 So once the president had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby, he thought that they were going up to the Capitol. And when Bobby had relayed to him, we're not. You don't have the assets to do it. It's not secure. We're going back to the West Wing. The president had very strong, a very angry response to that. Tony described him as being irate. The president said something to the effect of, I'm the effing president. Take me up to the Capitol now, to which Bobby responded, sir, we have to go back to the West Wing. The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel. We're going back to the West Wing. We're not going to the Capitol. Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel. And when Mr. Renato had recounted this story to me, he had motioned towards his clavicles. That bombshell revelation was from Cassidy Hutchinson, the former aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. And as you saw, she detailed an all-out meltdown by an unhinged Donald Trump on January 6th. This is the president of the United States, just to emphasize this. Lunging at a member of Secret Service, trying to go for his neck after he tried to take hold of the steering wheel in a moving vehicle. Now, they discussed invoking the 25th Amendment throughout the course of this hearing, but the fact that they didn't do it that day after he tried to physically assault someone, it's unclear if he actually did grab his neck, but he lunged for it. I just, how do you allow this individual to continue governing after he very clearly is incapable of governing? It's just truly astonishing. Really, really insane shit here. Now, that was one of many revelations that came out from today's hearing, featuring Cassidy Hutchinson. And another one really just proves that Donald Trump had a thirst for blood on January 6th because he wanted his supporters to be able to enter the premises with weapons. When we were in the offstage, announce area tent behind the stage, he was very concerned about the shot, meaning the photograph that we would get because the rally space wasn't full. One of the reasons which I've previously stated was because he wanted it to be full and for people to not feel excluded because they'd come far to watch him at the rally. And he felt the mags were at fault for not letting everybody in, but another leading reason and likely the primary reason is because he wanted it full and he was angry that we weren't letting people through the mags with weapons. What the Secret Service deemed as weapons and our weapons. But when we were in the offstage, announce tent, I was part of a conversation. I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of, you know, I don't effing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march the capital from here. Let the people in. Take the effing mags away. In this particular instance, it wasn't the capacity of our space. It was the mags and the people that didn't want to come through. And that's what Tony had been trying to relate to him that morning. You know, it's not the issues that we encountered on the campaign. We have enough space or they don't want to come in right now. They have weapons they don't want confiscated by the Secret Service and they're fine on the mall. They can see you on the mall and they want to march straight to the capital from the mall. So Trump had no concern for the security of others. He knew that they weren't there to hurt him. And even if they might potentially hurt others, he was OK with that. In fact, I think that implicitly, he wanted them to do violence. That's what that indicates to me by him saying that, let them through. Truly insane. Now, I think the second largest bombshell revelation from today's hearing comes in the form of evidence of witness tampering. Now, it was towards the end when Vice Chair Liz Cheney kind of revealed that witness tampering is going on. She didn't reveal the names of individuals potentially implicated in this scheme to intimidate and or tamper with witnesses. But the messages here are very clear. So the first one reads, a person let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he's thinking about you. He knows you're loyal and you're going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition. He being Donald Trump, I'm assuming. Now, also, here's a statement from a witness. Quote, what they said to me is, as long as I continue to be a team player, they know that I'm on the team. I'm doing the right thing. I'm protecting who I need to protect. You know, I'll continue to stay in good graces in Trump world. And they have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read the transcripts and just to keep that in mind as I proceed through my depositions and interviews with the committee. So if you read the subtext in that first message, it looks like intimidation to me, but they're sitting here telling witnesses, well, just know that Trump knows you're very loyal. And if you want to remain in our good graces, well, he does read the transcripts. They are brazen. Now, we don't know if this is coming straight from the horse's mouth or somebody from Trump's world, but either way, we know that Trump is involved in some way, shape, or form with witness tampering. Now, after the hearing concluded, Jamie Raskin, who's a member of the January 6th Select Committee, gave us some additional context about how serious this is. Well, the evidence of witness tampering that the committee has released are the two episodes that the vice chair cited today anonymously for obvious reasons. It's a crime to tamper with witnesses. It's a form of obstructing justice. The committee won't tolerate it and we haven't had the chance to fully investigate it or fully discuss it, but it's something on our agenda. Mr. Raskin, are you watching this? In other words, if anyone has prosecuted, this will be one more crime to add to the growing list of crimes. Unbelievable. It's like we're watching a mafia movie play out in real time, but this involves the former president of the United States. Now, at the previous January 6th hearing, we learned that individual members of Congress, such as Green, Gates, Gohmert, they sought pardons from the Trump administration, and now we're learning more individuals in Trump world wanted pardons from Donald Trump. And these two names are very, very big names. Ms. Hutchinson, did Rudy Giuliani ever suggest that he was interested in receiving a presidential pardon related to January 6th? He did. Ms. Hutchinson, did White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, ever indicate that he was interested in receiving a presidential pardon related to January 6th? Ms. Meadows did seek that pardon. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Ms. Hutchinson. So Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows reasonably believed that they could be prosecuted for crimes that they believed that they committed, hence the need for pardons from Donald Trump. Now, we get this news almost a month after we learned that the Justice Department would not be charging Meadows with contempt to which the January 6th committee responded by calling that decision puzzling and in a statement late Friday, representatives Benny Thompson and Liz Cheney said, we hope the department provides greater clarity on this matter. No one is above the law. So now that we have this additional context and now know that Meadows sought a pardon from Trump because he believed that he was guilty of crimes potentially, Merrick Garland looks even worse, even more spineless for not prosecuting him. Now, the last video that I wanna play from this event features Michael Flynn. Now, let me remind you that Michael Flynn said, there's no reason why we can't have a Myanmar-style military coup here in the United States. Now, he's going to be asked a very direct and simple question. Do you believe in the peaceful transfer of power here in the United States? Pay close attention to his answer. General Flynn, do you believe the violence on January 6th was justified? Do we have a minute? Yes. Mr. Cheney, could you repeat the question, please? Yes, General Flynn, do you believe the violence on January 6th was justified? Is that, can I get clarifications? Is that a moral question or are you asking me a deep question? I'm asking both. I said, I said the fact. Do you believe the violence on January 6th was justified morally? Take the fact. You believe the violence on January 6th was justified legally? Yes. General Flynn, do you believe in the peaceful transition of power in the United States of America? Of course. If somebody pleads the fifth when they're asked whether or not a peaceful transfer of power is something that they believe in, they don't believe in a peaceful transfer of power. And he's broadcasted this before. So it's insane to watch all of this play out. And I don't think that we'll fully appreciate how serious all of this is until a decade or two has passed when we look back at like a Hollywood film about this very event. Because this is truly insane shit. This is worse than Watergate. But if Donald Trump isn't held accountable, then I fear for the future of democracy in this country because we might not have a future as a democracy. And that's not to say that we even really have a democracy altogether. I think that the power of the people is waning rapidly in the United States. Not that we ever really had real democracy in this country, but what's left of it is hanging on by a thread. And whether or not what we have will survive, all will come down to whether or not the people who tried to kill democracy are going to be held accountable. Mike is a total shit-lifed. Shit-lifed. Once he started shilling for the DNC, I stopped watching. So I definitely won't be hitting the subscribe button or turning on notifications by clicking the bell. No way. It's very sad enough.