we have to deal with them directly saying to stop speaking blankly, yes, and in the reform of the Supreme Court it can happen. I think term limits, when you look at how many other things have changed in American life, might make sense if you change the size, you have to have a well thought out plan. about what you're doing and why you're not going to unleash the endless recriminations going back and forth about it, but I think one model would be that there are states that have dealt with gerrymandering through independent, nonpartisan approaches and sometimes there are ways that work, whereas when both parties go back and forth manipulating each other, everyone loses in the long run. um, the next question about intelligence that goes all the way to the sixth, I think for me it's on both sides, the report and what we're doing.

What I've learned shows that there were structural problems as well as politicized pressure on what the answer was going to be, so that's part of the answer. The other one, which may be a less satisfactory answer to the questioner who feels like he knew this was going to happen, was that when you look at the events after the action, there can be a post-event bias, so yes, there were warnings before 9/11, but it was also a different and unprecedented attack, so I think reasonable minds can debate or differ on whether this was, gosh, definitely. happened, how come you didn't see it or this insurrection even to members of Congress who weren't involved seemed unfathomable and if those other people hadn't been so successful, they would have just been people in camouflage drinking beers, which is not true ? dismiss your point, but to say that I think it cuts both ways a little bit um I think so, I think so, let's move on, how about right here?

I think um I just want to mention that if Mitch McConnell participates in fascism then he's there a fascist and he participates so I think you were being overly careful but my question is he was in South Carolina. I lived in South Carolina during the Trump era and somehow survived and thank God I'm not there anymore, but now that. Republicans are in charge of Congress again. You know, I knew all the members of the cabinet. I knew everyone and everything they did all the time because what was happening seemed so dangerous and I felt urgently like I needed to know, but I don't want to.

I don't want to listen to Jim Jordan anymore. I don't think he's alone in that. Do I have to listen to Jim Jordan? And if I have to listen to Jim Jordan, how can I convince other people not to? I don't care or see the danger as much as I do that you also have to listen to Jim Epping Jordan okay mm-hmm hi my name is Harry and I wanted to follow up on something each of you mentioned in your individual comments previous. I want to delve more specifically into a hypothetical scenario that could have happened if Mike Pence had decided to give in to Trump's demands, throw out and do one of the following, throw out some of the election results or send them back to the states or try to have a scenario in which there is a contingent election in the House or a fourth possibility: the violence was so successful that it literally killed at least one member of Congress.

Any one of those four things happens and there is a chaotic situation in which the Republicans claim that Trump is the president the Democrats would say wait that's not constitutional each of those four things that I just named there are constitutional legal flaws in all of them suppose that the Democrats It's January 7 Democrats try to file an emergency lawsuit in the Supreme Court, what do they do? Which I think would happen then, especially considering the fact that four of the Supreme Court justices would probably throw their bodies on the train tracks before accepting a fascist coup and that they would only need to get one more member to sign a deal. opinion that says that Joe Biden is the legally elected president, great and you sir, hello, my name is Christian and I am a big fan who has been watching for a long time whoCalls for the first time and I really appreciate what he does.

I appreciate what he's doing, huh, but with all due respect to the name of your book and the committee that named it, don't you think this January 6 quote is a wasted messaging opportunity? Wouldn't they believe the Trump riots, the Republican coup, or the right? fill in the blank be a more effective phrase, especially now that we know that January 6th was just one part of what you're saying was an eight-part plan, it might be time to start calling it something else, well I think it's a great idea. question, the top of the book is the name of the government and the three editions of the New Yorker edition, New York Times edition, the bottom is what I told Harper.

I want to discuss what the coup conspiracy was, so I'm there with you, fine. Alright, I'm right there with you. I would appreciate the kind comments we had from a viewer who disagreed with me on McConnell, which we appreciate. We had a great viewer with an idea about how to describe it and and the words, I mean, lawyers will tell you that words matter because that's the entrance, the window that you open into people's minds to then discuss something. I'll take the constitutional crisis question and you could answer everything else. This is freehand. How many lawyers are there here?

Yeah, except because they're like I deal with John and Aries all day. I won't come to this at night. I don't care if it's not a synagogue. You get into the very legalistic part. from the Supreme Court practice here, which I think we referenced earlier, where I said that if they did the fake State delegation vote and then said oh, this means that Trump is actually still president, then you would need to petition the Supreme Court to take the case in whatever it is. The time window is narrow and the question is: will they accept it or not?

If they don't accept it, either Trump is still president or there will be a constitutional crisis about it, if they accept it, if, for example, Chief Justice Roberts finds out that he knows five who could then he will have four to vote for him, five to vote and issue a ruling that says that despite the House's attempt to use fraud to lie and conduct this phony vote, the election stands and Biden is still the president-elect as soon as the Supreme Court says that. Even if there is violence in the streets at home in Revolt, as with all crisis issues in the country, the question is what the military does right, it's a little sad that we have to talk about this, but the evidence we have is that the military with the Supreme Court, not with the banana house, eh, and in that case I think that as you get to 19 and 20, the military in this country supports that if, however, the court does not intervenes or is it a situation in which it is the other way around.

Biden is standing his ground but Trump's people are trying to recover before he illegally cuts the same question is so to hear it we have some evidence on that which I think is encouraging as there were never four votes before the sixth to hear any of the 30+ cases brought by the Trump team and I say because that's what they were now many people thought that Bush v. Gore was a very unusual outcome, but I don't call that case because legally it was argued to the top and had legitimate ingredients even if you don't agree with it, so I think that's the hypothetical question that was posed on the topic and the problem is that here is a training ground where people like Banana Navarro see this as something that They would like to improve and maybe reduce it, maybe 14 days was too much.

They try to take control and use those days and do it differently with what John warned, so that's my answer to some of those, uh, all the other questions are yours, refresh my memory because I was going through my mind all the things that I wanted to say on that topic, do we really need to listen to what some might call, you know, President Jordan or what some consider quoting the other side, um, the Pence question that I kind of answered, so yeah, Well, the thing was, Jordan doesn't have a jacket? Well, he represents the new leadership that we have allowed to happen by doing nothing to hold anyone accountable for what happened two years ago and that is what we learned from history: let these people do the things they do now . change the retaliation against him for working hard in an impeachment process and for defending our intelligence network and calling strikes and foul balls in a position with his experience and intelligence that is not valued in this Congress, I assume he will run for the Senate and the uh, what's happening at home in the meantime is that we have the kids loose and they're not going to be able to say now, well, we could wait two years, but we have no idea what's going to happen and we can't tolerate this , but we planted the seeds of this catastrophe by not doing something, in my opinion, even before the midterm elections.

It's interesting and the nation doesn't believe us Democrats. I am a genetic democrat. Democrats should be trusted to be in charge and not trust Republicans. or then we have a paralysis we did not make the sale we did not carry the burden of persuasion we did not explain to people that we are not only empathetic we are warriors for democracy and we have to be and you have to come with us and that is why people have to learn to speak and it may be exhausting, it may continue, but if we don't we will be victims, as happens in all other nations, when something like this Banana Republic raises its head and a guy who should not be in charge of the Judiciary or someone should not be on the oversight committee it happens and that's the hell we're living political health thank you I think we'll go to our final round of questions which with apologies we didn't reach everyone um and I'll say a few points to close uh including one more thing that I want to share and then for those who want to of course we will still continue the night for those who want to come let's say hello but that's a different process I want to be wise with the time for those who may have places to go sir hello I'm Oliver um now my question is going to reveal my age um I don't watch television I watch your show on YouTube when you post on YouTube and I guess from your perspective what is the current status quo of television.

Interesting, well you know, we love YouTube on video, great show, gentlemen, my name is Mike Italiano, my question is about budding effort to ban Trump from the ballot in the states through the 14th Amendment. Colorado has an initiative. There is an unknown Republican presidential candidate who filed a case in federal court in Florida. I think the House bill is probably dead politically. There are many things. of dark money who would oppose this um, but I think the issue is really important. I was wondering if you think this is something the show should cover as a possible way to push policy?

Okay, great, thank you. Hi, I'm Tracy. Originally from Detroit Michigan and my sedaic Ari, I congratulate you, my 30 something year old son and I look at you at the same time, we like that bridge and you are about 41. I am a third. a full AARP member, yeah, my question is, you know? In my state of Michigan, the Republican Party paid for several busloads of people to attend the January 6th insurrection, and I grew up with the Black Panthers, the civil rights movement, and the government. came down full force with both boots on, this doesn't happen without money and I don't really listen to who the monetary interests are that all these shenanigans benefit because it doesn't help me, it doesn't help my son and it doesn't help my adorable grandson So who benefits from these shenanigans?

Hi, my name is Patty, I'm from Alexandria, Virginia, this is a very similar question, it won't require much thinking when you were kids. I'm a teacher, so when you guys were kids, I always liked to ask people what you were like or maybe just a memory from your childhood, you two, okay, maybe we'll do that one near the end, John. I wrote it down and here again, hello. Patty Morrissey old friend of John Flannery hi Patty I used to ask him questions regularly um given the strength of the big lie that Trump supports some of the citizenry and the demonstrated willingness of many of those citizens to use violence to do so.

Trump's gamble: To what extent do you think the politics of mass psychosis is driving what appears to be a reluctance or at least a frustrating slowness on the part of the Biden Justice Department to act against the main coup plotter and bring Donald Trump to justice? justice at the right time? way, yeah, okay, John Howard, my question is this and I've been following this for a long time. Come to the microphone, please. I've been following this for a long time at first with Donald Trump's lies. Donald Trump almost 22,000 lives before any network called him a liar, okay that was crazy.

I would like to know now as I saw two military men get arrested or charged and being in the military myself, these guys will face betrayal. for just being there, how long will it be before these media outlets start calling Donald Trump a traitor because that's what he is? You have violated the Constitution of the United States and every senator, congressman, president, vice president, has taken an oath to the Constitution. not to a person, that is betrayal and I would like to hear it said more on TV and that might attract a lot of people when they start calling them liars, we all stand up, but now he has gone beyond that, thank you and I think we will .

Ask the group's last question and then I'll remind you. Go ahead, I wrote them this time. I'm ready for you. Hello, my name is Simone. I bring you a question from my mother in California who wants you to be her son. oh, that's funny, or husband or son-in-law, it doesn't matter, she just does, she loves it. I think son and husband are very different. She will accept anything at this point. Okay, real quick, say hello. Ari, this is probably a stupid question. What would you see as the ideal for our country in the post-Trump era and what would it take to heal the divide?

The ideal The ideal She just said The ideal for our country What our country could be like Yeah, okay, or you know, go ahead. steps I don't know thank you and hi I'm Simone it's the mom no you're Simone my mom is jean jeans uh tell Gene we said hi so he cries if I say no I'm joking tell him and you know I'm a journalist so These are all facts, tell her that if she had come tonight we would have gone out to dinner and then gotten married, but she's not here so you never know.

Well, we'll give you some answers. I have a couple of thoughts and at the end I want to share something and then for those who are leaving, we will say goodbye and for those who are staying, we will meet and greet to make this night a little more fun, John, okay. Do you want me to remind you of something? No, come in. I think I can summarize a couple of Patty John and the question about section 14 of the Constitution, article 14, section 3. I think that is absolutely correct. I have been peddling this false thing that no man is above the law when clearly the people are this entire political and business class that is above everyone else and we have reached that stage in the absence of laws that are reliable.

We have an accounting of this period of violence and we are seeing it more and more and we have had stories in the last week or so, we the people are going to make a difference and as a guy who went through Watergate, the War of Vietnam. uh, the lies to get us into Iraq the way I see it and so on, it's always been the people who have sorted these things out, not immediately and not forever, but when I was young when I read Jefferson saying that they had always believed the people. he did it right I think he's right because they have a vested interest in the community and what they care about is that we did it with kids last year, well when I was a kid, wait, do you have anything else?

What's wrong with the television status quo? I will do television. you do justice to Donald Trump and you betray, well that's simple, I'll do television and he'll do television, that's fair, um right, that's a traitor sob that doesn't have to be, thank you for getting a nomination let alone any something else and that article. 14 Section 3 states that if you have sworn to preserve and protect the United States, you may be barred from holding public office, but we do not undertake to remedy the outrage and therefore what we do is Can we, can we, We can force others to do these kinds of things too because there is no punishment for doing so, so the problem always comes back to the law and if we as individuals don't open our mouths and speak, then huh?

Borrowing from the New Testament Jesus said: If you are lukewarm I will spit you out of my mouth. I'm not religious, but I think it's absolutely right that we are a life-giving aspect of our community, our family and everything when we say the things that can. matter and giving another person the freedom to agree or disagree and move the ball forward, that's not happening in America, not with the lies we're suffering from, so that's my take on that big question of which It would be an ideal United States. Tough question, maybe one of those robots fromartificial intelligence could give us three answers, but one of the big divides that we know about history is whether you do it in school or read history books or know that people don't tell you that this law school is for the most part just The History is just the history of court cases and you keep reading them.

I don't know how you felt, but sophomore year I thought, wait a minute, are we going to read court cases all the time like I thought I was going somewhere and I didn't and you learn something by first being that verse in something, but I think that a line that we know throughout American history that is different from other societies, some countries that are younger or that have more despotic and feudal systems is very early. There was a promise and an appeal to a notion of progress that wasn't real and that left this divide that many people who knew much more than I did about American history.

I'm not a historian, but many learned people have described in various ways how option is a lie because it was not a democracy and the people did not have the same rights and women were not part of it or it was a promise that you made them fulfill and I think when I look that story is what I see and that lives on today, so you know one of the most interesting things that Dr. King did, you know, someone asked what we liked when we were kids and we'll get to that, but I remember being young and I was very interested in Dr.

King and my parents had one of those speeches that they used to sell on vinyl and I used to put it on the vinyl and listen to it and I remember thinking that he knew better than most, survived and finally gave his life in sacrifice to this terrible injustice of American racism, but what he was calling us to do was treat it as a promise that we could still keep, instead of just a lie, and therefore instead of giving an answer because I didn't even write. my own book you know this is her book I will give you that answer that other people wiser than me have said throughout history that to the question of Simone's mother, Gene, I don't have a good memory, so you know, to Gene's question, but I think of her as Simone's mother or my future wife to Gene's question.

I think the best ideal America in the future might be for us to try to continue doing that work that's not done. I'll do YouTube and then we'll do it. kids okay and then we'll finish the YouTube question it's really cool the young man said well I don't watch you on TV of course this is a jump between two and how we use language they do it well it's just TV in a different format. The platform is Kindle, which means you don't read this book, no, you get it on Kindle, it will be lighter than this, although I like good old books, I still get the times in the print newspaper, personally, but YouTube it has done.

It is one of the most used and searched platforms in the world. It's more accessible to more people, including people with less money, marginalized people, than many other platforms, if you still need access to an internet connection, whether you're going to a library or a friend's house. or you live in the developed world and you might have that access, but it's cheaper than linear cable and it's cheaper than a lot of other things. I think YouTube has completely revolutionized the information we have. There is a lot of talk about the Internet as a dark place for division and people use it that way, but the history of knowledge information in society is always linked to the transmission of human ideas and culture, so people say, "Oh, the printing press from about the 17th century." Behind us are Scrolls that long predate the printing press.

Speaking correctly Jews often identify as a people of the book and have that knowledge-based emphasis at least on a religious level, but it can seep into that identity in other ways. I cited your writing because, like, well, how do you define yourself as a good former Irish Catholic from the Bronx as a good Irish Catholic? He knows it and then he goes to the dark side of it. It's, in Nazi Germany, some of the most important people next to the military appointees were where the propaganda was and Putin is obsessed with Imogen's propaganda and these people we're talking about tonight are doing that, so that It's a great answer to what I think about YouTube.

I think it's vital that we provide it there. and the positive thing for people who work and care about journalism is that the business model is under pressure and it is very important that if you are in a position to subscribe to a local newspaper or support local reporters or subscribe to those newsletters, I think that is vital. The business model is under pressure, but if until now there has never been a broader impact of what we are doing than now, we have things that we have done when we had it, Mr. Peter Navarro, who is now awaiting trial when we had it in office.

On the show, it was noticed in the government and in Elite, it was noticed on television, but I can tell you that the interview went viral and more people saw it after it aired than live, so if you're worried, sometimes the People come up to me and tell me. a little worried or the facts that are known YouTube has been a huge Force multiplier for us and other people for cat videos so you know there's more than one thing there but I'm optimistic about it as a kid my The nickname that dad gave me when I was eight years old was: he called me a box of stones because he said that I talked a lot and I remember that he used to bother me as if it were pejorative, but you know, he had a good character and I think he was a very talkative child, he was always very outgoing.

I was interested in learning about other people um my parents raised me to be involved in everything I didn't realize that it was unusual and in that sense when I was a child I didn't know how lucky I was It was that at the table we talked about everything from his work to school and things that were happening around the world. I remember just going to other kids' houses when, yeah it's funny because I work in TV, but like the TV was on. the whole dinner was different for me it was never at my house or they just talked about almost childish things with the kids and then the kids and the adults split up so I was very lucky to have really wonderful parents who are still with me Mary who They've been married 51 years and they're amazing and I don't know how they'll respond to the wedding I'm having, but that's how I was when I was a kid and then it was because theirs was the right product environment and they used to invite friends over and then John would tell us what kind of kid I was, sometimes they would invite friends when I was, you know, not nine years old and I would go down to go.

I spoke because I was interested in talking to people and I remember my parents Danny and Barb. He would tell some friend of his in the kitchen if they were in the other room. He told her so you know. So how did he do for you? How did he do for you? I first met Danny and Barb and then they said adults would tell my parents, so what are you teaching small talk? and they would say no, it's like he was like that and I think both things are true, maybe I was like that because I love talking to people, but I also think they made me a little like that, so that's the kind of child that was.

What kind of child were you? I was. We are similar in many ways. My parents left me. speak no matter who was around and when I won in elementary school a local speech contest second in the Bronx questionable uh my dad said to me oh I didn't know you could do that, that you could compete in that and I said well, I think it's because when adults finish, no one tells me to shut up, so I guess I have license to talk and, um, I was the kind of kid who didn't know why after the first week we weren't together. going to school on Saturday, I really enjoyed the first week and I gave signs, I guess, of my interests, so my dad bought me a little printing press and when I printed little headlines and things, I studied speakers from the Midwest because I wanted to talk about that way, you know, and uh, so I put the phone down, picked up the phone at our house in the Bronx and said hello, this is the Flannery residence, how can I help you?

Oh, and my mom would get on and the woman would say, What's wrong with John? What is he putting in his butt? Do you know what is it? What is this residential business? So, you know, telescopes, tape recorders, there was a huge tape recorder and my friends, we do, Edgar Allan Poe. I know someone is knocking on my door, etc., all that stuff. The most important moment of my education when I was young was that I was in this high school at the Jesuit high school and it was in the afternoon and I was going to my Latin class and I was in college and I saw all these people coming into the gym and I thought , well, I have time and, uh, not that that would have stopped me anyway and so, this is like an ab movie.

I'm going through all of these. College students, all these tall kids, and I was a real ugly duckling in elementary school. I was fat. I was ugly for part of high school. And some still think I'm ugly in my soul, I guess, but because of my politics, but that's how it is. I go to class and I see this crowd and I go with them and I walk in and there's this huge light on the left across this room, first-generation Italian Irish Catholic college kids, you know, and the person speaking is a young senator and he's challenging everyone to make a difference and it was Jack Kennedy so I went back to class and I didn't get in any trouble and I was in a daydream so the two things that have connected my life to what I do is that I was crazy about science but I was obsessed with politics, so I came up with a pattern that got me to where I am and I think sometimes if you look back on your life, what seems like a random walk isn't those little choices at all.

You adapt to yourself and if you resist the moment when you have to move on, then you lose some of the joy you could have in life. Thanks, we gave it a show mate, that was a great question. I love it, John and we appreciate it. Thank you so much. I'll end by sharing something: The cleaning supplies are again for those who leave our special thanks to this wonderful building that has hosted so many interesting and important conversations on Sixth and I, politics, prose, and Harper. Collins who publish this edition. If you want to keep up with us, some of you know the beat and understand it that way.

I want to give you two links so we can have the question about YouTube. Everyone can get our YouTube playlist which is free. or you can give it to anyone in your life, including younger people who don't usually buy cable these days. I don't know if you've heard of msnbc.com. Ari, you have to write it down, you will remember that MSC msnbc. .com Ari, that link goes to our YouTube playlist which is updated daily and for people who don't have cable or someone they want to share in their life, I write regularly for people who are looking for additional things beyond the show that You can subscribe to my newsletter for free at Ari

melber

.com.

I also think an address that you can remember is myname.com, so those are cleaning supplies and in the meet and greet the way we want to do this is pretty effective, John and I'm going to step away for a second we're going to come back no. we're going to leave forever we're going to leave and take off our microphones we're going to go up here we're going to have people come up in groups We're both going to be here, so if you're really here to talk to John, he's hanging out with me, talking to both of us.

We wanted to do it that way. Who benefits? It's always a good question, so what are we going to do? It's time to leave it for that and all those who want to stay can go up to those I know some of you are leaving with it. I want to share one more thing, okay, okay, I'm okay with that, um, I didn't read much. from the lectern but I decided that I want to read to you the last page and a half of what I wrote again because some people are going to buy that book and take it home and it's intimidating that they don't read it well, that's how The book closes for those who want to hear my own voice.

January 6 is more than a day. It is more than an abbreviation of an event and its related topics, like some historical dates in the public mentality. On January 6th it turned out to be more than one. violent attack marks the criminal culmination of an organized conspiracy led outside the White House evidence of criminal intent extends over weeks and sometimes months several conspirators were worn out their plans were illegal or criminal and pressured most of the conspirators never took the physical step of storming the capital, some even oppose that particular tactic while promoting other illegal plots that pursue the same outcome.

The people in the Capitol that day, many now convicted, form the criminal muscle that supports a plot among several who did not operate in isolation and, for Trump, were just pawns, the advisors and lawyers of the most important planners, the ones who knew the certification date and how the electoral counting law and rules could be exploited for an endgame where a delayed certification could keep Trump in office, neither of them have been charged, which is why the date matters, if it were aone-day riot, that might be the right outcome, but if it's a coup plot and powerful people in the White House, AIDS, guarded by agents with guns paid for with your tax money, who exercise the powers of the prosecution and even potentially the military if they get their way in the coup attempt, then the consequences go beyond justice, they affect public safety and the future of our democracy.

There's a political writer, Doug Porter, who put it so simply that he's actually one of the only people I know. I quote outside the government in this article and he is just a freelance writer. I read it in California. decide whether we, the United States, act to make this a terrible aberration of this era or whether public training for the next coup and democracy can turn against us by confronting those facts in this report in independent accounts of these plots and whether We, the United States, ultimately act. about them, thank you all, many thanks to Ari Melber and John P Flannery, that was amazing.

If you are staying for a meet and greet, please remain seated. Autographed books are for sale in the main lobby and if you wish to exit through the exits. They are to my left and right on this level, so everyone on the balcony is going down and they don't need to go down any further. All exits are on this level. We'll call you for the See you and greet you soon and thank you very much for joining us tonight.