>> IN THIS NEW SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT, THERE IS A PARAGRAPH THAT IS QUITE TELLING. QUOTE, JUST OVER TWO WEEKS AFTER THE FBI DISCOVERED CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS IN THE STORAGE ROOM AND TRUMP'S OFFICE, NOW TO, AS IN WALT NAUTA, CALLED TRUMP EMPLOYEE NUMBER FIVE, AND SAYING WORDS THE POINT OF, SOMEONE JUST WANTS TO MAKE SURE CARLOS IS GOOD. CARLOS, AS-ING CARLOS DE OLIVEIRA, THE MAR-A-LAGO MAINTENANCE WORKER WHO WAS ADDED TODAY'S NEW INDICTMENT AS A COCONSPIRATOR. IN RESPONSE, TRUMP EMPLOYEE 5 TOLD WALT NAUTA THAT DE OLIVEIRA WAS LOYAL AND WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING TO AFFECT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH TRUMP. THAT SAME DAY AT NAUTA'S REQUEST, CONFIRMED WITH THE CZECH GROUP THAT DE OLIVEIRA WAS LOYAL. THAT SAME DAY, TRUMP CALLED DE OLIVEIRA AND TOLD HIM THAT TRUMP WOULD GET DE OLIVEIRA AN ATTORNEY. THE LAWYER TRUMP GOT TO REPRESENT DE OLIVEIRA IS A MAN NAMED JOHN IRVING. HE HAS BEEN PAID DIET BY DONALD TRUMP'S SAVE AMERICA PACK. AS ATTORNEY STANLEY WOODWARD, REPRESENTING TWO OTHER CLIENTS INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER, WALT NAUTA AND LUCILLE TO MERS, THE I.T. WORKER WHO IS PRESUMED TO BE EMPLOYEE NUMBER 4 IN THE SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT. TRUMP, OR TRUMP'S LEADERSHIP PACK, I SHOULD SAY, HAS MADE IT A PRACTICE TO PAY FOR LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR THE WITNESSES, WHO MIGHT HAVE IMPORTANT INFORMATION AS IT CONCERNS THE FORMER PRESIDENT. SOMETHING THE HOUSE JANUARY SIX COMMITTEE EXPLORED AT LENGTH AFTER LEARNING THAT CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, A KEY WITNESS, HAD BEEN CONTACTED BY TRUMP ALLIES TO MAKE SURE THAT SHE, CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, REMAINED LOYAL. REMEMBER THAT MISS HUTCHINSON'S FIRST LAWYER, STEPHEN PASSANTINO, WAS BEING PAID BY TRUMP, AND WAS COACHING HER TO TELL COMMITTEE INVESTIGATORS THAT SHE DID NOT RECALL CERTAIN CRITICAL INFORMATION. JOINING US NOW IS CONGRESSWOMAN ZOLOFT MINH OF CALIFORNIA. SHE WAS OF COURSE A MEMBER OF THE JANUARY SIX COMMITTEE, AND AS SHE WROTE IN A RECENT OP-ED, SPECIAL COUNSEL JACK SMITH IS VINDICATING THE COMMITTEES. WORK CONGRESSMAN LOFGREN, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TONIGHT. I WONDER WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS WERE WHEN YOU READ THAT PARAGRAPH IN THIS INDICTMENT ABOUT WHETHER MR. DE OLIVEIRA WAS LOYAL AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS THE THRESHOLD WITH WHICH HE COULD GET AN ATTORNEY PAID FOR BY TRUMP. >> WELL, IT WAS REMINISCENT OF THE TESTIMONY WE GOT FROM CASSIDY HUTCHINSON. AND NOT JUST THAT HE WAS LOYAL, BUT THAT FINDING THE LAWYER AND MAKING SURE THAT HE WAS ON THE TEAM WOULD KEEP HIM FROM TELLING THINGS OR REVEALING THINGS THAT WOULD BE DAMAGING TO THE EX PRESIDENT. HUTCHINSON'S TESTIMONY BASICALLY WAS THAT SHE WASN'T TOLD HOW MUCH THE LAWYER WAS BEING PAID, BASICALLY THAT THIS LAWYER WAS COUNSELING HER NOT TO TELL THE FULL TRUTH. AND IN FACT HE ADVISED HER TO PUT HERSELF IN A POSITION TO BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS. THEY DANGLED JOBS IN FRONT OF HER TO MAKE SURE THAT SHE STAYED LOYAL. IT'S SORT OF A MOBSTERS TYPE APPROACH TO PEOPLE IN YOUR, QUOTE, ORGANIZATION, AND IT'S SORT OF REMINDED ME OF THAT. >> I KNOW THESE ARE INCENTIVIZED DEALS, BUT DOES THIS NOT QUALIFY AS WITNESS INTIMIDATION? >> THIS WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THE COMMITTEE REFERRED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. WE ARE VERY DISTURBED ABOUT THE TESTIMONY. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY CORROBORATING EVIDENCE. BUT THERE WERE A LOT OF THE WITNESSES THAT APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMITTEE WERE PAID FOR BY TRUMP WORLD, THAT'S THEIR WORD, NOT JUST MIND. IT DID CAUSE CONCERN. WAS THAT PART OF THE SAME SORT OF SITUATION THAT HAPPENED WITH MYTHS MISS HUTCHINSON? WAS IT INFLUENCING THEIR TESTIMONY? WAS IT KEEPING THESE WITNESSES UNDER CONTROL? WE WERE UNABLE TO FIND OUT, BUT IT MADE US VERY SUSPICIOUS, AND WE HOPE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WOULD LOOK AT IT AND BE ABLE TO DO MORE DIGGING THAN WE WERE ABLE TO DO. >> WE KNOW THAT WALT NAUTA AND EMPLOYEE NUMBER 4 IS REPORTED TO BE TAVARES, THE HEAD OF I.T. AT MAR-A-LAGO, THEY'RE BEING REPRESENTED BY WOODWARD, WOODWARD IS BEING PAID BY TRUMP'S PACK, THERE'S A CURIOUS DYNAMIC HERE, WHICH IS LUCILLE TAVARES'S CLEARLY, IF HE IS EMPLOYEE NUMBER 4, GIVING A LOT OF INFORMATION TO THE DOJ, MAYBE EVEN A COOPERATING WITNESS. WALT NAUTA, REPRESENTED BY THE SAME LAWYER, IS NOT A COOPERATING WITNESS. DOES THAT STRIKE YOU AS AN ODD ARRANGEMENT AND POTENTIALLY PROBLEMATIC? >> IT CAUSES ANXIETY. IT IS NOT NECESSARILY IMPROPER FOR SOMEONE TO HELP OR ASSIST WITH PAYMENT OF COUNCIL IF THEY ARE AN EMPLOYER, PER SE, IS NOT ILLEGAL OR IMPROPER. BUT THE CONCERN IS IS THAT THIS IS BEING USED AS A TOOL TO KEEP A WITNESS UNDER CONTROL, TO KEEP THEM FROM BEING FULLY CANDID WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. I CAN'T SAY THAT THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE, WE DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT IT DOES RAISE A CONCERN AND REALLY I GUESS SOME OF IT IS, STEMMING FROM THE TESTIMONY THAT MISS HUTCHINSON GAVE US, BECAUSE CLEARLY THAT WAS THE PATTERN THEY WERE USING WITH HER, AND IT DIDN'T WORK, BECAUSE SHE WAS AN HONEST PERSON. >> THAT IS SUCH A KEY POINT. IT DIDN'T WORK WITH CASSIDY HUTCHINSON BECAUSE SHE WAS AN HONEST PERSON. AND YOUR EXPERIENCE AS A LAWYER, DOES IT ALL COME DOWN TO THESE CLIENTS LOOKING AT THEIR OWN INTERNAL MORAL COMPASS AND SAY WHAT KIND OF PERSON DO I WANT TO BE, OR MAKING THIS NAKED CALCULATION THAT TRUMP MIGHT NOT BE REELECTED AND I COULD BE IN LEAK DEEP LEGAL PERIL IF I CONTINUE TO BASICALLY ALIGN MYSELF WITH HIM. WHAT GOES INTO CONVINCING SOMEONE THAT THEIR LAWYER IS NOT THE BEST REPRESENTATIVE FOR THEM? >> EVERY PERSON IS DIFFERENT, BUT MISS HUTCHINSON TOLD A WONDERFUL STORY, WHICH WAS, SHE WAS ADVISED TO DO THE LOOK IN THE MIRROR TEST. WOULD SHE BE ABLE TO LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND FACE YOURSELF BASED ON WHAT SHE WAS DOING. AND I THINK THAT'S PRETTY GOOD ADVICE. IF TEN YEARS FROM NOW YOU CAN'T LOOK YOURSELF IN THE MIRROR AND BE PROUD OF WHAT YOU DID, YOU WANT TO THINK ABOUT DOING SOMETHING ELSE. CERTAINLY THERE ARE CALCULATIONS ABOUT, WILL YOU END UP IN JAIL, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, BUT IN THE END, HAVING HONOR AND BEING TRUTHFUL IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL SHOULD DO. IF YOU ARE NOT TELLING A LIE, YOU NEVER HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHAT YOU SAID BEFORE, JUST TELL THE TRUTH. >> TRUER WORDS HAVE NEVER BEEN. SPOK
