Q So he's the one fielding questions from the U.S. Capitol Police about the application. Isn't he?
A Yes.
Q So it would be common sense for him to be able to deny WildProtest's affiliation because he is the one speaking to the U.S. Capitol Police. Isn't he?
A I don't know. I think—I think it's like a leap and a jump. And I don't know. And I don't recall these conversations.
Q Do you recall ever texting Mr. Stephen Brown for him to put, in quotes, 50 people on the application?
A No, I do not recall that.
Q And, since Mr. Stephen Brown is talking to the U.S. Capitol Police, if we just flow down to the next message so that he can deny to the Capitol Police Wild Protest's affiliation, he can also deny your affiliation by putting Nathan Martin's name on there. Does that make sense?
A No. I don't want my name as any point of contact for any vendor, logistics, anything like that, because people calling me would slow me down. I was concerned about political remedies, legal remedies, and legislative remedies. So it was a question of who handles what things and who—I handle the political things. I had consultants to handle other things. And I couldn't afford to be the point of contact for the JW Marriott or travel arrangements or anything like that.
Q So, for this, you are saying that because if he would have put your name on there, you would have been the point of contact for the Capitol Police? Is that what you're saying?
A Yes. I would have had to be able to field questions. I didn't have time to field questions from anyone. And I don't have the expertise to field those questions
