Thread by @lawfareblog

Starting in a few minutes, the Lawfare team discusses today's #January6thCommitteeHearing

twitter.com/i/spaces/1mnGe…

Hosted by @benjaminwittes, our panel today includes executive editor @nkorpett, senior editor @qjurecic, and associate editor @rohini_kurup

.@qjurecic sums up today's hearing: the Committee went into the weeds to show that 1. Trump lost the election and 2. Trump knew he lost the election.

.@rohini_kurup describes these first two days of the #Jan6Hearings as being important so the public can hear the truth directly from Trump's aides.

Even if it was information we already knew, it's meaningful to hear it from 'the horse's mouth.'

But on the contrary, @benjaminwittes thinks we learned a great deal from today's hearing.

From Ben: We found out that Trump had fewer 'Yes Men' than we thought. Many people told him that he did in fact lose.

.@benjaminwittes is "haunted" by the idea that Trump was delusional. He poses the question: Was Trump lying or did he really believe he won?

@nkorpett doesn't think it matters either way. He knew or should have known.

.@qjurecic compares the current hearing to the Mueller Report--It's hard to prove intent with Trump because he lives in his own world and expresses himself strangely.

It's why @benjaminwittes was waiting for someone to say Trump acknowledged the truth privately. But none yet.

.@benjaminwittes and @qjurecic point out that Trump was talking about fraud far before anyone could know, before votes were counted, before the election even. Both think that points to the idea that Trump was lying rather than delusional.

@benjaminwittes @qjurecic But they will not rule it out!

Executive editor @nkorpett recommends #TheAftermath episode 2 as a companion to the #Jan6Hearings! (The whole series as well, but episode 2 is particularly helpful atm)

lawfareblog.com/aftermath-podc…

Time for audience questions.

First up, @qjurecic draws attention to how the Committee has shown the staff members who have done much of the work of investigating all these past months---unusual in the Capitol, and nice to see.

In response to a question, @benjaminwittes explains that Trump's intent only matters in criminal proceedings, which this is not.

.@qjurecic and @nkorpett talk about the kind of accountability that Congressional hearings can provide. Not a Guilty or Not Guilty, but instead provide a historical record of what has happened. Congress is uniquely positioned to do this kind of fact finding.

A very interesting question from the audience: is raising money to defend the Big Lie, is that financial fraud?

@benjaminwittes thinks it's fraud adjacent, but doesn't cross the line completely (they did use much of the money on litigation, after all).

Can the #January6thCommittee evidence be ported into a DOJ case?

@nkorpett answers that the prosecution will try to enter the evidence, and the defense will try to block it. Our treasured former corporate lawyer won't say for sure!

.@benjaminwittes: it is "very unlikely" that the #January6thCommittee has anything that the DOJ doesn't. Their criminal agenda will not be set by the Committee.

And that's all for today! Thanks for joining us---the replay is available NOW right here on Twitter, or you can wait tomorrow for it to come out on our podcast.

Be sure to join us for the next one once we have it scheduled!

And here it is!

https://twitter.com/lawfareblog/status/1536442143111249921