It has been three months since the Jan. 6 committee has held a public hearing unpacking the events of that violent day, but in private, a flurry of work continues as an individual charged with breaching the U.S. Capitol is on tap to cooperate.

When reached for comment by Daily Kos, Heather Shaner, the attorney for the individual being interviewed by the committee on Friday remotely, would not disclose the identity of the person testifying but did confirm Politico’s initial reporting.

Remarking on why this deposition with a defendant is happening, Shaner said: “If I am an American citizen and if I had any personal knowledge that would help the committee, it is my responsibility to give them that information.”

“And if I have contacts, whether they are friends or people who have contacted me or my clients who have information relevant to what happened on Jan. 6 and they are willing to give that information to the investigators, it’s my job to facilitate that,” she said.

Turning to testimony from individuals who engaged in the Capitol attack for months now, the committee is quietly piecing together evidence related to the planning and organizing of the breach as well as the role former President Donald Trump had in summoning his supporters to Washington.

“Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!” Trump tweeted on Dec. 20.

Not limited to the Capitol assault, the committee is also carefully assessing how the former president’s false claims of election fraud manifested inside of the White House, and how close allies, like former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino—both already subpoenaed by the committee—may have played a role in attempting to subvert the electoral process.

While Friday’s testimony with the unidentified defendant unfolded, a previously scheduled meeting with Amy and Kylie Kremer, the founder and co-founder of the pro-Trump Women for America First organization, was put on hold. It is unclear when either Kremer will be called back and a spokesperson for the committee did not immediately return a request for comment.

Also postponed was deposition from Jeffrey Clark who, just 24 hours before his meeting with lawmakers, split with his attorney, Robert Driscoll, a former deputy assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice who now works for the Washington firm McGlinchey Stafford, leading their white collar and government investigations board.

Notably, Shaner also said Friday she has forwarded to the committee another source who may prove useful to investigators. That source is not one of her clients, however. Politico reported that this individual “claimed to have information related to associates of Alex Jones, the far-right broadcaster who helped promote pro-Trump election conspiracy theories.”

In the vein of remote hearings, or in this case, a lack thereof, less than 24 hours ago at the nearby U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, District Judge Trevor McFadden took a strict stance on a request from Jan. 6 defendants and Florida residents Dana Winn and Rachael Pert.

Both Winn and Pert were initially hit with five charges, including unlawful entry to a restricted building and violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds. They were also charged with obstruction of Congress, but that was dropped as a part of their respective plea agreements. The Florida couple self-surrendered to the FBI; court records disclosed it was one of Pert’s coworkers at a convenience store who tipped off law enforcement about her involvement. The coworker recognized Pert in a wanted flyer displaying many of the intruders to the Capitol.

Winn and Pert were scheduled for sentencing on Dec. 20—incidentally, exactly one year to the day Trump announced the impending “Big protest” in Washington on Twitter—and requested the hearing be held virtually because of the cost they would incur traveling from Florida to Washington. The request was unopposed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Brandon Regan.

“Both defendants work full-time, however their respective incomes and other assets are such as they both qualified for court-appointed counsel in this case,” defense attorney Allen Orenberg wrote in the request. “Furthermore, Ms. Pert is a single parent to two minor children, aged 10 and 7, who live at home with her. Consequently, it will be a significant financial burden on both defendants if they are required to travel to/from Middleburg, Florida to Washington, D.C.”

Orenberg also cited as a burden: the costs of a hotel in Washington for a single night, childcare while they are away, and the levy of $500 in restitution that they and all Jan. 6 defendants pleading guilty to a misdemeanor crime are expected to fork over. The restitution is aimed at defraying the $1.5 million in damage done to the Capitol.

But McFadden was having none of it, writing in his order: “Defendants found the means to travel to Washington, D.C. to commit the crime to which they have plead guilty. Defendants can therefore find the means to return to Washington, D.C. to be held accountable for this crime.”

McFadden is not the only judge in Washington who appears to have little patience of late. On Thursday, District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell ripped into Justice Department prosecutors as “almost schizophrenic” during her first sentencing of a Jan. 6 defendant.

The dig, first reported by The Washington Post, was related to the disparity Howell purportedly observed between how U.S. prosecutors have described the insurrection and how they have so far compiled plea agreements for defendants.

“No wonder parts of the public in the U.S. are confused about whether what happened on Jan. 6 at the Capitol was simply a petty offense of trespassing with some disorderliness, or shocking criminal conduct that represented a grave threat to our democratic norms,” Judge Howell wrote. “Let me make my view clear: The rioters were not mere protesters.”