How former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone could be the key to unlocking what Trump really knew about January 6

• Former WH Counsel Pat Cipollone on Friday will testify before the January 6 committee.
• He has reportedly expressed concerns about Trump's actions around January 6.

Former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone's testimony to the January 6 committee this week could heighten former President Donald Trump's legal exposure in the Justice Department's investigation of the insurrection.

Last week, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified that Cipollone expressed concerns about the potential criminal charges he could face if Trump went to the US Capitol building with protesters on January 6.

Hutchinson recalled him saying at the time, "We're going to get charges of every crime imaginable if we make that move."

Legal experts say that Cipollone's first-hand account of whether Trump was aware that he was potentially engaging in criminal activity could strengthen a case against him by the Justice Department.

"Cipollone is in a unique position to tell us a lot about Trump's state of mind, where his head was at, and what he was trying to do," said John Dean, the White House counsel for former President Richard Nixon.

Legal experts told Insider that establishing Trump's criminal intent would be the most challenging thing the Justice Department would have to prove. Insider has previously reported that the evidence laid out by the January 6 committee indicates that Trump could have violated four federal laws, including conspiracy to defraud the government, witness tampering, and obstructing an official proceeding.

Last month, federal agents confiscated the phone of John Eastman, an attorney who advised Trump on how to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. The department has also issued subpoenas to several individuals involved in an alleged scheme to send a fake slate of electors to overturn Joe Biden's presidential election victory in several states.

"Did he know that the scheme to concoct phony fake electors was fraudulent and illegal? Did he intend to whip up the crowd so that it would put violent pressure on Pence and others in the capital? These are the different questions that come up in a criminal case," said Daniel Richman, a former federal prosecutor in the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.

Richman said it would be critical to know whether Cipollone warned the president himself about the legal risks if he carried out his plans to overturn the 2020 presidential elections.

Making a case against Trump

The Justice Department will most likely monitor what comes out of Cipollone's testimony that is expected to be recorded on Friday, according to CNN. Cipollone's attorney Michael Purpura did not respond to questions about whether client will testify during an upcoming live hearing.

The former White House counsel only agreed to testify days after the January 6 committee issued him a subpoena.

Cipollone played a central role in warning several White House advisers about the legal ramifications of Trump's actions leading up to the January 6 insurrection,

At one point, Trump's son-in-law and former White House adviser Jared Kushner dismissed Cipollone's concerns, even after the former White House counsel threatened to resign.

"My interest at that time was on trying to get as many pardons done," Kushner said in a videotaped interview with the committee. "And I know that you know, he was always, him and the team were always saying, 'oh we're going to resign, we're not going to be here if this happens, if that happens.' So, I kind of took it up to just be whining, to be honest with you."

Hutchinson also recalled Cipollone's conversation with Trump's White House chief of staff Mark Meadows on January 6, when he urged him to speak to the president as pro-Trump supporters were forcing their way into the US Capitol. She said Cipollone told Meadows at one point, "Something needs to be done, or people are going to die, and the blood is going to be on your effing hands."

Legal analysts have hinted that Cipollone could refuse to answer specific questions due to attorney-client privilege. Neil Eggleston, the former White House counsel for President Barack Obama, said that this kind of privilege would not apply in this situation since Cipollone only represented Trump in an official capacity. Eggleston added that when Trump was seeking to overturn the election, he was acting as a candidate, not as president.

Chuck Rosenberg, a former federal prosecutor, also said that Cipollone cannot invoke the attorney-client privilege if he spoke with Trump on January 6 with another person present during the conversation.

"It all depends on the circumstances and who was present and what information went back and forth," he said.

Rosenberg added that it would likely take more than Cipollone's testimony for the Justice Department to decide whether to charge the former president.

"The most important and compelling witnesses in a real trial, where the rules of evidence apply, could be people who spoke directly to the former president and can tell a jury what he said and thus what he intended. That could be someone like Pat Cipollone. It could be any number of people. We just don't yet know," he said.