Good evening and welcome to the Washington Week extra.
I'm Yamiche Alcindor.
We're continuing our conversation on the January
6th investigation.
This week, CNN reported on some text messages
sent by Senator Mike Lee of Utah and representative Chip Roy of Texas,
both Republicans to then White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.
They show the two lawmakers went from fierce advocates of former
president Trump.
To dishearten bystanders.
For example, CNN reports that on November
7th Roy wrote to Rory wrote to Meadows saying, Quote.
We need ammo.
We need fraud Examples.
We need it this weekend.
But by January, 3rd Senator Lee was texting medals that the effort
to overturn the 2020 election could quote badly backfire.
Joining me tonight to discuss this and more.
Peter Baker, chief White
House correspondent for The New York Times.
Eugene Daniels, White House correspondent, co author of Play Political
Playbook.
And Marianna Sotomayor, congressional correspondent, Congressional
reporter rather for the Washington Post.
Thank you so much for being
here.
Marianna.
I want to start with you.
What's the significance?
You think of these newly revealed text messages.
You're in Congress
covering these lawmakers.
I wonder what you make of them.
You know a couple of different things.
One way to look at.
It is
just how much the committee knows right.
This could be just the tip
of the iceberg of many text messages and many interviews that they've
had with many different people who have been involved and know what
their actions were leading up to January 6th they being, of course,
the administration and what they were telling them to do and the
aftermath, So that's one part of it.
That I'm sure will come out in the next couple of months as the committee
continues to investigate.
The other, of course, is just what these
Republicans were thinking.
These are two very pro Trump members of
Congress who have since been staunchly supporting the Maga movement,
especially since I cover more of the House chip Roy.
He is very much
in his in Trump's corner and to see them say, or at least themselves
reach a point where even though they
Of course, we're saying we need to find evidence we need as members
of Congress.
The evidence to be able to overturn the election.
You saw them start
to pull back.
The more that the administration I should say Trump's
own lawyers were making these big claims of the election.
Lie that
you know Trump won by a landslide, and we're going to prove that
And these members starting to actually warned the administration
and say, I don't know if this is going the direction that we thought
it was.
I don't think that there is that enough evidence and even
Roy saying that you are putting a stake in the heart of democracy.
You don't hear them talking about the election lie the big lie in
that way, even when you ask them about it.
Nowadays, they still try
and skirt the issue, so to pull back and get a sense of what Republicans,
including those
Very
Trump allied members were saying is very interesting
to sticking with you.
I wonder, because you as you just described
the lie continues Republicans on a number of Republicans running
in primaries in the midterms.
They all really don't want to say that
President Biden was elected fairly, even though there is no evidence
of widespread election fraud in the 2020 election.
How much of a
difference does this kind of reporting make do voters take this information
and sort of
Think about it in a way that changes or impacts their political decisions.
You know, it's interesting.
Um, now that the election season is really
ramping up you asked Democratic strategist this You asked Republican
strategist this and they say it really doesn't Republicans are very
much of the opinion that sure this stuff can come out and and you
know, we should expect that this committee is going to have hearings
at some point and a final report, probably right up.
Against the November election date.
And they say that's not swaying
people that much.
Democrats know that, too, and for them, it's more.
You almost note this saddened tone because they wish that voters
cared a lot more about democracy.
They talk about it in a more We
are the ones who are preserving democracy.
We want to defend democracy.
But that isn't necessarily resonating with voters right now, because
what they are feeling are all of these economic issues that's forefront
on their minds.
And that's what Republicans definitely want to pin Democrats on so
not necessarily this specific issue.
And Eugene I saw you nodding
jump in here.
What?
What's your reporting?
Sort of tell you about
what's going on here?
Yeah.
I mean, not talking about like the midterm effect or the fact
that this conversation by January 6th has on the midterms.
She's
exactly right.
You talk to Democrats, and they are concerned that
this isn't breaking through.
They thought this was going to be a
much more important issue for voters as they move, especially as
we got closer to the midterms.
However, I will say there are there's
frustration among
Democratic strategist at times that the White House isn't talking
about this more.
They want to see President Biden out there, um,
yelling about this as much as he possibly can.
He's done speeches
about this, and I want to be clear here.
When you look at these images
that we're seeing now, you know, voters aren't seeing this all the
time right there Thinking about gas prices.
They're thinking about
putting food on their tables.
They're thinking about a pandemic that
we're starting to see numbers tick up a little bit in certain areas
again.
And so it is on is incumbent upon
Democrats if they want voters to care to talk about this a lot more,
and they haven't been doing that because they also know that it's
not resonating, but you know, it's kind of like the chicken or the
egg.
Is it not resonating because they're not talking about it all
the time, Or is it not resonating because voters haven't seen anything?
And I will say when you talk about the committee kind of ramping
up or having their public hearings, which we're going to see, and
they see in the next couple of months.
That is one place that Democrats feel that they're going to have
the upper hand because for about a year and a half, we've seen Republicans
kind of be able to whitewash and talk about January 6th in a way
that at times, especially at times, it's not true.
It was not
Just walk in the park.
It was not that it was it was dangerous.
People
died and so Democrats feel like they're going to be able to tell
that story with this committee and are hoping that will help them
break through.
Find them down.
And and Peter.
We saw a number of Trump advisers come in and testify
before the committee.
His daughter, Ivanka Trump, her husband, Jared
Kushner, as well as this week We saw Stephen Miller, who was a White
House senior adviser going in to speak to the committee.
We don't
know exactly what these officials are saying.
But I wonder what do
you think of the significance that we're seeing people?
Come in and speak for eight hours to lawmakers.
Yeah, well, one of the things that significant about it is that they're
coming in right there, not defying the committee, as others had there.
Not like Mark Meadows, who was refused to talk to the committee or
Steve Bannon or Dan Scavino or some of these real, you know, people
who are very loyal to President Trump.
This is his own son in law
and daughter.
This is one of his closest ideological agent, Stephen
Miller, and they have chosen
To go ahead and speak to the committee, rather than to, you know,
take a chance on a contempt of Congress Citation and a criminal charge
by the Justice Department.
What does that mean?
In terms of information
to the committee?
It's unclear what do they
These three people in particular.
No, obviously, you assume Ivanka
and Jared being members of the family have quite a lot to say Stephen
Miller, one of the You know True loyalists all the way through the
end, you know, wrote a lot of the president's words and the most
key moments.
What does he know?
We'd like to have that information
that could be key.
But
You know, it may be awhile until we actually have that information.
But I'm most struck by the fact that they chose to do and they didn't
fight it.
Unlike the others, I wonder whether that's sending a message
to other potential witnesses that it's time to drop any resistance
and come in
if there is no price to be paid by, you know by President Trump.
But former President Trump and Mariana Peter was just just said the
word time and of course, time is what lawmakers are running out of
talk a little bit about the pressure.
The January 6th investigation
the committee it's feeling as the calendar keeps moving toward what
could be possibly be Democrats losing control and then, of course,
losing this committee.
Yeah, you know, Chairman Bennie Thompson has always said there's
no timeline for this to end.
We all know that there is just like
you said.
It is the November elections right now Republicans very
much looking like they're going to take the majority and Kevin McCarthy
if he speaker.
He's already saying as minority leader that he will
disband this committee, so they very much are running up against
time they have outlined and tried to say that they may start hearings
as soon as next month.
That's likely to go into the summer, but they really have at least
another month or two to continue investigating behind the scenes
they do want to be able to present in a storytelling kind of way.
What they have been able to find in these hearings.
How long that
takes.
We're not exactly sure it could be several hearings in a row
in a week or it could expand several weeks.
But that is also out
of time when members of Congress are on the campaign trail.
Don't
want to be talking about January 6th or getting questions about Trump,
necessarily both Republicans and Democrats.
But either way right now the committee very much, aiming to release
a final report, likely in the fall sometime in September or October.
Mariana sticking with you, you kind of wrote the intro to my next
question to you because it was You told our producers that Democrats
are sort of not wanting to talk that much about January 6th and Trump
but also wanting to make an appeal that really moves their voters
to the polls.
How are they balancing that?
Yeah, You know, it's interesting because it really depends on the
districts and because I look more at at House races.
There are some
Democrats that if it's likely they're facing off a super mega very
trump candidate On the Republican side, they actually see a little
bit of an of an advantage to talk about the democracy angle to talk
about January 6th and how Democrats have been the ones
Who have taken this seriously this investigation seriously.
But most
Democrats, of course, don't want to be talking about Trump.
Necessarily.
They learned the lesson from the Virginia gubernatorial race where
that seemed to be the big issue, and you can't just run a race attacking
trump or attacking trump like Republicans, so they are likely just
going to stick to talking about again.
Those economic issues.
If the issue does come up, which at times it does those Democrats
already trying to find a way to talk about how they as a party are
trying to, you know, make things more affordable.
They're not necessarily
leaning in on the democracy angle too much, but of course, acknowledged
the fact that this happened and that they are the party that is going
to try and preserve the principles of this country.
Yeah, and Eugene, another subject that is related to January 6th
we saw in Ohio man who claimed that he was following presidential
orders be found guilty.
He said to the judge that he was sort of
listening to President Trump and felt obligated to go into the capital
on January 6th because President Trump told him to do so.
What do you make of the fact that this defense that is being used
by other defendants, at least in their FBI interviews did not work
for this for this man.
I would say this man.
His name was Dustin
Thompson.
Yeah.
I mean, it's something that we've heard ever since January.
6th happened right when you would talk to some of these folks that
breached the capital is they would say, you know in In his speech,
President Trump said We were going right.
He did tell them that they
should go to the capital.
Um
And that he would be going with them right?
And as we all remember,
that didn't happen, and it seemed like it was never going to happen.
He was not going to walk to the capital from the White House with
them, and so this entire time you've been hearing some of these folks
say that they were, they felt like it was an order.
As Thompson said
from President Trump that did not hold up in court because what was
said by a government lawyer right by, um by the prosecution.
Was that President Trump wasn't on trial here that you know if there
if that is to happen, that is a separate court, and that is not what's
happening on this day.
Because what you what you don't want to.
Prosecutors
don't want people to be able to not get in trouble not have some
kind of legal ramifications for their own actions that day.
Whether
or not President Trump had former president Trump
Has to answer for what he did That day is another story.
Stephen
Miller himself was asked, um, based on reporting by The New York
Times What the president meant when he talked about use the word
we Was he talking about all of us.
What did he want we to do?
And
so that's something that the General Sixth Committee is looking into.
And then you're also seeing play out in some of these court cases.
And Peter last 30 seconds goes to you.
President.
Trump just told
The Washington Post that he wished he had gone to the capital, but
that the secret Service told him he couldn't do.
So.
What do you
make of the fact that this case is has is this case resulted in someone
being found guilty even as the former president is saying that he
wished he had joined in?
Yeah, it's remarkable, of course, how much he has come to embrace
January 6th as an act of patriotism rather than an act of insurrection,
right?
He is trying to recast it in history.
As an expression of political
protest of a stolen election, not the storming of a capital in order
to stop the constitutional counting of the votes.
Um and for a lot
of Americans that will resonate, But it is it is.
Is a remarkable attempt to redefine rewrite and reshape history.
You know that flies in the face of the video, which is still out
there you can find on Google anytime.
What really happened that day
He was never going to walk to the capital.
He was never going to do that.
It was never a lot possibility.
I
don't know that he can walk that far everywhere when we were covered
him, Hamish, you know, we never saw him walk very far.
It's It's
not something he does much less The security idea that so when he
was telling those people that why was he telling him that because
it was never going to happen?
He was telling them that because he
wanted them to go do it.
He wanted to rub them up is that
You know is that give him responsibility for what happened.
That's
a debate People will have throughout history will certainly will
have to keep talking about this.
Thank you so much.
We'll have to
leave it there tonight.
Thank you to Peter, Eugene and Mariana for
joining us and for sharing your reporting and thank you for joining